Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Ben C Smith · 10-27-2008, 01:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by patcleaver

Do we at least have some water tight evidence that the Hebrew or LXX Jewish Scriptures existed before Constantine?

The Hebrew scriptures appear in many, many of the Dead Sea scrolls. (And so do apocryphal books such as 1 Enoch.)

Ben.

ETA: My post crossed with that of Andrew Criddle.

patcleaver · 10-27-2008, 02:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by andrewcriddle

Quote:

Originally Posted by patcleaver

Do we at least have some water tight evidence that the Hebrew or LXX Jewish Scriptures existed before Constantine?

IF you accept paleographic dating then yes we have manuscripts of both the Hebrew Scriptures (the DSS) and the LXX from well before the time of Constantine. The dates of the DSS Hebrew scriptures can be justified by C14 dating and other archaeological techniques independently of paleograohy. Independently of paleographic evidence some of the Greek OT material eg the scroll of the 12 minor prophets from the Dead Sea is on archaeological grounds probably 1st or 2nd century CE.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ben C Smith

Quote:

Originally Posted by patcleaver

Do we at least have some water tight evidence that the Hebrew or LXX Jewish Scriptures existed before Constantine?

The Hebrew scriptures appear in many, many of the Dead Sea scrolls. (And so do apocryphal books such as 1 Enoch.)

Ben.

ETA: My post crossed with that of Andrew Criddle.

Thanks, Andrew Criddle.
Thanks, Ben C Smith

Sorry, an amazing faux pas in view of my previous statement:

Quote:

Originally Posted by patcleaver

We have the DSS carbon dated to 95 BCE-122 CE. I think they contain most of the Jewish Scriptures in Hebrew (or is it Aramaic?).

Of course there is water-tight evidence that the documents contained in the DSS existed on their respective C14 dates.

I am a little emotional because my world just got rocked a little.

I have asserted in a discussion with several people in the past few weeks that the Jewish Scriptures were at least 500-600 BCE, and now I find out that something that I was confident about is "not true", and I have to bo back and appologize and correct my mistake.

Toto · 10-27-2008, 02:47 PM

Some posts involving charges of insanity have been split off, send to E, and locked.

Please stay on topic and avoid personal comments.

Jeffrey Gibson · 10-27-2008, 02:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mountainman

IMO Origen was the pupil of the neopythagorean Ammonius Saccas, and not the christian Ammonias Saccas whom Eusebius describes as being the teacher of Origen. Have a look at what the ancient historians say.
They say there must certainly have been two Ammonias Saccas in history, one whom Eusebius describes as the christian teacher of Origen, and another whom ancient historians identify and the neopythagorean teacher of the neopythagorean Origen.

Which ancient historians say this, Pete? And where specifically do they say it? And what is your source that the "pagan" Ammonius Saccas was a Neopythagorean?

Jeffrey

patcleaver · 10-27-2008, 03:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

Some posts involving charges of insanity have been split off, send to E, and locked.

Please stay on topic and avoid personal comments.

Thanks, Toto

patcleaver · 10-27-2008, 03:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ben C Smith

Quote:

Originally Posted by spin

How many other examples would you like?

There is also the infinitive absolute construction so prevalent in the Hebrew language, and so unnecessary in Greek or Latin.

Ben.

The issue is: could most of the Jewish Scriptures (or at lest the Pentateuch) have been originally documented in Greek from Hebrew/Aramaic oral tradition, and later translated into Hebrew/Aramaic.

It would be very difficult to determine whether Hebrew oral tradition was originally documented in Hebrew or Greek.

Spin provided a good example in Psalms 34, 119 145 that were probably originally written in Hebrew because they encode the Hebrew alphabet.

Fortuna pointed out that in the book of Nehemiah(8) Ezra the Scribe Brought from Babylon the Books of the law of Mosche and read them to the peope on the frist of Tizri. Hebrew scrolls must have existed prior to the authoring of Nehemiah(8).

