An Argument in Favor of Something Like "Platonic" Influence in the Pentateuch

[neilgodfrey]

I really don't mind if you respond meaningfully and even civilly to my comment and query. What did I say wrong?

I thought of a number of ways to answer this question. Let's take this approach. The Bible (the Hexateuch) is written in Hebrew. How do you think 'Western science' came to an understanding of the Hebrew text of the Bible? Do you think it was a process akin to the Rosetta Stone where a researcher had a great insight and 'broke a code'? Of course not. They consulted with the Jews. The Jewish religious 'experts' explained Hebrew to Western researchers. Hebrew is first and foremost a religious language. The earliest Hebrew texts are either the Bible or about the Bible. On some level we took 'their' understanding, their exegesis of the Bible. Part of that exegesis (whether it was told to the researchers or not) was 'tradition' (קבלה). It seems foolish to me to say 'we accept the literal meaning of the Hebrew words as passed along by Jews' but not their tradition. I don't see where one begins and one truly ends. It's an inseparable tightly knotted bundle of yarn.

Okay. But forgive me -- I really don't understand what any of that has to do with the title you created for this thread or with your opening OPs. I think you are assuming too much --- some things are not so obvious to me.

[Secret Alias]

Well it comes down to this - why, if the 'historical' character behind 'Moses' was Thutmoses did the writers of the Pentateuch choose משה, a name whose numbers added up to exactly 3 4 5? Could it be that it has some connection to the Platonic "geometrical number" or the "nuptial number" or "perfect number" at Republic 546b–c:

Now for divine begettings there is a period comprehended by a perfect number, and for mortal by the first in which augmentations dominating and dominated when they have attained to three distances and four limits of the assimilating and the dissimilating, the waxing and the waning, render all things conversable and commensurable with one another, whereof a basal four-thirds wedded to the pempad yields two harmonies at the third augmentation, the one the product of equal factors taken one hundred times, the other of equal length one way but oblong,-one dimension of a hundred numbers determined by the rational diameters of the pempad lacking one in each case, or of the irrational lacking two; the other dimension of a hundred cubes of the triad. And this entire geometrical number is determinative of this thing, of better and inferior births

[neilgodfrey]

Well it comes down to this - why, if the 'historical' character behind 'Moses' was Thutmoses did the writers of the Pentateuch choose משה, a name whose numbers added up to exactly 3 4 5? Could it be that it has some connection to the Platonic "geometrical number" or the "nuptial number" or "perfect number" at Republic 546b–c:

Now for divine begettings there is a period comprehended by a perfect number, and for mortal by the first in which augmentations dominating and dominated when they have attained to three distances and four limits of the assimilating and the dissimilating, the waxing and the waning, render all things conversable and commensurable with one another, whereof a basal four-thirds wedded to the pempad yields two harmonies at the third augmentation, the one the product of equal factors taken one hundred times, the other of equal length one way but oblong,-one dimension of a hundred numbers determined by the rational diameters of the pempad lacking one in each case, or of the irrational lacking two; the other dimension of a hundred cubes of the triad. And this entire geometrical number is determinative of this thing, of better and inferior births

Okay -- so let me try again.

It is debatable -- meaning there are arguments for and against -- whether the Pentateuch was influenced in its composition by gematria and isomorphism. It is easier -- but that does not mean the alternative is impossible -- to understand gematria and isomorphism being applied by some interpreters to the Pentateuch, and perhaps to some later revisions of it.

Jesus is another instance, as we know: 888. That is interesting, but it is rash to conclude from that one detail that the gospels themselves were composed with gematria in mind.

The name Jesus with its 888 symbolism surely preceded the gospels. Stories of Moses were also known independently of the Pentateuch.

It does, as you note, point to a Hellenistic origin. I have a nice little pile of reading to catch up on to try to see what's what with how gematria was used in both the Bible and other Hellenistic-Roman era literature: Menken, Labuschagne, Laroche, Barc. One possible difficulty is that a backlash against Hellenism may have influenced the reliability of copies of some of the biblical texts.

