Philo of Alexandria - Books and Journals

critical studies 2002 223
passions provide the higher hermeneutical ground from which he can launch
either into the Platonic or the Stoic model. In both cases the Socratic paradigm
plays an important role. For this reason the epigraph of the article is a quote
from QG 4.99, which alludes to the contrast between beautiful mind and ugly
body in the case of Socrates himself. The study has been reprinted in the volume
edited by F. Alesse, Philo of Alexandria and Post-Aristotelian Philosophy,Studies
on Philo of Alexandria 5 (Leiden 2008) 167–195. (DTR)
20276. J. Reynard, ‘La notion d’athéisme dans l’œuvre de Philon
d’Alexandrie,’ in G. Dorival and D. Pralon (edd.), Nier les dieux, nier
Dieu, Textes et Documents de le Méditerrané antique et médiévale (Aixen-Provence
2002) 211–221.
As an adherent of strict monotheism, Philo criticizes atheism as it manifests
itself in diverse guises: polytheism (animal cult, veneration of natural elements,
divinization of human beings); atheism as doctrine; atheism as moral category,
symbolized by Pharaoh, but also by Cain; atheistic exegesis. In the author’s view
the problematics of atheism centre on the unicity of God the uncreated creator.
Polytheistic cults, philosophical doctrines, wicked behaviour, inappropriate
readings: all of these are judged in accordance with the single criterion of conformity
to Jewish monotheism. Everything that threatens this belief is imbued
with atheism, a term which sums up everything which Philo fights against. One
atheist, however, does find favour in his sight: Theodore of Cyrene, whom he sees
notsomuchasadenierofGodbutoftheAtheniangods(Prob. 127–130). (JR)
20277. D.Rokeah,Justin Martyr and the Jews, Jewish and Christian
Perspectives Series 5 (Leiden 2002), esp. 22–28.
This work is a revised and updated version of an earlier edition published
in Hebrew by The Ben-Zion Dinur Center for Research in Jewish History, the
Hebrew University, Jerusalem in 1998. Chapter four of this study contains a
summary of the discussion on the question of Justin’s dependence on Philo.
E. R. Goodenough argues that several Philonic interpretations in Justin prove
the Christian author’s dependence on Philo. A different view is advanced by
L. W. Barnard, who examines the development of the theory of the Logos in
Judaism and Greek thought. In his view the similarities between the two writers
must be regarded as a product of their common source, viz. the LXX. Finally,
the opinion of O. Skarskaune is reported, who posits that no evidence for a
direct link between Philo and Justin exists. Justin’s sources are (1) Christian
testimonies, based on disputes between Jewish-Christians and Christians, and
(2) typological interpretations developed by Justin himself. (ACG)
20278.R.Roukema,‘LeFilsduTrès-Haut.Surlesangesetlachristologie,’
Études Théologique et Religieuses 77 (2002) 343–357, esp. 346–348.
Deut 32:8–9, which shows that before the exile Israel had a belief in a
pantheon similar to that which occurs in Ugaritic texts, is cited twice by Philo