I do not know how the Septuagint deals with the Hebrew infinitive absolute construction, but even if the Septuagint did not include it, it could have been included in the Hebrew when the Septuagint was (allegedly) translated back into Hebrew.

mountainman · 10-27-2008, 03:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeffrey Gibson

Quote:

Originally Posted by mountainman

IMO Origen was the pupil of the neopythagorean Ammonius Saccas, and not the christian Ammonias Saccas whom Eusebius describes as being the teacher of Origen. Have a look at what the ancient historians say.
They say there must certainly have been two Ammonias Saccas in history, one whom Eusebius describes as the christian teacher of Origen, and another whom ancient historians identify and the neopythagorean teacher of the neopythagorean Origen.

Which ancient historians say this, Pete? And where specifically do they say it?

Dear Jeffrey,

The WIKI summary on Ammonius Saccas provides a starting point for more specific research. I do not have my notes with me at present.

Quote:

Ammonius Saccas

Ammonius Saccas (3rd century AD) was a Greek philosopher from Alexandria who was often referred to as one of the founders of Neoplatonism. He is mainly known as the teacher of Plotinus, who he taught for eleven years from 232 to 243. He was undoubtably the biggest influence on Plotinus in his development of Neoplatonism, although little is known about his own philosophical views. Later Christian writers stated that Ammonius was a Christian, but it is now generally assumed that there was a different Ammonius of Alexandria who wrote biblical texts.

Life

Not much is known about the life of Ammonius Saccas. He had a humble background, and appears to have earned a living as a porter at the docks of Alexandria, hence his nickname of "Sack-bearer" (Sakkas for sakkophoros). Most details of his life come from the fragments left from Porphyry's writings. The most famous pupil of Ammonius Saccas was Plotinus who studied under Ammonius for eleven years. According to Porphyry, in 232, at the age of 28, Plotinus went to Alexandria to study philosophy:

In his twenty-eighth year he [Plotinus] felt the impulse to study philosophy and was recommended to the teachers in Alexandria who then had the highest reputation; but he came away from their lectures so depressed and full of sadness that he told his trouble to one of his friends. The friend, understanding the desire of his heart, sent him to Ammonius, whom he had not so far tried. He went and heard him, and said to his friend, "This is the man I was looking for." From that day he stayed continually with Ammonius and acquired so complete a training in philosophy that he became eager to make acquaintance with the Persian philosophical discipline and that prevailing among the Indians.[1]

According to Porphyry, the parents of Ammonius were Christians, but upon learning Greek philosophy, Ammonius rejected his parents' religion for paganism. This conversion is contested by the Christian writers Jerome and Eusebius, who state that Ammonius remained a Christian throughout his lifetime:

[Porphyry] plainly utters a falsehood (for what will not an opposer of Christians do?) when he says that ... Ammonius fell from a life of piety into heathen customs. ... Ammonius held the divine philosophy unshaken and unadulterated to the end of his life. His works yet extant show this, as he is celebrated among many for the writings which he has left.[2]

Eusebius goes on to mention a work On the Harmony of Moses and Jesus, and in an epistle addressed to Carpianus speaks of a Diatessaron or Harmony of the Four Gospels composed by Ammonius.[3]

However we are told by Longinus that Ammonius wrote nothing,[4] and if Ammonius was the principle influence on Plotinus, then it is unlikely that Ammonius would have been a Christian. One way to explain much of the confusion concerning Ammonius is to assume that there were two people called Ammonius: Ammonius Saccas who taught Plotinus, and an Ammonius the Christian who wrote biblical texts.

To add to the confusion, it seems that Ammonius had two pupils called Origen: Origen the Christian, and Origen the Pagan.[2] It is quite possible that Ammonius Saccas taught both Origens. Among Ammonius' other pupils there were Herennius and Cassius Longinus.

