Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [GTh] GTh 49: The Kingdom as Philo's the Spirit-Sophia

Expand Messages
  • Michael Grondin
    Frank- First, a minor question about the following Philonic passage: For surely, when found a colony, the land which receives them becomes their native land
    Message 1 of 3 , May 15, 2001
    • 0 Attachment
      Frank-

      First, a minor question about the following Philonic passage:

      "For surely, when found a colony, the land which receives them becomes
      their native land ..."

      I can't quite decode "when found a colony". Is this a correct
      transcription? If so, how do you understand it? Is this 'found' in the
      sense of 'find' or in the sense of 'establish'?

      OK, now the major problem I have with this note is that altho YOU
      continually conjoin Spirit and Sophia, PHILO doesn't do so in any of the
      quoted material. In fact, I can't find a single mention of 'spirit' in HIS
      words that you quote. Now it may be that from the entire Philonic corpus
      you've gleaned the idea that whenever Philo talks about wisdom, he intends
      to include spirit as well. Or it may be that he equates the two in one or
      more of his works. But that doesn't mean that in the work in question - and
      in any other work where he doesn't explicitly equate the two - that that
      identity was in his mind and that he intended the reader to fill in the
      missing term. In other words, when Philo says 'wisdom', I assume he means
      just that, unless he explicitly mentions 'spirit' in the same breath. <g>
      It seems to me that to assume the identity of spirit and wisdom thruout his
      works is methodologically suspect, ignoring at least the possibility of his
      thought developing over time as his corpus developed, as well as the
      possibility that he occasionally wanted to talk about one separately from
      the other. It strikes me as extraordinary license to quote a Philonic
      passage on wisdom and then to assume without further ado that in that
      passage he's really talking about wisdom/spirit. He may be, but one expects
      it to be shown, not assumed - if it's important to the point. On the other
      hand, if it's not important to the point, why change the wording?

      Regards,
      Mike
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.