Stephan Huller's recent interview by Jacob Berman

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
User avatar
John T
Posts: 1567
Joined: Thu May 15, 2014 8:57 am

Re: Stephan Huller's recent interview by Jacob Berman

Post by John T »

Secret Alias wrote: Mon Aug 08, 2022 2:04 pm What denomination of Hebrew didn't think that ish here was a second god of Israel or an angel?
iysh = man.

You need to get over it and move on.
Perhaps the better question would be, When did the Hebrews settle on a montheistic God, i.e. YHWH? :scratch:

Here are just a few generic names for God in the Old Testament:

Elohim.
Eloah.
El.
El Shaddai.
El Elyon.
El Olam.
El Berith.
El Roi.

John T is done with this thread. :cheers:
Secret Alias
Posts: 18362
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: Stephan Huller's recent interview by Jacob Berman

Post by Secret Alias »

When did the Hebrews settle on a montheistic God, i.e
After Philo it would seem.
Secret Alias
Posts: 18362
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: Stephan Huller's recent interview by Jacob Berman

Post by Secret Alias »

Against All Heresies

o this is added one Cerdo. He introduces two first causes,68 that is, two Gods-one good, the other cruel:69 the good being the superior; the latter, the cruel one, being the creator of the world.70 He repudiates the prophecies and the Law; renounces God the Creator; maintains that Christ who came was the Son of the superior God; affirms that He was not in the substance of flesh; states Him to have been only in a phantasmal shape, to have not really suffered, but undergone a quasipassion, and not to have been born of a virgin, nay, really not to have been born at all. A resurrection of the soul merely does he approve, denying that of the body. The Gospel of Luke alone, and that not entire, does he receive. Of the Apostle Paul he takes neither all the epistles, nor in their integrity. The Acts of the Apostles and the Apocalypse he rejects as false.

[2] After him emerged a disciple of his, one Marcion by name, a native of Pontus,71 son of a bishop, excommunicated because of a rape committed on a certain virgin.72 He, starting from the fact that it is said, "Every good tree beareth good fruit, but an evil evil,"73 attempted to approve the heresy of Cerdo; so that his assertions are identical with those of the former heretic before him.

[3] After him arose one Lucan by name, a follower and disciple of Marcion. He, too, wading through the same kinds of blasphemy, teaches the same as Marcion and Cerdo had taught.

[4] Close on their heels follows Apelles, a disciple of Marcion, who after lapsing, into his own carnality,74 was severed from Marcion. He introduces one God in the infinite upper regions, and states that He made many powers and angels; beside Him, withal, another Virtue, which he affirms to be called Lord, but represents as an angel. By him he will have it appear that the world75 . was originated in imitation of a superior world.76 With this lower world he mingled throughout (a principle of) repentance, because he had not made it so perfectly as that superior world had been originated. The Law and the prophets he repudiates. [5] Christ he neither, like Marcion, affirms to have been in a phantasmal shape, nor yet in substance of a true body, as the Gospel teaches; but says, because He descended from the upper regions, that in the course of His descent He wove together for Himself a starry and airy77 flesh; and, in His resurrection, restored, in the course of His ascent, to the several individual elements whatever had been borrowed in His descent: and thus-the several parts of His body dispersed-He reinstated in heaven His spirit only. [6] This man denies the resurrection of the flesh. He uses, too, one only apostle; but that is Marcion's, that is, a mutilated one. He teaches the salvation of souls alone. He has, besides, private but extraordinary lections of his own, which he calls "Manifestations78 of one Philumene,79 a girl whom he follows as a prophetess. He has, besides, his own books, which he has entitled books of Syllogisms, in which he seeks to prove that whatever Moses has written about God is not true, but is false.
Secret Alias
Posts: 18362
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: Stephan Huller's recent interview by Jacob Berman

Post by Secret Alias »

Lieu makes the connection with Josephus:
'Phantasm' was also used of figures who appear in dreams and visions, although this still left considerable room for debate as to the nature of their substantial existence, and indeed whether they were to be trusted or taken as 'real'.24 For example, Josephus describes the, certainly palpable, figure with whom Jacob wrestled as a 'phantasma' (Josephus, AJ I. 20.2 [331–4]),
Secret Alias
Posts: 18362
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: Stephan Huller's recent interview by Jacob Berman