The references supplied on that page are:
Armstrong, A., (1967), The Cambridge History of Later Greek and Early Medieval Philosophy, Pages 196-200. Cambridge University Press.
Karamanolis, G., (2006), Plato and Aristotle in Agreement?: Platonists on Aristotle from Antiochus to Porphyry, Pages 191-215. Oxford University Press.
Reale, G., (1990), A History of Ancient Philosophy IV: The Schools of the Imperial Age, Pages 297-303. SUNY Press.

Here is another article from A Dictionary of Christian Biography and Literature:

Quote:

Ammonius Saccas. Next to nothing is known of this philosopher. That he obtained his name of Saccas (= σακκοφόρος) from having been a porter in his youth is affirmed by Suidas (under Origenes) and Ammianus Marcellinus (xxii. 528). He was a native of Alexandria; Porphyry asserts that he was born of Christian parents, and returned to the heathen religion. Eusebius (H. E. vi. 19, 7) denies this, but perhaps confounds him with another Ammonius, the author of a Diatessaron, still extant. That the founder of the Alexandrian school of philosophy (for such Ammonius Saccas was) should have been at the same time a Christian, though not impossible, seems hardly likely. Moreover, the Ammonius of Eusebius wrote books; whereas, according to both Longinus and Porphyry, Ammonius Saccas wrote none. Plotinus is said to have been most strongly impressed with his first hearing of Ammonius, and to have cried out, "This is the man I was looking for!" (τοῦτον ἐζήτουν), after which he remained his constant friend till the death of the elder philosopher. Among other disciples of Ammonius were Herennius, the celebrated Longinus, Heracles the Christian, Olympius, Antonius, a heathen called Origen, and also the famous Christian of that name. It is possible, however, that the Christians, Origen and Heracles, may have been the disciples of that Ammonius whom Eusebius confounds with Ammonius Saccas, and who was himself a Christian; but this cannot be certainly known. We may guess something concerning the philosophy of Ammonius Saccas from the fact that Plotinus was his pupil. Hierocles (ap. Photius) affirms that his aim was to reconcile the philosophies of Plato and Aristotle, hence he appears to have combined mysticism and eclecticism. Nemesius, a bishop and a neo-Platonist of the close of the 4th cent., cites two passages, one of which he declares to contain the views of Numenius and Ammonius, the other he attributes to Ammonius alone. They concern the nature of the soul and its relation to the body; but they appear to have been merely the traditional views of Ammonius, not any actual written words of his. The life and philosophy of Ammonius have been discussed by Vacherot, Hist. de l᾿Ecole d᾿Alex. i. 342; Jules Simon, Hist. de l᾿Ecole d᾿Alex. i. 204; Dehaut in his historical essay on the life and teaching of our philosopher; and Zeller in his Philosophie der Griechen, who also mentions other writers on Ammonius.

Quote:

And what is your source that the "pagan" Ammonius Saccas was a Neopythagorean.

My position is that lineage of the neopythagoreans and the lineage of the neoplatonists, for the express purpose of the investigation of christian origins, may be treated as the one lineage. I understand that for some other purposes, we must investigate the ways in which it might be said that the one combined lineage was composed of two separate strands. However I apologise in advance if I appear to be using the terms neopythagorean and neoplatonic interchangeably, but at that time when Constantine appeared, he absolutely trashed both lineages equally. There is no pont in separating these two lineages from my perspective.

Notably, the lineage of these philosophers when stated does not often mention the historical figure of Apollonius of Tyana, whom we know to be some form of neopythagoraean. Apollonius was an author of many books, an author of many letters (collected after his death), and Eusebius cites in many books (Against Hierocles), not once but dozens of times as being a subject in the history of Philostratus. Eusebius does not appear to suggest Philostratus is a fictional account. He refers to it as a history, many times. So we also need to be aware that this famous Greek academic lineage was essentially cut off by Constantine, since he edicted for the burning of the academic writings of Porphyry (who preserves among others Plotinus and Euclid), and "that Porphyrian" Arius of Alexandria.

