Philo of Alexandria - Books and Journals

250 part two
20345. L.H.Feldman,‘Philo’sinterpretationofKorah,’Revue des
Etudes Juives 162 (2003) 1–15.
In Mos. Philo describes the rebellion of the Levite Korah against Moses,
but he does not mention Korah’s name (2.174–179, 275–287). In contrast to
Josephus, Philo does not mention Korah’s descent, wealth or ability as speaker.
His main concern is theological: Korah resists the divine commands by which
Moses was appointed as leader. It is a conflict between belief and disbelief. In
the biblical account Dathan and Abiram are also mentioned as leaders in the
revolt, but Philo omits their names. In contrast to the biblical narrative, Philo
tells us that the Levites try to persuade the tribe of Reuben to join the revolt.
(ACG)
20346. L.H.Feldman,‘Philo’sVersionofBalaam,’Henoch 25 (2003)
301–319.
The fascination that the figure of Balaam exercised on Philo may be seen
from the sheer amount of space that he devotes to him, both because of his
interest in the phenomenon of prophecy and because he sought to elevate the
figure of Moses, the true prophet, through contrasting him with Balaam, the
greatest of pagan prophets but actually a mere technician (μάντις). Philo is
consistent in disparaging him, notably in his most extended treatment of the
Balaam episode, Mos. 1.263–299, where he does not even mention Balaam by
name. He is careful in his treatment of Balaam’s messianic-like prediction that
a man will come forth from the Israelites who will rule over many nations
(including the Edomites, from whom according to later tradition the Romans
were descended). Philo reduces Balaam’s prophetic claims to absurdity by stating
thathisdonkeyprovedtohavesuperiorsight;heomits,however,tosaythat
the donkey spoke, presumably because sophisticated readers would find this
hard to believe. Finally, Philo, perhaps indirectly referring to what he saw in
the Alexandrian Jewish community of his own days, adds that it is Balaam who
suggests to Balak the means by which he may overcome the Israelites, namely
by illicit sexual allurements coming from Moabite women. (HMK; based on the
author’s summary)
20347. L.H.Feldman,‘QuestionsabouttheGreatFlood,asViewed
by Philo, Pseudo-Philo, Josephus, and the Rabbis,’ Zeitschrift für die
alttestamentliche Wissenschaft 115 (2003) 401–422.
The author discusses several questions relating to the interpretation of Noah
and the flood by Philo, Josephus, Ps.Philo, and the rabbis. On the question of
the historicity of Noah and the flood, Philo has no doubts and does not regard
the story as a myth. An important theological issue in his reading is that God
is perfectly just and that people suffer because they deserve it. As a philosopher
Philo is also concerned with the question why animals, who do not have free
will, are also destroyed by God. Philo emphasizes the fact that God lengthened
the lives of those living at the time of the flood in order that they may repent.