Philo of Alexandria - Books and Journals

344 part two
The significance of the adjective ψιστς when it qualifies a divinity is
debated. Does it imply that there was an evolution towards monotheism in
the Greco-Roman world, maybe under the influence of Judaism, since the
Septuagint translates Elyon by Hypsistos, a divine name used by Philo as well?
Through the analysis of votive inscriptions, the author shows that the use of
ψιστς by pagan worshippers is to be understood as a way to exalt the god,
which is not exclusivistic and does not imply monotheism. Not only are several
gods called ψιστς, butthegodHypsistos is sometimes mentioned together
with other gods whom the devotee wishes to worship as well. True, in the
majority of cases, the god Hypsistos is the only one to be invoked, but simply
because in this specific religious context the devotion is directed towards this god
in particular. Moreover, archaeological data show that gods which were called
ψιστι were worshipped in the same way and through the same rituals as the
other gods. Finally, the adjective ψιστς, which emphasizes the god’s greatness
and might, represents a reflection on the essence of the divinity rather than on
its unicity. (DTR; based on a summary supplied by Katell Berthelot)
20510. K.Berthelot,‘‘Ilsjettentaufeuleursfilsetleursfillespour
leurs dieux’: une justification humaniste du massacre des Cananéens
danslestextesjuifsanciens?,’Revue Biblique 112 (2005) 161–191.
Just as is the case for many modern commentators, ancient authors, whether
Jews or Christians, felt uncomfortable about the eradication of the Canaanite
population during the conquest of Canaan by the Israelites. The author discusses
one of the ways in which Jewish authors in antiquity, and in particular
Philo, justified these massacres. In Spec. 2.167ff. the Alexandrian defends both
divine justice and the Israelites who were its agent. He presents the Canaanites
as monstrous beings who sacrificed their children to their gods. He also defends
the Jewish people against accusations of misanthropy brought against them by
Greeks and Egyptians. He turns the tables by accusing them of behaving like
the Canaanites when they participate in the Dionysiac cults which accompany
human sacrifice or when they expose their newly-born children. These arguments
show a certain sensitivity towards humanistic objections against the biblical
accounts, even if they do not imply true adherence to humanism on the part
of Jewish authors. (JR)
20511. M.Böhm,Rezeption und Funktion der Vätererzählungen bei
Philo von Alexandria. Zum Zusammenhang von Kontext, Hermeneutik
und Exegese im frühen Judentum, Beihefte zur Zeitschrift für die neutestamentliche
Wissenschaft und die Kunde der älteren Kirche 128 (Berlin
2005).
This Leipzig Habilitationshcrift distinguishes between three fundamental
parts of the corpus Philonicum: the Exposition of the Law, the Allegorical Commentary
on the book Genesis and the Quaestiones. Theauthorfocusesonthe
narratives of Abraham, Sarah, Hagar, Ishmael, Isaac, Lot, Rebecca, Laban, Esau