[Secret Alias]

I am not presenting gematria as something I "believe" in. It is worth noting however that divine names like "El Shaddai" "Shema (Aramaic)/haShem" and "Moses" all having the same numerical value 345 is interesting. The fact that "I am that I am" (the divine name from the bush is 543 and the two together = 888. Is interesting. Marqe (whose name 'Mark' also equals 345 which is a big deal in Samaritan circles notices that the first two words of the Song of the Sea in Greek = 888. These were things that ancients did. The 318 men the fought with Abraham and the name Eliezer etc etc.

But that's not really what I think is "Platonic" per se. I've spent some time reading English translations of Marqe and there is something else. The parallels between Marqe and Philo have already been noted. The question of all questions is what exactly is the purpose of the Israelite religion? What does Philo think it is? The answer is the promise that El Shaddai makes to Abraham - namely that his seed will be like the stars in heaven viz. they will live as the stars in an astral realm.

In commenting on Genesis 15:5 in Who Is the Heir? 86-87, Philo states:

“When the Lord led him outside He said “Look up into heaven and count the stars, if thou canst count their sum. So shall be thy seed.” Well does the text say “so (οὕτως ἔσται)” not “so many (τοσοῦτον)” that is, “of equal number to the stars.” For He wishes to suggest not number merely, but a multitude of other things, such as tend to happiness perfect and complete. The “seed shall be (οὕτως οὖν ἔσται)”, He says, as the ethereal sight spread out before him, celestial as that is, full of light unshadowed and pure as that is, for night is banished from heaven and darkness from ether. It shall be the very likeness of the stars.”1

Here Philo argues from the grammar of the LXX of Gen 15:5 that the adverb οὕτως should be understood not merely quantitatively but qualitatively as well, suggesting that the promise to become as the very likeness of the stars was the original intention of the scribe. The promise of Gen 15:5 for Philo entails being transformed into beings full of light, being in the “very likeness of the stars,” and participating in their celestial life.2

In Questions and Answers on Genesis, Philo similarly comments on the patriarchal promise of star-like seed as it was retold to Isaac in Gen 26:4a:

“What is the meaning of the words, “I will multiply thy seed as the stars of heaven?” Two things are indicated, in which the nature of all things in general consists, (namely) quantity and quality – quantity in “I will multiply,” and quality in “as the stars.” So may (thy descendants) be pure and far-shining and always be ranged in order and obey their leader and may they behave like the luciform (stars) which everywhere with the splendour of ethereal brightness also illumine all other things.” (QG 4.181)

Philo here again sees implicit within the language “so may thy descendants be” the promise of the ethereal life of the stars. In Gen 26:5, Abraham’s seed will be multiplied as the stars of heaven and be given all these lands “because Abraham obeyed my voice.” For Philo, Abraham acts as the stars act who are always “ranged in order and obey their leader.” In both of these texts Philo seems to axiomatically employ the phrase “so shall your seed be (οὕτως ἔσται τὸ σπέρμα σου)” as if it were to be taken as a kind of adage that was intended to denote celestial immortality.

Is this Platonic? I think so. But there is something more. I am not an expert on any of this. But I think that Philo and Plato shared the idea that the perfect man was 3 4 5 because he was 216.

In Plato's Republic, when discussing how the Guardians should organize a breeding program for the citizens, Socrates says:

"Though the rulers you have trained for your city are wise, reason and perception will not always enable them to hit on the right and wrong times for breeding; some time they will miss them, and then children will be begotten amiss."

Fortunately, says Socrates, it can all be worked out by mathematics:

"For the number of the human creature is the first in which root and square multiplications (comprising three dimensions and four limits) of basic numbers which make like and unlike, and which increase and decrease, produce a final result in completely commensurate terms."

This seemingly indecipherable text can be better understood when it is realized that in Plato's day there was no word for "cubed", and that 216 is the first (smallest) cube which is the sum of three cubes. Most scholars agree that the number referred to is 216. I think the function of the Israelite religion in Alexandria was to initiate proselytes into a mystery religion where they hoped to become "perfect" (i.e. like Moses, like the number 216). There are hints in Philo. He speaks of Jacob, Abraham and finally Isaac as steps on a ladder to perfection. Philo hints that Jacob, the lowest rung, starts with "Lord" (= Yahweh) but upon seeing "Theos" (= Elohim) changes allegiances. Now God (Theos) is his God. Abraham moves on to the Isaac level of perfection. Isaac is the type who is born perfect and godlike. But there is some sort of notion that humanity becomes progressively better through the mystery religion.