Stephan Hoebeeck on the philosophical origins of Christianity
Posted: Sun Sep 19, 2021 3:09 am
Nothing is lost, nothing is created, everything is transformed. This sentence is probably true for Christianity: the appearance of Christianity marks the disappearance of Alexandrian Judaism. A text from the third century, the Apostolic Constitutions, has preserved for us the first Christian liturgy. Today we know that the first Christian liturgy is simply the liturgy used in the Greek-speaking synagogues: Christians are therefore the Judaizers and the Judeo-Greek half-breeds. It is therefore in this specific milieu that we must try to understand the gospels; indeed, if these men and women overwhelmingly rally to Christianity, it is because for them Christianity represents quite clearly what they are attached to.
Since 100 BC, Alexandrian Judaism has been confronted with the attack of the Greek philosophers. The latter mocked the Jews by saying that the God of Israel was only a Zeus or a Baal among others and that he was not the true God. These philosophers believe that the true God is necessarily unknowable, he has no contact with man and has entrusted the universe to his sons, who are the logoi or gods. The philosophy is monotheistic, but their One God is inactive and impassive: He and we are like two parallel lines that never meet. In this context, the God of the Bible who acts, comes down to earth, knows men, cannot be the true God. It is Philo who will reply to them that there are not Logoi but only one Logos who is the second god, the son of God, etc. Philo's philosophy is very simple, as soon as God does something in the Bible, it is not God who does it but the Logos of God who does it in his place. It is not God who speaks to Moses, but the Logos of God who speaks to Moses; it is not God who feeds the Israelites in the desert, but the Logos of God who feeds the Israelites in the desert. Philo rewrote the Bible in philosophical language... If the Jews of Alexandria, the Judeo-Greek half-breeds and the converts from paganism were convinced of the Philonian interpretation of the Torah, the rabbis of Yavneh were much less so. They rejected this type of interpretation. For them, God really acts and, despite his infinity in history, this God is the true God and is not replaced by an archangel, a son in his action towards men.
Let us observe the miracles of Jesus, which imitate the miracles described in the Old Testament, the calmed storm, the miraculous fishing, the walking on water, the healed lepers, the healed paralyzed hand are all miracles attributed to God in the Tanakh. Jesus is thus fundamentally for the Christians of the years 120-140, not a man, but the Second God, archangel, Logos, Son of God, etc. described by Philo. Philo would say that the function of the Logos is to be the Savior God, in Hebrew Yehôshua... Jesus. In this early gospel, the miracles of God in the Tanakh are described as the miracles of the Logos of God and not of God who is impassible and therefore cannot perform miracles.
But these Judaizers are confronted with another problem, how to explain their philosophical interpretation of the Bible when the majority of people are illiterate? They will compose an allegory which accounts for the truth of the Bible within the framework of Greek philosophy and the mores of the time: they will say that he is a man.
Since 100 BC, Alexandrian Judaism has been confronted with the attack of the Greek philosophers. The latter mocked the Jews by saying that the God of Israel was only a Zeus or a Baal among others and that he was not the true God. These philosophers believe that the true God is necessarily unknowable, he has no contact with man and has entrusted the universe to his sons, who are the logoi or gods. The philosophy is monotheistic, but their One God is inactive and impassive: He and we are like two parallel lines that never meet. In this context, the God of the Bible who acts, comes down to earth, knows men, cannot be the true God. It is Philo who will reply to them that there are not Logoi but only one Logos who is the second god, the son of God, etc. Philo's philosophy is very simple, as soon as God does something in the Bible, it is not God who does it but the Logos of God who does it in his place. It is not God who speaks to Moses, but the Logos of God who speaks to Moses; it is not God who feeds the Israelites in the desert, but the Logos of God who feeds the Israelites in the desert. Philo rewrote the Bible in philosophical language... If the Jews of Alexandria, the Judeo-Greek half-breeds and the converts from paganism were convinced of the Philonian interpretation of the Torah, the rabbis of Yavneh were much less so. They rejected this type of interpretation. For them, God really acts and, despite his infinity in history, this God is the true God and is not replaced by an archangel, a son in his action towards men.
Let us observe the miracles of Jesus, which imitate the miracles described in the Old Testament, the calmed storm, the miraculous fishing, the walking on water, the healed lepers, the healed paralyzed hand are all miracles attributed to God in the Tanakh. Jesus is thus fundamentally for the Christians of the years 120-140, not a man, but the Second God, archangel, Logos, Son of God, etc. described by Philo. Philo would say that the function of the Logos is to be the Savior God, in Hebrew Yehôshua... Jesus. In this early gospel, the miracles of God in the Tanakh are described as the miracles of the Logos of God and not of God who is impassible and therefore cannot perform miracles.
But these Judaizers are confronted with another problem, how to explain their philosophical interpretation of the Bible when the majority of people are illiterate? They will compose an allegory which accounts for the truth of the Bible within the framework of Greek philosophy and the mores of the time: they will say that he is a man.
Quoted from: