Freethought & Rationalism Archive

stephan huller · 01-18-2013, 12:49 AM

stephan huller · 01-18-2013, 12:53 AM

Toto · 01-18-2013, 01:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mountainman

...

I have already cited a detailed analysis of how Eusebius "Christianized" Philo's description of the Therapeutae: Eusebius of Caesarea's Interpretatio Christiana of Philo's De vita contemplative - Harvard Theological Review. Attention aa5874 and all Eusebius Church History fans: Read all about how Eusebius "Christianized" Philo.

The remark is made therein ....

This article is about how Eusebius interpreted Philo's Jewish Theraputae as Christian or proto-Christians. There is nothing there to support the idea that this group that Philo described were pagans.

Quote:

Not knowing whether Philo gave them this name, or whether these people called themselves therapeutae, is it therefore not all the more reasonable to go out into the classical citations to determine who else referred to themselves or others as therapeutae in antiquity?

You have not made a case for this.

Quote:

The proposition here presumed to be true is that the therapeutae of antiquity were a Jewish sect as described by Philo.

I am questioning the truth of this proposition and have provided a substantial amount of negative evidence that suggests that the greater portion of people in antiquity (who were pagan) would associate the therapeutae with that class of people who "served and attended the [pagan] gods" in the [pagan] temples...

There is no negative evidence here. There is nothing that indicates that the term Theraputae could not be used for a variety of different groups.

Pete - at this point you are just stringing together non sequiturs. What is your point? If Phile were in fact describing a pagan group, what would that prove?

tanya · 01-18-2013, 01:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stephan huller

No Philo makes that plain. They were a Jewish sect. No one doubts that.

On the contrary, the only person, in this thread, who agrees with you is Toto.

Everyone else agrees with me, including Clive, Robert, and Pete, that the Therapeutae were a Greek group, with many locales throughout the Roman Empire. Pete has a web site, with a long standing, published, widely acknowledged, detailed description of the Therapeutae. Eusebius is irrelevant to this discussion of the Therapeutae. Unlike you, Stephan, Pete is not one track, minded.

The French group Medecins sans Frontieres is a contemporary version of the Therapeutae' theme.

There is no connection with Judaism, though that does not mean that there were no jews included among the Therapeutae. One does not exclude those who would demonstrate empathy for others, in need: the elderly the crippled, those suffering hunger, thirst, those who were homeless, destitute, political prisoners, and the like. Granted, most jews do not fit that description. Most, in my experience, are vicious, blood sucking leaches, the scum of the earth. But, I have also encountered a few who were wonderful, kind hearted, gracious, and generous. They are the exception.

The writings of Philo, regarding the Therapeutae, are as accurate as Philo's detailed description of Hercules.

Are you and Toto now going to assert that Hercules was Jewish?

:angry:

Robert Tulip · 01-18-2013, 01:53 AM

It is as plain as the nose on your face that Philo does not describe the therapeuts as exclusively Jewish. I proved this already and here it is again, with emphasis added.

Toto, how do these quotes from Philo square with your insistence that the Therapeuts were a Jewish group?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Robert Tulip

...Text from Philo's On The Contemplative Life is at http://www-relg-studies.scu.edu/facs...herapeutae.htm

The eminent Dr Huller would have us believe, unless I misread him, that the Therapeuts were exclusivist Jews. And yet Philo calls them "The best people from all parts". He says they use "the other [books] by means of which religion and sound knowledge grow together into one perfect whole," a description that does not read as exclusive. He says their "Elders are, in their regard, those who from their earliest age have passed their youth and maturity in the contemplative branch of philosophy, which truly is the noblest and most divine." That does not read as Jewish exclusivism.

Further, it appears the Therapeuts had a highly esoteric approach: Philo says "[Their] exposition of sacred scripture proceeds by unfolding the meaning hidden in allegories. ... on the one hand, it unfolds and unveils the symbols, and on the other brings forward the meanings into the light and exhibits them naked to those who by a little exercise of memory are able to behold things not clear by means of things that are."

I do wish there were some rare souls today capable of taking such a passage seriously. What it shows is that the entire concept of apostasy that Stephan Huller has introduced to this discussion is irrelevant for this sort of unfolding of allegory. Indeed, by allegory, it appears that Moses is a myth. Efforts to present the therapeuts as exclusivist bigots reflect a very limited and false understanding.

