Philo of Alexandria - Books and Journals

184 part two
societies of Asia Minor as understood by the author. Several aspects from the
works of Philo are used to demonstrate how the social conditions of proselytes
may illuminate issues in 1Peter. (TS)
20164.A.M.Serra,‘La‘spada’:simbolodella‘paroladiDio,’nell’Antico
Testamento biblico-guidaico e nel Nuovo Testamento,’ Marianum 63
(2001) 17–89, esp. 32–46.
In interpreting the symbol of the sword representing the word of God, the
author also deals with the contribution of Philo. This occurs in section II
devoted to ancient Jewish literature. The biblical passages which he focuses on
are Gen 3:24, 48:22, Exod 32:27 and Num 22:29, where Philo takes the sword
as symbolizing the word of God. The major part of the discussion, however,
concentrates on an analysis of the doctrine of the Logos cutter in Her.Herethe
double role, i.e. both cosmological and soteriological, of the Logos comes clearly
to the fore. (RR)
20165. R. Sgarbi, ‘Prevedibilità vs. imprevedibilità: questioni di traduttologia
armena in riferimento a testi greci,’ in R. B. Finazzi and A.
Valvo (edd.), Pensiero e istituzioni del mondo classico nelle culture del
Vicino Oriente: Atti del Seminario Nazionale di studio (Brescia, 14–15–16
ottobre 1999), L’eredità classica nel mondo orientale 4 (Turin 2001) 259–
263.
The author analyses a few words from the first book of Spec. and the way that
they are rendered in the Armenian translation. For example the translation of
μσων in Spec. 1.321 corresponds to a lexical calque with the Armenian term
aneraˇziˇst (non-musical), which introduces the significance of ‘uneducated and
boorish’ in a form that hitherto did not exist and so is only comprehensible with
reference to the Greek. In another case, Spec. 1.290, the Armenian translation
allows us to reconstruct the exact form of the Greek text. Other cases in turn
demonstrate inaccuracies and errors of comprehension on the part of the translator
(e.g. in Spec. 1.286). (RR)
20166. Y. Shibata, ‘On the Ineffable. Philo and Justin,’ Patristica.
Proceedings of the Colloquia of the Japanese Society for Patristic Studies,
Supplementary Volume 1 (2001) 19–47.
The article treats the subject of divine ineffability as indicated by the term
ρρητς. The main emphasis of the article is on Justin, but Philo is brought
in mainly at the beginning for purposes of comparison and contrast. In the
view of the author Philo places more emphasis on the limitations of the human
cognitive faculty. Justin’s main emphasis is different. The ineffable maintains a
certain contact with human language through the evolution of the Logos in his
incarnate role. (DTR)