Post by Secret Alias »

More 'phantasma' references in Josephus. The Peniel experience:

[325] Ἰακώβῳ δὲ εἰς τὴν Χαναναίαν προϊόντι φαντάσματα συνετύγχανεν ἀγαθὰς ἐλπίδας ὑπαγορεύοντα περὶ τῶν ἐς ὕστερον: καὶ τὸν μὲν τόπον ἐκεῖνον προσαγορεύει θεοῦ στρατόπεδον, βουλόμενος δὲ εἰδέναι, τί ὁ ἀδελφὸς αὐτοῦ φρονεῖ, τοὺς γνωσομένους ἕκαστα μετὰ ἀκριβείας προύπεμψε δεδιὼς αὐτὸν διὰ τὴν προτέραν ὑποψίαν. [326] ἐνετέλλετο δὲ τοῖς πεμπομένοις λέγειν πρὸς τὸν Ἡσαῦν, ὅτι νομίσας Ἰάκωβος ἄδικον συνδιαιτᾶσθαι αὐτοῦ τῇ ὀργῇ τῆς χώρας ἑκὼν ὑπεξέλθοι, καὶ νῦν τὸν χρόνον ἱκανὸν ἡγούμενος εἶναι διαλλάκτην ἐπανήκοι γυναῖκάς τε καὶ παῖδας ἐπαγόμενος μετὰ τοῦ πορισθέντος βίου, μετὰ τῶν τιμιωτάτων ἑαυτὸν ἐκείνῳ παραδιδούς, ὅτι κρίνοι μέγιστον ἀγαθὸν τὸ τῷ ἀδελφῷ συμμεταλαμβάνειν τῶν ὑπὸ τοῦ θεοῦ δεδομένων.

325 As Jacob went on his journey to the land of Canaan, he had a vision, offering him good hope for his future, and that place he named the Camp of God. Eager to know his brother's intentions towards him, he sent ahead to tell him everything in detail, being afraid on account of the former suspicions between them. 326 He told his envoys to tell Esau that Jacob thought it wrong to live near him while he was angry with him and had then left the region, but was now returning, assuming that his long absence had healed the rift between them. He was bringing with him his wives and children, and the property he had gained, and placed himself and what was dearest to him, into his hands, and would think it his greatest good fortune to share with his brother what God had given to him."

The dream of Joseph:

[80] Ὁ δὲ τῆς δεξιᾶς αὐτοῦ λαβόμενος "ὦ νεανία, φησί, σὺ γάρ μοι νῦν ἄριστος καὶ συνίσειν ἱκανώτατος ὑπὸ οἰκέτου τοὐμοῦ μεμαρτύρησαι, τῶν αὐτῶν ἀγαθῶν, ὧν καὶ τούτῳ μετέδωκας ἀξίωσον κἀμὲ φράσας ὅσα μοι κατὰ τοὺς ὕπνους ὀνειράτων ὄψεις προδηλοῦσι: βούλομαι δέ σε μηδὲν ὑποστελλόμενον φόβῳ κολακεῦσαι ψευδεῖ λόγῳ καὶ τῷ πρὸς ἡδονήν, ἂν τἀληθὲς σκυθρωπότερον ᾖ. [81] ἔδοξα γὰρ παρὰ ποταμὸν βαδίζων βόας ἰδεῖν εὐτραφεῖς ἅμα καὶ μεγέθει διαφερούσας ἑπτὰ τὸν ἀριθμὸν ἀπὸ τοῦ νάματος χωρεῖν ἐπὶ τὸ ἕλος, ἄλλας δὲ ταύταις τὸν ἀριθμὸν παραπλησίας ἐκ τοῦ ἕλους ὑπαντῆσαι λίαν κατισχνωμένας καὶ δεινὰς ὁραθῆναι, αἳ κατεσθίουσαι τὰς εὐτραφεῖς καὶ μεγάλας οὐδὲν ὠφελοῦντο χαλεπῶς ὑπὸ τοῦ λιμοῦ τετρυχωμέναι. [82] μετὰ δὲ ταύτην τὴν ὄψιν διεγερθεὶς ἐκ τοῦ ὕπνου καὶ τεταραγμένος ὢν καὶ τί ποτ' εἴη τὸ φάντασμα παρ' ἐμαυτῷ σκοπῶν καταφέρομαι πάλιν εἰς ὕπνον καὶ δεύτερον ὄναρ ὁρῶ πολὺ τοῦ προτέρου θαυμασιώτερον, ὅ με καὶ μᾶλλον ἐκφοβεῖ καὶ ταράττει. [83] στάχυας ἑπτὰ ἑώρων ἀπὸ μιᾶς ῥίζης ἐκφυέντας καρηβαροῦντας ἤδη καὶ κεκλιμένους ὑπὸ τοῦ καρποῦ καὶ τῆς πρὸς ἄμητον ὥρας καὶ τούτοις ἑτέρους ἑπτὰ στάχυας πλησίον λιφερνοῦντας καὶ ἀσθενεῖς ὑπὸ ἀδροσίας, οἳ δαπανᾶν καὶ κατεσθίειν τοὺς ὡραίους τραπέντες ἔκπληξίν μοι παρέσχον."