Next, Philo explains that the therapeuts have a ritual like "a Bacchic festival in which they had drunk deep of the Divine love." Oh, but Stephan tells us this is the same Philo who was so opposed to apostasy! Clearly, Philo's mention of Bacchus, the Greco-Roman Dionysian God of ecstasy, steps somewhat outside the strict tradition of Moses.

Philo concludes by explaining the sun worship of the therapeuts: "drunk until dawn with this godly drunkenness, neither heavy of head nor with winking eyes, but more wide awake than when they came into the banquet, they stand up, and turn both their eyes and their whole bodies towards the East. And, so soon as they spy the sun rising, they stretch out aloft their hands to heaven and fall to praying for a fair day, and for truth, and for clear judgment to see with.”

This image is like those from ancient Egyptian prayer books, with the devout holding up their hands to Ra the Sun God. Best to skip over such passages if they offend your sense of Jewish exclusivism.

Toto · 01-18-2013, 02:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tanya

Quote:

Originally Posted by stephan huller

No Philo makes that plain. They were a Jewish sect. No one doubts that.

On the contrary, the only person, in this thread, who agrees with you is Toto.

I think your count is off. What is Chili's position? outhouse? Shesh?? But I think that Stephan was referring to the consensus of scholars, not the posters in this thread.

Quote:

Everyone else agrees with me, including Clive, Robert, and Pete, that the Therapeutae were a Greek group, with many locales throughout the Roman Empire. Pete has a web site, with a long standing, published, widely acknowledged, detailed description of the Therapeutae. Eusebius is irrelevant to this discussion of the Therapeutae. Unlike you, Stephan, Pete is not one track, minded. ...

If the Therapeutae were pagans, why did they study the Jewish scripture? Euseibius of course thought that they were not Jewish, but Christians.

Let me quote from the article that Pete posted on Christianizing Philo:

Quote:

I begin by reviewing the reasoning that led Eusebius to identify the community of Lake Mariut as the first Christian community in Egypt. As Eusebius seems to have been the first to claim this, one may wonder what led him to identify the Therapeutae as Christians. Eusebius's Christianization of Philo's account was certainly made easier--or perhaps even encouraged--by Philo's downplaying of the Jewish identity of the Therapeutae community: Philo never uses the word "Jew(ish)" when describing the community and almost never refers to Jewish legal practices, apart from the Sabbath. As David M. Hay has emphasized, (23) Philo does not delve deeply into the thought and manner of life of the Therapeutae. This certainly gave Eusebius the latitude to assign to the Jewish sect an important role in his history of the Christian church. In addition, he seems to have been particularly struck by the allegorical interpretation practiced by the Therapeutae; Eusebius quotes two Philonic passages on this topic (24) to confirm his identification of the Therapeutae as Christians.

. . .

... Eusebius's account indicates the substance of two main arguments against his thesis: Why do the Therapeutae seem to respect Jewish customs if they are Christians? And why were the Therapeutae not called Christians if indeed they were?

Eusebius answers the first objection by explaining that the Therapeutae were "apparently of Hebrew origin" ... and, therefore, "still preserved most of the ancient customs in a distinctly Jewish manner"... (37) The association of the terms "Hebrew" and "Jew," which are often placed in opposition to each other in Eusebius's rhetoric, (38) here indicates his willingness to associate the Therapeutae with the Christians (39) and, at the same time, to acknowledge the Jewishness of their customs. In other words, Eusebius was aware that he could not deny completely their Jewishness. ....

tanya · 01-18-2013, 02:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

If the Therapeutae were pagans, why did they study the Jewish scripture?

Dear Toto, good heavens, lass. This is not like your writing. Has someone usurped your identity?

"If Philo was a Jew, why did he write in Greek?"

How do we know what group x or group y, or group z studied 2000 years ago?

For all I know, the Therapeutae were studying not only ancient Greek medical texts, but also ancient Egyptian texts on medicine.

One thing I do know, for sure, is that the focus of the Therapeutae was helping others, in accord with the teachings of Asklepius, Hippocrates, and other ancient scholars who had written on health care, surgery, and midwifery.

