Philo of Alexandria - Books and Journals

302 part two
In this response to A. Kovelman’s article (see below 20460)theauthorargues
against his claim that Alexandrian exegesis was a missing link in the evolution
from biblical epic to rabbinic spoudogeloion, or serio-comical literature.
Questioning this characterization of the evolution altogether, the author
maintains that ‘the admission of humor’ into the rabbinic corpus reflected
an internal change in Jewish literature—but not a change in genre—and that
this change came about ‘in dialogue and community with the Greco-Roman’
literatures (p. 155). To counter Kovelman’s argument that the Rabbis were
influenced by Philo’s treatment, she also discusses rabbinic interpretations of
Eve’s creation and rabbinic use of the androgynous human creation myth.
(EB)
20443. D.M.Hay,‘Philo’sAnthropology,theSpiritualRegimenof
the Therapeutae, and a possible Connection with Corinth,’ in R. Deines
andK.-W.Niebuhr(edd.),Philound das Neue Testament: Wechselseitige
Wahrnehmungen. 1. Internationales Symposium zum Corpus Judaeo-
Hellenisticum Novi Testamenti (Eisenach/Jena, Mai 2003),Wissenschaftliche
Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 172 (Tübingen 2004) 127–
142.
The paper argues that an examination of the spirituality of the Therapeutae
can shed significant light on Philo’s rather abstruse exegesis of Gen 1 and
2 in terms of a double creation of humanity. The life of the soul that this
community practises can be read as a kind of nearly realized eschatology.
Although no direct historical link can be established, there are clear parallels
between Paul’s affirmations in 1Cor 15:44–49 and Philo’s double creation of
humanity, just as there are between the Corinthians whom Paul addresses and
Philo’s Therapeutae. In both cases praxis and theory shed light on each other.
Reading Philo’s treatises helps us understand the kind of spiritual problems that
Paul was attempting to address. (DTR)
20444. B. Heininger, ‘Paulus und Philo als Mystiker? Himmelsreisen
im Vergleich (2Kor 12,2–4; SpecLeg III 1–6),’ in R. Deines and K.-W.
Niebuhr (edd.), Philo und das Neue Testament: Wechselseitige Wahrnehmungen.
1. Internationales Symposium zum Corpus Judaeo-Hellenisticum
Novi Testamenti (Eisenach/Jena, Mai 2003), Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen
zum Neuen Testament 172 (Tübingen 2004) 189–204.
Heininger compares the Pauline narrative in 2Corinthians with Philo’s mystic
descriptions in Spec. 3. He also takes into account contemporary texts such
as Apuleius of Madaura (De deo Socratis). The heavenly journey proves to be
valuable like a traditional linguistic game (‘Sprachspiel’) that was often used
from Plato onwards. One can see, however, that Paul and Philo describe their
‘extraordinary experiences’ in quite a different way. This is not surprising on
account of their divergent historical and cultural settings. (GS)