Philo of Alexandria - Books and Journals

critical studies 2001 161
Christianity in Honor of David Hay [= The Studia Philonica Annual 13
(2001)], Brown Judaic Studies 332 (Providence RI 2001) 37–58.
To determine how Philo saw the relationship between Greek culture and the
opponents of the Jews in Alexandria, the author examines two commonplaces—
first, that Philo was a great admirer of the Greeks and their culture and, second,
that the opponents of the Jews in Alexandria were Greeks and Egyptians.
Based on a study of vocabulary pertaining to ‘Greeks’ (Ελληνες) and ‘Greece’
(Ελλάς), Birnbaum concludes that although Philo admired the Greeks and their
culture, he was also critical of them. At times he portrays the Jews as in some way
better than Greeks and even as better than Greeks and barbarians combined.
Philo never refers to the opponents of the Jews in Alexandria as Greeks and
Egyptians. Instead he calls them Alexandrians and Egyptians, and he obscures
distinctions between these two groups. Philo does not associate Alexandrian
opponents of the Jews with Greek culture. Despite the universalizing aspects
of his thought, he sometimes distinguishes sharply between Jews and non-Jews
and sees Jews and their heritage as superior to all other peoples and cultures.
(EB)
20107. P. Borgen, ‘Application of and Commitment to the Laws of
Moses. Observations on Philo’s Treatise On the Embassy to Gaius,’ in
D. T. Runia and G. E. Sterling (edd.), In the Spirit of Faith: Studies
in Philo and Early Christianity in Honor of David Hay [= The Studia
Philonica Annual 13 (2001)], Brown Judaic Studies 332 (Providence
RI 2001) 86–101.
In this article the author argues that ‘Philo’s treatise called Legat. istobe
ranked among Philo’s exegetical writings. In it Philo applies Scriptural principles
to historical events in a way similar to that found in his expository writings, such
as for example in Somn. 2.115–132. The conflict in Alexandria and Jerusalem was
a struggle for the way in which the Laws of Moses and ancestral traditions should
be interpreted and practised in society’ (88). The laws are here thus interpreted
relative to the practices in communal life and the critical events that took place.
To demonstrate and substantiate this thesis, Borgen applies an interpretative
model, formulated by B. Gerhardsson, that views the Jewish laws as woven into
the very fabric of Jewish society and institutions. Borgen then investigates Legat.
by focusing on the role of the Torah as inner tradition (the Torah-centric relation
to the only god), verbal tradition (Torah as words), behavioural tradition (Torah
as practised), institutional tradition (Torah as institution) and material tradition
(Torah as thing). In each section he starts with aspects from the Legat., and then
relates these to comparable discussions in the expository writings, finding that
the Embassy exemplifies how the Laws functioned in communal life on all these
various levels. (TS)
20108. P. Borgen, ‘Greek Encyclical Education, Philosophy and
the Synagogue. Observations from Philo of Alexandria’s Writings,’ in