[80]80 The king took him by the hand and said, "Young man, my servant says you are now the best and most competent person I can consult; do me the same favour you did for my servant and tell me what is foretold by these visions in my sleep. I want you to suppress nothing out of fear, nor flatter me with lies designed to please. 081 I seemed to be walking along the river and saw seven well-fed cows of extraordinary size, going from the river to the marshland. The same number of other cows met them, coming from the marshes, emaciated and terrible to see, which ate up the fat, large cows and were still not improved, so wretchedly hollow were they with hunger. 082 After this vision I woke from sleep troubled and puzzling about what this fantasm could mean. Then I fell asleep again and saw another dream, far stranger than the former, which scared and troubled me still more. 083 I saw seven ears of corn growing from one root, weighed down and bent with fruit, which was now ripe and ready for reaping. Beside them I saw seven other ears of corn, thin and weak for lack of rain, which began eating and devouring the ripe ears, putting me in a state of shock."

The burning bush:

[59] Τῇ δ' ὑστεραίᾳ Μωυσῆς νεκρούς τε ἐσκύλευε τῶν πολεμίων καὶ τὰς παντευχίας τῶν φυγόντων συνέλεγεν ἀριστεῦσί τε τιμὰς ἐδίδου καὶ τὸν στρατηγὸν Ἰησοῦν ἐνεκωμίαζε μαρτυρούμενον ἐφ' οἷς ἔπραξεν ὑπὸ παντὸς τοῦ στρατοῦ. ἀπέθανεν δὲ Ἑβραίων μὲν οὐδείς, τῶν δὲ πολεμίων ὅσους οὐδ' ἀριθμῷ γνῶναι δυνατὸν ἦν. [60] θύσας δὲ χαριστήρια βωμὸν ἱδρύεται νικαῖον ὀνομάσας τὸν θεὸν προεφήτευέ τε πανωλεθρὶ τοὺς Ἀμαληκίτας ἀπολουμένους καὶ μηδένα αὐτῶν ὑπολειφθησόμενον εἰς αὖθις διὰ τὸ Ἑβραίοις ἐπιστρατεύσασθαι καὶ ταῦτα ἐν ἐρήμῳ τε γῇ καὶ ταλαιπωρουμένοις, τόν τε στρατὸν εὐωχίαις ἀνελάμβανε. [61] καὶ ταύτην μὲν τὴν μάχην πρώτην μαχεσάμενοι πρὸς τοὺς κατατολμήσαντας αὐτῶν μετὰ τὴν ἐξ Αἰγύπτου γενομένην ἔξοδον οὕτως ἐπολέμησαν, ἐπεὶ δὲ τὴν τῶν ἐπινικίων ἑορτὴν ἤγαγον, ὁ Μωυσῆς ἀναπαύσας ἐπ' ὀλίγας ἡμέρας τοὺς Ἑβραίους μετὰ τὴν μάχην προῆγε συντεταγμένους: [62] πολὺ δ' ἦν ἤδη τὸ ὁπλιτικὸν αὐτοῖς: καὶ προιὼν κατ' ὀλίγον ἐν τριμήνῳ μετὰ τὴν ἐξ Αἰγύπτου κίνησιν παρῆν ἐπὶ τὸ Σιναῖον ὄρος, ἐν ᾧ τά τε περὶ τὸν θάμνον αὐτῷ καὶ τὰ λοιπὰ φαντάσματα συντυχεῖν προειρήκαμεν.