Anyway, this is leading off the thread, and it is the figure of Origen and his historicity which may answer Pat's original question as to whether we have any trace of the LXX prior to Eusebius. I think that we do in Origen, and in his Hexapla, by which a Hebrew translation of the corresponding greek text was also preserved. Eusebius purposefully attempts to confabulate a special type of Origen who had descended from that transcendental tribe of prenicene christians, and who in fact was an important and key link in its lineage. I think he needed to do this so that he could then tender forgeries in the name of a christian Origen. The fabrication of the Galilaeans was extensive. Emperor Julian refers to Eusebius as wretched.

We may contemplate Constantine standing up in front of the greek academics and priests of the eastern empire and touting the fact that Origen was not of the lineage of Pythagoras and/or Plato. The famous writer and academic Origen was not a follower of either Plato or Pythagoras, I can hear Constantine bellowing, he was follower of the christians. What a fraud! He would be citing the propaganda of Eusebius to the Greek audience, as an authority.

Best wishes,

Ben C Smith · 10-27-2008, 03:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by patcleaver

I do not know how the Septuagint deals with the Hebrew infinitive absolute construction, but even if the Septuagint did not include it, it could have been included in the Hebrew when the Septuagint was (allegedly) translated back into Hebrew.

Did you read the page I linked to? Your questions are answered there.

Ben.

mountainman · 10-27-2008, 03:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by patcleaver

Do we at least have some water tight evidence that the Hebrew or LXX Jewish Scriptures existed before Constantine?

Dear Pat,

Additionally we may find it represented in papyri which are able to be dated is a secure manner. I seem to recall seeing a fair number of references here and there. The following list may contain a reference to a such a fragment:

101 sql CE: P.Oxy 5 "christian". [Nomina sacra ?]
102 3rd CE: P.Bas 17 [non christian]
103 303 CE: P.Oxy 43 Nighwatchmen's report - 2 churches. [two churches]
104 sql CE: P.Oxy 210 A "christian" fragment. [Nomina sacra ?]
105 3rd CE: P.Oxy. 405 Irenaeus.[Dating?]
106 3/4 CE: P.Oxy 407 "christian amulet; 3rd/4th century". [4th amulet]
107 265 CE: P.Oxy. 412 and 907[Nomina sacra ?]
108 2nd CE: PSI.XIV.1412 "via Sotas, the christian". [chrestian?]
109 3rd CE: P.Oxy 1786 Hymn with music "christian". [Father, Son, and Holy Spirit]
110 3rd CE: P.Oxy 2070 Scratch pad "christian". [abbreviated (I—h—) 'Jesus']
111 3rd CE: P.Oxy. 2276[ “in the lord god” ]
112 3rd CE: P.Oxy. 2404 [ “in the lord god” ]
113 256 CE: P.Oxy 3035 Order to arrest "chrestian". [citation is "chrestian"]
114 3rd CE: P.Oxy 4365 Booklending.[incorrectly presumed christian]
115 3/4 CE: P.Oxy 1493 lines 4–5; Nomina sacra in letter with virtually no other Christian identifiers[Nomina sacra]

Other Papyrii Fragments

151 xxx CE: P.Oxy. 3057 [Judge, non christian]
152 xxx CE: P.Oxy. 3313 [Judge, non christian]
153 xxx CE: P.Oxy. 3069 [Judge, non christian]
154 xxx CE: P.Oxy. 3314 [Judge, non christian]
155 4th CE: P.Oxy. 209 [sample]
156 4th CE: P.Oxy. 4127 [sample]
157 4th CE: P.Oxy. 3857 ["Greetings in the Lord"]
158 3rd CE: PSI.9.1041 . ["as is proper"]
159 3rd CE: PSI.9.1041 . ["as is proper"]
160 3rd CE: PSI.9.1041 . ["as is proper"]
161 2nd CE: PSI.3.208 . ["according to custom"]
162 4th CE: P.Oxy. 4010 [magic and "the lord's prayer"]
163 3rd CE: P.Oxy. 32 [everyday life]
164 3rd CE: P.Oxy. 3646 [everyday life]
165 3rd CE: P.Oxy. 115 [everyday life]
166 3rd CE: P.Oxy. 3724 [epigrams to Philodemis]
167 4th CE: P.Walsh Univ.I.20 [church "land-grabs"]
168 4th CE: P.Oxy. 3311 [church "land-grabs"]
169 304 CE: P.Oxy. 2673 [the "illiterate lector"]

