mountainman

The following fragment of Apollonius of Tyana is from a book
entitled The Mystic Rites or Concerning Sacrifices.

Noack [Psyche, I ii.5.] tells us that scholarship
is convinced of the genuineness of this fragment.
This book, as we have seen, was widely circulated
and held in the highest respect, and it said that
its rules were engraved on brazen pillars
at Byzantium. [Noack, ibid.]

Several fragments of it have been preserved, [See Zeller, Phil d
Griech, v 127] the most important of which is to be found in
Eusebius, [Præparat. Evangel., iv 12-13; ed Dindorf (Leipzig 1867),
i 176, 177] and is to this effect:

“ ‘Tis best to make no sacrifice to God at all,
no lighting of a fire,
no calling Him by any name
that men employ for things to sense.

For God is over all, the first;
and only after Him do come the other Gods.
For He doth stand in need of naught
e’en from the Gods,
much less from us small men -
naught that the earth brings forth,
nor any life she nurseth,
or even any thing the stainless air contains.

The only fitting sacrifice to God
is man’s best reason,
and not the word
that comes from out his mouth.

“We men should ask the best of beings
through the best thing in us,
for what is good -
mean by means of mind,
for mind needs no material things
to make its prayer.
So then, to God, the mighty One,
who’s over all,
no sacrifice should ever be lit up.”

The claim is that the above writings support a monotheistic
outlook. And thus we can say that the neopythagoreans
who supported views such as this --- and these were
far more widespread views than any spread of christian
views in the first century, when this was written --- can
be considered as monotheistic. Perhaps the christian
participant here would prefer monotheistic pagans.


Secondly, as an aside, can such neopythagorean monotheism
from an historical perspective, be considered an "Abrahamic
Religion"? AFAIK, the Pythagorean tradition is descendent
from the antiquity of the greeks, the egyptians, persians,
indians, etc and is thus non Abrahamic. Correct/Incorrect?

neilgodfrey

If you haven't seen it already you might be interested in the discussion of the development of pagan monotheism found in Pagan Monotheism in Late Antiquity edited by Polymnia Athanassiadi and Michael Frede.

Neil Godfrey

http://vridar.wordpress.com

mountainman

Looks to be an interesting book. It appears to cover late
antiquity ... do you happen to know what years precisely
the book deals with its subject matter. Are there any
extracts available for discussion? Thanks for the ref.

neilgodfrey

The first chapter is "Towards Monotheism" by M.L.West. It gives an overview of religious development from OT days, Zoroastrianism, Homer and classical Greeks.

2nd is Monotheism and Pagan Philosophy in Later Antiquity by Michael Frede. Looks at Sceptics, Aristotle, Platonists and Stoics, through to early Christian era.

3rd ch. is Monotheism in the Gnostic Tradition by John Dillon.

4th ch. is The Cult of Theos Hypsistos between Pagans, Jews and Christians by Stephen Mitchell -- my fav chapter -- includes a methodological survey of archaeological and epigraphic evidence for Theos Hypsistos, and influence re Jews and Christians, plus appendix on doco evidence for Theos Hypsistos and Zeus Hypsistos.

5th chapter is The Chaldean Oracles: Theology and Theurgy by P. Athanassiadi, which I think iirc looks at 3rd century onwards -- though accompanied by an interesting methodological note "i see no reason to doubt for doubt's sake" somewhere in there.

Ch. 6 is The Significance of the Speech of Praetextatus by W.Liebeschuetz, covering from about 5th C I think.

Neil Godfrey

http://vridar.wordpress.com

Toto

Pagan Monotheism in Late Antiquity (or via: amazon.co.uk) is searchable on Amazon.

adren@line

monotheism was seen with the Persians before the Semites.

The Hindu Vedas have also been interpreted as monotheistic.

neilgodfrey

One thing I learned from reading "Pagan Monotheism in Late Antiquity" was the conceptual similarity between the Hindu idea of god/s and the "classical" view of "late antiquity" -- the many gods like Mercury, Venus and co being understood as different manifestations and functions of the One Deity.

Neil Godfrey

http://vridar.wordpress.com

mountainman

The development of pagan monotheism is itself a very interesting
part of the topography of the history of antiquity. Thanks for the
leads in this region, I shall add these to the growing list of research.

I agree with the claim that the Hindu Vedas have also been
interpreted as monotheistic. But this would be another thread.

The Hellenic neo-pythagorean culture however fell out of favour
it would appear, under the rule of Constantine, and into favour
fell a brand new (and strange) Roman religious order monotheism,
which Constantine called "christianity".

It is notable that Julian did not use this term, but rather
the term "the Galilaeans", in the same fashion as is used
by the author Josephus, to represent unruly clans of
brigands held up in the regions of Galilee.