059 The next day, Moses stripped the enemy corpses and collected the armour of those who fled and rewarded the valiant and gave high praise to their general, Joshua, who was acclaimed by all the army for what he had done. Of the Hebrews not one was killed, but of the enemy too many to be counted. 060 He offered a thanksgiving sacrifice and built an altar dedicated to God the Victorious and foretold the utter destruction of the Amalekites, and that none of them would survive into the future, since they fought the Hebrews when they were under pressure in the wilderness. Then he revived the army with feasting. 061 This was first battle they fought with those who dared oppose them after their exodus from Egypt. When they had celebrated the victory festival, Moses let the Hebrews rest for a few days after the battle and then he led them out in military order. 062 Many of them were now armed, and going forward in stages, three months after leaving Egypt they came to Mount Sinai, where he had met with the experience at the bush and other visions, as we have already said

The angel of God who comes to Gideon (Judges 6)

[213] Καὶ Γεδεὼν ὁ Ἰάσου παῖς Μανασσίδος φυλῆς ἐν ὀλίγοις δράγματα σταχύων φερόμενος κρυπτῶς εἰς τὴν ληνὸν ἔκοπτε: τοὺς γὰρ πολεμίους ἐδεδίει φανερῶς τοῦτο ποιεῖν ἐπὶ τῆς ἅλωος. φαντάσματος δὲ αὐτῷ παραστάντος νεανίσκου μορφῇ καὶ φήσαντος εὐδαίμονα καὶ φίλον τῷ θεῷ, ὑποτυχών "τοῦτο γοῦν, ἔφη, τεκμήριον τῆς εὐμενείας αὐτοῦ μέγιστον τῇ ληνῷ με νῦν ἀντὶ ἅλωος χρῆσθαι." [214] θαρσεῖν δὲ παρακελευσαμένου καὶ πειρᾶσθαι τῆς ἐλευθερίας ἀνασώζειν ἀδυνάτως ἔχειν ἔλεγε: τήν τε γὰρ φυλὴν ἐξ ἧς ὑπῆρχε πλήθους ὑστερεῖν καὶ νέον αὐτὸν εἶναι καὶ τηλικούτων πραγμάτων ἀσθενέστερον. ὁ δὲ θεὸς αὐτὸς ἀναπληρώσειν τὸ λεῖπον ἐπηγγέλλετο καὶ νίκην παρέξειν Ἰσραηλίταις αὐτοῦ στρατηγοῦντος.

213 Gideon, son of Jasos, one of the distinguished few in the tribe of Manasses, brought his sheaves of corn secretly and threshed them at the wine-press, too fearful of the enemy to do so publicly in the threshing-floor. An apparition came to him in the shape of a young man to tell him that he was fortunate and beloved of God. Instantly he replied, "What a sign of his favour that I am forced to use this wine-press instead of a threshing-floor!" 214 The apparition urged him to take heart and strive to recover their freedom, but he replied that it was impossible, as the tribe he belonged to was small and he himself was too young and insignificant to think of deeds so great. The other promised him that God would supply whatever he was lacking and give the Israelites victory under his leadership.

The angel of God (Judges 13)