One might also search the epigraphy databases.

Best wishes,

Pete

Jeffrey Gibson · 10-27-2008, 04:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mountainman

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeffrey Gibson

Which ancient historians say this, Pete? And where specifically do they say it?

Dear Jeffrey,

The WIKI summary on Ammonius Saccas provides a starting point for more specific research. I do not have my notes with me at present.

In other words, you don't know. And if your notes are based solely on internet sources like Wiki, they are worthless. Your entry from Dictionary of Christian Biography is 100 years old.

Quote:

The references supplied on that page are:
Armstrong, A., (1967), The Cambridge History of Later Greek and Early Medieval Philosophy, Pages 196-200. Cambridge University Press.
Karamanolis, G., (2006), Plato and Aristotle in Agreement?: Platonists on Aristotle from Antiochus to Porphyry, Pages 191-215. Oxford University Press. Reale, G., (1990), A History of Ancient Philosophy IV: The Schools of the Imperial Age, Pages 297-303. SUNY Press.

None of these folks are historians from antiquity. And even if what you meant by "ancient historians" was "historians of antquity", it's a safe bet to say that you haven't read what they've written about Ammonius Saccas or you'd know that neither Armstrong nor Karamanois nor Reale (or for that matter Zeller [Phil d Gr 3.2; Dodds [Le Sources de Plotinius] or M. Baltes whose RAC article on Ammonius is the standared reference) believe or suggest that that there were two people named Ammonius Saccas or that Plotinus' Ammonius and Origen's/Eusebius' Ammonius were anyone but the same person.

Quote:

And what is your source that the "pagan" Ammonius Saccas was a Neopythagorean.

My position is that lineage of the neopythagoreans and the lineage of the neoplatonists, for the express purpose of the investigation of christian origins, may be treated as the one lineage.

That's nice. But on what study of either neoplatonism or neopythagoreanism do you base this? Have you read Plotinus or Iamblichus, Synesius or Porphry, Alexander of Aboneuteichos and Hierocles? And, more importantly, what ancient historian, let alone what pupil of Ammonius, ever claims that he was a neopythegorean or was influenced in his philosophy by this school of thought?

Quote:

I understand that for some other purposes, we must investigate the ways in which it might be said that the one combined lineage was composed of two separate strands.

Might be said?

Quote:

However I apologise in advance if I appear to be using the terms neopythagorean and neoplatonic interchangeably,

appear?

Quote:

but at that time when Constantine appeared, he absolutely trashed both lineages equally.

He did?

Quote:

There is no pont in separating these two lineages from my perspective.

Which BTW is a totally uninformed one when it comes to these two philosophical schools.

Quote:

Notably, the lineage of these philosophers when stated does not often mention the historical figure of Apollonius of Tyana, whom we know to be some form of neopythagoraean. Apollonius was an author of many books,

Really? Says who. And what are the names of these books?

Quote:

an author of many letters (collected after his death),

Most of which are regarded by modern experts on Apollonius and Philostratus as wholly inauthentic. Even Wiki says so!

Once again, Pete, you don't know what you are taking about.

Jeffrey

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

10-27-2008, 02:47 PM	#23
Toto Contributor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Los Angeles area Posts: 40,549	Some posts involving charges of insanity have been split off, send to E, and locked. Please stay on topic and avoid personal comments.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.