What is the age of obstetric forceps? 1500 BCE? Does the name, Asklepius mean, in Greek, "to cut open". We tend to overlook the horrific difficulty associated with childbirth, especially in ancient times, before antibiotic therapy, or notions of sterility. Wasn't cow dung still applied to soldiers' wounds to stop the bleeding, in the time of King Edward II?

The Therapeutae' role was surely similar to the role played today by comparable organizations, such as MSF.org

The famous aphorism of Jean-Baptiste Alphonse Karr rings true, at least to my ear:

Quote:

plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose

mountainman · 01-18-2013, 03:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

Quote:

Originally Posted by mountainman

Not knowing whether Philo gave them this name, or whether these people called themselves therapeutae, is it therefore not all the more reasonable to go out into the classical citations to determine who else referred to themselves or others as therapeutae in antiquity?

You have not made a case for this.

I have provided specific citations that have been supplemented by the list of citations to the mention of "therapeutae" in antiquity. The case is made in the citations to the evidence. How else can the case be made?

Quote:

The proposition here presumed to be true is that the therapeutae of antiquity were a Jewish sect as described by Philo.

I am questioning the truth of this proposition and have provided a substantial amount of negative evidence that suggests that the greater portion of people in antiquity (who were pagan) would associate the therapeutae with that class of people who "served and attended the [pagan] gods" in the [pagan] temples...

There is no negative evidence here.

We have hundreds of references in classical pagan sources who all agree that the therapeutae were not the attendants of a Jewish god, but rather that they were all the attendants of a Pagan god. This is not positive evidence in support of a Jewish sect of therapeutae who were everywhere in the empire.

Quote:

There is nothing that indicates that the term Theraputae could not be used for a variety of different groups.

It was used by different [pagan] groups to describe those who served and attended the god at the temples. How many Jewish temples were there in Alexandria in the first century compared to the number of pagan temples?

The point is that we are dealing with a Greek word that has a rich classical Greek context in the pagan world, and every pagan in antiquity knew that the therapeutae were those who served the [pagan] god in his (or her)temple.

Quote:

If Phile were in fact describing a pagan group, what would that prove?

It would assist in establishing a case that the Christians who preserved and USED the Philo Therapeutae source did so to hide and obscure the predominance of pagan therapeutae. It also would demonstrate that despite all the rhetoric that Eusebius uses in an attempt to make us think these therapeutae were the early Christians who walked with the apostles, their stature was neither Christian nor Jewish but pagan.

It would assist in establishing the case that in many instances, not just this, the Christians effective stole the identity of a large well known and highly respected class of pagan people, and wove them fraudulently into their fictitious tapesty of early Christian history.

Here is some more from Philo's works of literature

Quote:

Originally Posted by WIKI

The ancient Church looked upon these Therapeutæ as disguised Christian monks. This view has found advocates even in very recent times; Lucius' opinion particularly, that the Christian monkdom of the third century was here glorified in a Jewish disguise, was widely accepted ("Die Therapeuten," 1879). But the ritual of the society, which was entirely at variance with Christianity, disproves this view. The chief ceremony especially, the choral representation of the passage through the Red Sea, has no special significance for Christianity; nor have there ever been in the Christian Church nocturnal festivals celebrated by men and women together.

But Massebieau ("Revue de l'Histoire des Religions," 1887, xvi. 170 et seq., 284 et seq.), F. C. Conybeare ("Philo About the Contemplative Life," Oxford, 1895), and Wendland ("Die Therapeuten," etc., Leipsig, 1896) ascribe the entire work to Philo, basing their argument wholly on linguistic reasons, which seem sufficiently conclusive.

But there are great dissimilarities between the fundamental conceptions of the author of the "De Vita Contemplativa" and those of Philo. The latter looks upon Greek culture and philosophy as allies, the former is hostile to Greek philosophy (see Siegfried in "Protestantische Kirchenzeitung," 1896, No.42).

He repudiates a science that numbered among Its followers the sacred baud of the Pythagoreans, inspired men like Parmenides, Empedocles, Zeno, Cleanthes, Heraclitus, and Plato, whom Philo prized ("Quod Omnis Probus," i., ii.; "Quis Rerum Divinarum Heres Sit," 43; "De Providentia," ii. 42, 48, etc.).