[276] Μανώχης τις Δανιτῶν ἐν ὀλίγοις ἄριστος καὶ τῆς πατρίδος ὁμολογούμενος πρῶτος εἶχε γύναιον ἐπ' εὐμορφίᾳ περίβλεπτον καὶ τῶν κατ' αὐτὸ διαφέρον. παίδων δ' οὐ γινομένων αὐτῷ δυσφορῶν ἐπὶ τῇ ἀπαιδίᾳ θεὸν ἱκέτευεν ἐπὶ τὸ προάστειον συνεχῶς φοιτῶν μετὰ τῆς γυναικὸς δοῦναι διαδοχὴν αὐτοῖς γνησίαν: μέγα δέ ἐστι τοῦτο πεδίον. [277] ἦν δὲ καὶ μανιώδης ὑπ' ἔρωτος ἐπὶ τῇ γυναικὶ καὶ διὰ τοῦτο ζηλότυπος ἀκρατῶς. μονωθείσῃ δὲ τῇ γυναικὶ φάντασμα ἐπιφαίνεται τοῦ θεοῦ νεανίᾳ καλῷ παραπλήσιον μεγάλῳ καὶ εὐαγγελιζόμενον αὐτῇ παιδὸς γονὴν κατὰ θεοῦ πρόνοιαν καλοῦ τε καὶ ῥώμην ἐπιφανοῦς, ὑφ' ᾧ πονήσειν Παλαιστίνους ἀνδρουμένῳ. [278] παρῄνει τε τὰς κόμας αὐτῷ μὴ ἀποκείρειν: ἔσται δ' αὐτῷ πρὸς ἄλλο μὲν ποτὸν ἀποστροφὴ τοῦ θεοῦ τοῦτο προστάσσοντος, πρὸς ὕδωρ δὲ μόνον οἰκειότης." καὶ ὁ μὲν ταῦτ' εἰπὼν ᾤχετο κατὰ βούλησιν ἐλθὼν τοῦ θεοῦ.

276 Manoah, a man of rare virtue and first among the influential people of his region, had a most beautiful wife who excelled among her friends. Having no children, and unhappy at being childless, he came constantly with his wife into the suburbs, in the Great Plain, and begged God for legitimate offspring to succeed them. 277 He was madly fond of his wife, and his jealousy of her knew no bounds. Once when his wife was alone, she saw an apparition, an angel of God, like a beautiful, tall young man, who brought her the good news that she would have a son, born by God's providence. He would be handsome and strong, and as a man would afflict the Philistines. 278 He warned her not to cut his hair and that, at God's command, avoiding all other kinds of drink, he should stick to water only. Having said this, by the will of God the angel went away as he had come.

Daniel's vision:

[272] ταῦτα μὲν ἰδεῖν ἐν τῷ πεδίῳ τῷ ἐν Σούσοις ὁ Δανίηλος ἔγραψε, κρῖναι δ' αὐτὸν τὴν ὄψιν τοῦ φαντάσματος ἐδήλου τὸν θεὸν οὕτως: τὸν μὲν κριὸν βασιλείας τὰς Μήδων καὶ Περσῶν σημαίνειν ἔφασκε, τὰ δὲ κέρατα τοὺς βασιλεύειν μέλλοντας, τὸ δὲ ἔσχατον κέρας σημαίνειν τὸν ἔσχατον βασιλέα: τοῦτον γὰρ διοίσειν ἁπάντων πλούτῳ τε καὶ δόξῃ. [273] τὸν δὲ τράγον δηλοῦν, ὡς ἐκ τῶν Ἑλλήνων τις βασιλεύων ἔσται, ὃς τῷ Πέρσῃ συμβαλὼν δὶς κρατήσει τῇ μάχῃ καὶ παραλήψεται τὴν ἡγεμονίαν ἅπασαν. [274] δηλοῦσθαι δ' ὑπὸ τοῦ μεγάλου κέρατος τοῦ ἐν τῷ μετώπῳ τοῦ τράγου τὸν πρῶτον βασιλέα καὶ τὴν τῶν τεσσάρων ἀναβλάστησιν ἐκπεσόντος ἐκείνου καὶ τὴν πρὸς τὰ τέσσαρα κλίματα τῆς γῆς αὐτῶν ἀποστροφὴν ἑκάστου τοὺς διαδόχους μετὰ τὸν θάνατον τοῦ πρώτου βασιλέως ἐμφανίζεσθαι καὶ διαμερισμὸν εἰς αὐτοὺς τῆς βασιλείας, οὔτε δὲ παῖδας αὐτοῦ τούτους ὄντας οὔτε συγγενεῖς, πολλοῖς ἔτεσιν ἄρξειν τῆς οἰκουμένης. [275] γενήσεσθαι δ' ἐκ τούτων τινὰ βασιλέα τὸν ἐκπολεμήσοντα τό τε ἔθνος καὶ τοὺς νόμους αὐτῶν καὶ τὴν κατὰ τούτους ἀφαιρησόμενον πολιτείαν καὶ συλήσοντα τὸν ναὸν καὶ τὰς θυσίας ἐπ' ἔτη τρία κωλύσοντα ἐπιτελεσθῆναι. [276] καὶ δὴ ταῦτα ἡμῶν συνέβη παθεῖν τῷ ἔθνει ὑπὸ Ἀντιόχου τοῦ Ἐπιφανοῦς, καθὼς εἶδεν ὁ Δανίηλος καὶ πολλοῖς ἔτεσιν ἔμπροσθεν ἀνέγραψε τὰ γενησόμενα. τὸν αὐτὸν δὲ τρόπον ὁ Δανίηλος καὶ περὶ τῆς Ῥωμαίων ἡγεμονίας ἀνέγραψε, καὶ ὅτι ὑπ' αὐτῶν ἐρημωθήσεται.
* * *
272 Daniel wrote that he saw these visions in the Plain of Susa, and he told us that God showed the meaning of this vision as follows: He said the ram meant the kingdoms of the Medes and Persians and the horns the kings who would reign in them, and that the last horn meant the last king, who would exceed all the kings in riches and glory. 273 The he-goat meant that one would come from the Greeks and reign, after twice overcoming the Persian in battle and would take over his entire dominion. 274 The great horn growing from the forehead of the he-goat meant the first king, and the springing up of four horns when it fell off and the turning of each of them to the four corners of the earth, meant the successors who would arise after the death of the first king and the division of the kingdom among people who would be neither his children nor his relatives, who would reign over the world for many years. 275 From among them a certain king would arise and defeat the Jewish nation and their laws and take away their state and despoil the temple and for three years forbid the sacrifices to be offered. 276 In fact it turned out that the nation did suffer these things under Antiochus Epiphanes, as Daniel saw and wrote many years before the event. In the same way Daniel also wrote about Roman rule and how our country would be desolated by them.
Secret Alias
Posts: 18362
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: Stephan Huller's recent interview by Jacob Berman

