Philo of Alexandria - Books and Journals

critical studies 2001 177
class. Part Two, on Jewish culture, includes his discussion of the birth and raising
of Jewish children, the centrality of Scripture in his thought and his ideas about
Divine language, his use of parables, and his portrayal of the connection between
Nature and the Jewish way of life. Reviews: E. Birnbaum, SPhA 14 (2002) 186–
193; F. Calabi, Adamant 8 (2002) 354–357; L. H. Feldman, SCI 21 (2002) 314–
318; J. M. G. Barclay, JJS 54 (2003) 154–156; A. C. Geljon, JSJ 34 (2003) 102–
105; F. J. Murphy, CBQ 65 (2003) 647–648; R. Vicent, Sales 65 (2003) 186–187;
J. Neusner, RRJ 8 (2005) 331–333. (EB)
20147.D.Noy,‘‘ASightUnfittoSee’:JewishReactionstotheRoman
Imperial Cult,’ Classics Ireland 8 (2001) 68–83.
Taking his point of departure in Gaius Caligula’s decision to have a statue of
himself installed in the Jewish Temple at Jerusalem, the author discusses this and
other episodes in order to reach a conclusion on the general Jewish reactions
to the imperial cult. Using the works of Philo, Josephus, the Rabbis and some
papyri and inscriptions, the author’s main thesis is that the case of Caligula was
exceptional, and that usually there was no pressure from central authorities for
Jews to compromise with the cult, although the issue may have been less clearcut
at a local level. In general, the Jews seem to have been content to ignore the
imperial cult, and the proponents of the cult were content to ignore the Jews.
(TS)
20148. M.Osman´ski, Logos i stworzenie. Filozoficzna interpretacja
traktau De opificio mundi Filona z Aleksandrii [Polish: Logos and creation.
Philosophical Interpretation of the treatise De opificio mundi of Philo of
Alexandria] (Lublin 2001).
In this book the author focuses on the problem of Logos in Opif. andits
place within Philo’s conception of creation. The main analysis is preceded by
a brief exposition of Philo’s life, his philosophical background, the structure and
place of the treatise in the Philonic corpus and the sources of his conception of
the Logos. In the first chapter two main questions are raised: (1) Is the Logos
to be identified with or distinguished from God? (2) Is the Logos created or
not created? In the next chapter questions concerning the immanent Logos are
raised: (1) Is it material or immaterial? (2) How can its relation to nature or the
law of nature be described? In the final chapter the Logos’ relation to human
beings is analysed. Each of these questions is preceded by a review of scholarly
positions on the subject. Although the author refrains from giving definitive
answers to these problems, he argues for an interpretation of the Logos in Philo
as ‘God’s mind turned towards creation’. Within the Logos thus conceived he
distinguishes four aspects: (1) formal, i.e. thinking itself; (2) material, i.e. the
ideas conceived; (3) unifying or arranging, i.e. the unity of all the ideas forming
one archetype; (4) creative, i.e. creating the sensible world according to the
archetype. In a formal sense the Logos is the principle of the unity of these
four aspects in the act of creation. It seems that the manifestation of these four