He considers the symposium a detestable, common drinking-bout. This can not be explained as a Stoic diatribe; for in this case Philo would not have repeated it. And Philo would have been the last to interpret the Platonic Eros in the vulgar way in which it is explained in the "De Vita Contemplativa," 7 (ii. 480), as he repeatedly uses the myth of double man allegorically in his interpretation of Scripture ("De Opificio Mundi," 24; "De Allegoriis Legum," ii. 24).

It must furthermore be remembered that Philo in none of his other works mentions these colonies of allegorizing ascetics, in which he would have been highly interested had he known of them. But pupils of Philo may subsequently have founded near Alexandria similar colonies that endeavored to realize his ideal of a pure life triumphing over the senses and passions; and they might also have been responsible for the one-sided development of certain of the master's principles.

While Philo desired to renounce the lusts of this world, he held fast to the scientific culture of Hellenism, which the author of this book denounces. Although Philo liked to withdraw from the world in order to give himself up entirely to contemplation, and bitterly regretted the lack of such repose ("De Specialibus Legibus," 1 [ii. 299]), he did not abandon the work that was required of him by the welfare of his people.

All this last list of dissimilarities suggests that the Philo who wrote VC was not the same Philo who wrote other books.

Iskander · 01-18-2013, 04:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mountainman

N/A

Quote:

Originally Posted by mountainman

.... the Philo who wrote VC was not the same Philo who wrote other books.

Different authors! It is a very interesting observation. How could we be reasonably certain of that?

aa5874 · 01-18-2013, 06:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

...If Phile were in fact describing a pagan group, what would that prove?

Quote:

Originally Posted by mountainman

It would assist in establishing a case that the Christians who preserved and USED the Philo Therapeutae source did so to hide and obscure the predominance of pagan therapeutae. It also would demonstrate that despite all the rhetoric that Eusebius uses in an attempt to make us think these therapeutae were the early Christians who walked with the apostles, their stature was neither Christian nor Jewish but pagan.

It would assist in establishing the case that in many instances, not just this, the Christians effective stole the identity of a large well known and highly respected class of pagan people, and wove them fraudulently into their fictitious tapesty of early Christian history.

Anyone familiar with Apologetics or Christianized writings can immediately detect that Philo's "On the Contemplative Life" is NOT Christianized.

There is NOTHING at all relating to the Jesus cult or teachings in Philo's writings on the Therapuetae.

No Apologetics before Eusebius used Philo's writings as evidence for the teachings of the supposed Jesus or cult.

It is clear that the author of "Church History" merely made FALSE claims about Philo.

In fact, every claim made in "Church History" about Philo with respect to Mark and Peter has turned out to be completely erroneous.

Now, if one actually reads "On the Contemplative Life" it will be seen that Philo's Theraputae are NOT only Jews.

Quote:

Now this class of persons may be met with in many places, for it was fitting that both Greece and the country of the barbarians should partake of whatever is perfectly good; and there is the greatest number of such men in Egypt, in every one of the districts, or nomi as they are called, and especially around Alexandria; (22) and from all quarters those who are the best of these therapeutae proceed on their pilgrimage to some most suitable place as if it were their country, which is beyond the Mareotic lake, lying in a somewhat level plain a little raised above the rest, being suitable for their purpose by reason of its safety and also of the fine temperature of the air.

And further, the writings of Philo is in complete contradiction to the Pauline letters in Christian Scriptures. There is NOTHING in the writings of Philo where he advocates that the Laws of the Jews are obsolete as stated in in the Galatians.

Galatians 2:16 KJV

Quote:

Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified .

Quote:

Originally Posted by mountainman

..All this last list of dissimilarities suggests that the Philo who wrote VC was not the same Philo who wrote other books.

Whoever wrote "On the Contemplative Life" was NOT a Christian of the Jesus cult even if you believe it was not written by Philo.

We know what Christianized writings would contain.

We have the NT Canon and the writings of Apologetics.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

01-18-2013, 12:49 AM	#141
stephan huller Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: seattle, wa Posts: 9,337

01-18-2013, 12:53 AM	#142
stephan huller Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: seattle, wa Posts: 9,337

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.