Ero sivun ”Filon Aleksandrialainen” versioiden välillä
[arvioimaton versio] | [arvioimaton versio] |
Poistettu sisältö Lisätty sisältö
Rivi 184:
=== Itsenäiset teokset ===
* ''De
* ''Quod
* ''In Flaccum'' ja ''De
* ''De
* ''De
* ''
#Περὶ Ἰονδαίων an apology for the Jews (Schürer, l.c. pp. 532 et seq.).-->
<!--
For a list of the lost works of Philo see Schürer, l.c. p. 534.
====''De
"De
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 of Elea|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.
-->
=== Muita Filonin nimiin laitettuja teoksia ===
|