Post by Secret Alias »

Clementine Homily 4

Ἡ Βερνίκη δὲ ἀξιωθεῖσα· Ταῦτα μὲν οὕτως, ἔφη, ἔχει ὡς ἠκούσατε, τὰ δὲ ἄλλα τὰ κατ' αὐτὸν τὸν Σίμωνα, ἅπερ ἴσως ἀγνοεῖτε, ἀκούσατε· φαντάσματά τε γὰρ καὶ ἰνδάλματα ἐν μέσῃ τῇ ἀγορᾷ φαίνεσθαι ποιῶν δι' ἡμέρας πᾶσαν ἐκπλήττει τὴν πόλιν καὶ προιόντος αὐτοῦ ἀνδριάντες κινοῦνται καὶ σκιαὶ πολλαὶ προηγοῦνται, ἅσπερ αὐτὰς ψυχὰς τῶν τεθνηκότων εἶναι λέγει.

But Bernice, being asked, said: These things are indeed as you have heard; and I will tell you other things respecting this same Simon, which perhaps you do not know. For he astonishes the whole city every day, by making spectres and ghosts appear in the midst of the market-place; and when he walks abroad, statues move, and many shadows go before him, which, he says, are souls of the dead.

Aristotle

The earliest extant treatise exclusively on the subject of memory and recollection is Aristotle's De memoria et reminiscentia. In the De memoria, Aristotle defnes memory as a mental image (φάντασμα) that is inscribed on the part of the body that constitutes memory.4 Not only, however, does Aristotle describe memory more vividly as an "imprint or drawing in us," like a picture,5 but he also describes how this memory comes about. "The change that occurs marks in a sort of imprint, as it were, of the sense-image, as people who seal things with signet rings."6

4 Aristotle, Mem. 451a14–16 (LCL 288:296–97). Richard Sorabji, Aristotle on Memory, (London: Duckworth, 2004), 14, notes that Aristotle is not always consistent in his discussion of "what" memory is. At Mem. 450a30, Aristotle seems to suggest that memory is the imprint of a sense image (οἷον τύπον τινὰ τοῦ αἰσθήματος), but, as Sorabji rightly claims, in Mem. 451a14–16, it is clear that "it is the phantasma, the having of which is said to be memory." Thus, it seems likely that the "picture-like effect," to use Sorabji's term for the imprint in 450a30, is simply a more vivid description of the φάντασμα that is memory. For a broader discussion of φάντασμα as mental images, see Aristotle, DA 431a16; 431b2; 432a3–14. See also Malcolm Schofeld, “Aristotle on the Imagination,” in Essays on Aristotle’s De anima, eds. Martha C. Nussbaum and Amélie Rorty (Oxford: Clarendon Press,
1992), 249-77.
User avatar
MrMacSon
Posts: 8798
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 3:45 pm

Re: Stephan Huller's recent interview by Jacob Berman

Post by MrMacSon »

Secret Alias wrote: Mon Aug 08, 2022 4:59 pm
When did the Hebrews settle on a montheistic God?
After Philo it would seem.
Likely before then. The mid-2nd century BCE(?)
Secret Alias
Posts: 18362
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: Stephan Huller's recent interview by Jacob Berman

Post by Secret Alias »

Harnack understood my conclusions here (without reference Josephus). He writes:

„Doketismus“ bedeutete im antiken Zeitalter etwas anderes als heute, weil man die Konsequenzen nicht zog, die wir ziehen zu müssen glauben ¹. Verglichen mit den natürlichen Menschenleibern war der Leib Christi ein φάντασμα; aber wie die Engel, die zu Abraham kamen, nicht Gespenster waren, sondern als leibhaftige und wirkliche Menschen handelten und aßen ², so war auch Christus kein Gespenst³, sondern der Gott trat in menschlicher Erscheinung auf und setzte sich selbst in den Stand, wie ein Mensch zu empfinden, zu handeln und zu leiden, obgleich die Identität mit einem natürlich erzeugten Fleischesleib nur scheinbar war, da die Substanz des Fleisches fehlte. Es ist also durchaus unrichtig, zu meinen, nach Marcion habe Christus nur scheinbar gelitten, sei nur scheinbar gestorben usw. So urteilten die Gegner; er selbst aber bezog hier den Schein nur auf die Fleischessubstanz

"Docetism" meant something different in ancient times than it does today, because the consequences that we think we must draw were not drawn ¹. Compared with the natural human bodies, the body of Christ was a φάντασμα; but as the angels that came to Abraham were not phantoms, but acted and ate as incarnate and real men, ² so also Christ was no ghost³, but the God appeared in human appearance and enabled Himself to feel, act and suffer like a man, although the identity with a naturally produced flesh body was only apparent, since the substance of the flesh was absent. It is therefore entirely incorrect to think that, according to Marcion, Christ only apparently suffered, only apparently died, etc. This was the opinion of the opponents; but he himself referred the appearance here only to the substance of the flesh.
Last edited by Secret Alias on Mon Aug 08, 2022 10:43 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Secret Alias
Posts: 18362
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: Stephan Huller's recent interview by Jacob Berman

Post by Secret Alias »

First century CE MrMacson.
Secret Alias
Posts: 18362
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: Stephan Huller's recent interview by Jacob Berman

Post by Secret Alias »

This is particularly relevant to the discussion:
That they did so is not surprising in light of the frequency with which docetic interpretations of Gen 18 are the topic of polemical discussions about Christology in the early Church. Already in Dial. 55–57, Justin identifies Christ with one of the three who appeared to Abraham and agrees with Trypho that they did not actually eat.124 Tertullian, though he disagrees with the standard interpretation and says the angels really did eat, suspects that Marcion has inconsistently modeled his Christology after the angels in Gen 18 (Marc. 4.38; Carn. Chr. 3). Apelles, Marcion's disciple, explicitly appeals to Gen 18 for his celestial flesh Christology (Carn. Chr. 6). According to later church fathers, Marcionites, Manichaeans, Bardesanites, and Valentinians all appeal to Gen 18 as a model for their docetic Christologies. 125 One example from the last part of the Adamantius Dialogue, which is directed against docetists, primarily Bardesanites and Marcionites, is worth mentioning here. The opponents claim that “just as the angels appeared to Abraham and ate and drank and conversed, so also Christ [appeared to the disciples]” (5.1). Adamantius's refutation includes language that closely echoes [Ps.-]Justin, Res. 2.14. whereas [Ps.-]Justin's opponents limit this claim to Jesus's resurrection. Regardless, the verbal correspondences help to confirm that docetizing interpretations of Gen 18 stand behind Res. 2.14. https://books.google.com/books?id=cm6rD ... 22&f=false
Post Reply