Revisiting Philo's Therapeutae and their Context/Timeline

[billd89]

There's no need to imagine wild stuff that isn't true, flights of fancy to the lands of This, That and T'Other. Scholem truly and simply meant 'Jewish magicians of the PGM' : he was explicitly calling out Festugière's bias against the sources (i.e. "Jews"). Based on the letter to M. Smith, we cannot and should not legitimately read anything more into it, really. On this level, imaginary extrapolations are not only digressive, they're misinformative.

The history of the publication of the PGM (in the form that most of us know) began conceptually in a seminar of Albrecht Dieterich at Heidelberg, way back in 1905. (Many PGM fragments were held at that university; Karl Preisendanz picked up the work of other Dieterich students killed in WW1 and ultimately moved there AFTER the first two volumes were published [1928/31], in 1935.) Logically, early 20th C. German scholarship on the PGM informs Scholem's opinion, although his own Jewish background and interest in pre-Christian Jewish Gnosticism added emphasis in the 1930s. His studies in Germany (1915-23) fit the period, if not the subject so exactly. Yet, is it really so surprising his later work might gravitate to this source-material? In my mind, the only question is when that happened.

For example, in a review of Scholem's work {Vigiliae Christianae 15(2) [1961], 118}, Gilles Quispel connected these dots:

even if this Gnostic dualism were presupposed, can there be any doubt that the speculations on the Name, contained in this writing, ultimately go back to the apocalyptic and esoteric lore of the Jews for whom the Gnosis of the Name was of paramount importance? Scholem himself quotes a Jewish mystical text, according to which the whole world is sustained by the letters of the Name. The same, however, is found in a magical papyrus (Preisendanz, PGM 1, p.38), which was no doubt influenced by the above mentioned Jewish conception...

Since Gershom Scholem (here, in 1958) regularly visited Ascona (Eranos), he was personally acquainted w/ Gilles Quispel & Jung from 1947 on.


By the mid-1950s, Scholem knew. See Gershom Scholem, Origins of the Kabbalah [1962, 1987], p.23:

At the same time, there are direct contacts between these texts of Merkabah Gnosticism and the syncretistic world of the magical papyri. We possess Hebrew Merkabah texts that read as if they belonged to the literature of magical papyri.28 The boundaries, at least regarding Judaism, were not as well defined as those drawn by many recent authors writing on Gnosticism who were bent on differentiating between Christian Gnosticism and the syncretistic magic under discussion.

28. I published one of these texts in Jewish Gnosticism, Merkabah Mysticism, and Talmudic Tradition [1960], appendix C, 101-117, on the basis of two manuscripts.

Note a buried comment, in Jewish Gnosticism [1960] on p.8:

...why have not these {Merkabah} texts attracted closer attention at the hands of scholars? The reason is simply that most scholars, from the very beginning of nineteenth century Jewish studies, have continually underrated the antiquity of these texts [...]. The striking similarities between the literary physiognomy of some of these texts and some of the so-called magical papyri escaped {scholars}, as did their close relation to other sources from this period. The one notable exception to this unhappy state of things was provided by Moses Gaster {1893/1928}, whose fine intuition and wide knowledge in these fields was, however, warped by a considerable weakness of philological method and precision. This lack has prevented his ideas from being discussed seriously.

Scholem may have been more circumspect in his publications, but near the end of his life and in personal correspondence (1980), he was quite candid that Jewish magicians wrote (some) of the PGM (="Papyri"). Yet there are other scholars drawn towards the same conclusion, whether or not a popular opinion. Affiliated University of Chicago since 1963, Hans Dieter Betz only follows what I suppose to be 'the German scholarship' on this point: some PGM material originated with Jewish magicians.

Hans Dieter Betz, The Greek Magical Papyri In Translation [1986], p.xlv:

...not everything was lost.7 At the end of antiquity, some philosophers and theologians, astrologers and alchemists collected magical books and spells that were still available. Literary writers included some of the material in their works, if only to make fun of it. It is known that philosophers of the Neo-Pythagorean and Neo-Platonic schools, as well as Gnostic and Hermetic groups, used magical books and hence must have possessed copies. But most of their material vanished and what we have left are their quotations.

p.xlv:

Questions similar to those appropriate to the study of Greek religion must be raised in view of the material (divine names as well as entire passages) that comes from some form of Judaism. Jewish magic was famous in antiquity47 and more sources have come to light in recent years; but the origin and nature of the sections representing Jewish magic in the Greek Magical Papyri is far from clear. Did this material actually originate with Jewish magicians? How did it get into the hands of the magicians who wrote the Greek Magical Papyri? What kind of transformation took place in the material itself? If the texts in question come from Judaism, what type of Judaism do they represent?

The historian of religion will be especially interested in the kind of syncretism represented in the Greek magical papyri.48 This syncretism is more than a mixture of diverse elements from Egyptian, Greek, Babylonian, and Jewish religion, with a few sprinkles of Christianity.

47. On Jewish magic and related bibliography, see L. Blau, Das altjudische Zauberwesen (Strassburg: Trubner, 1898, 2 1914); J. Trachtenberg, Jewish Magic and Superstition: A Study in Folk-Religion (New York: Behrman, 1939); G. G. Scholem, Jewish Gnosticism, Merkabah Mysticism, and Talmudic Tradition (New York: The Jewish Theological Seminary of America, 2 1965); J. Neusner, A History of the Jews in Babylonia , vols. 4 and 5 (Leiden: Brill, 1969, 1970); I. Gruenwald, Apocalyptic and Merkavah Mysticism (Leiden: Brill, 1980).

48. See for surveys A. A. Barb, “Mystery, Myth, and Magic,” in The Legacy of Egypt, ed. J. R. Harris (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 2 1971) 138—69; M. P. Nilsson, Geschichte der Griechischen Religion, 2 vols. (Munchen: Beck, 3 1967, 2 1961) II, 520— 43 and passim; K. Preisendanz, “Zur synkretistischen Magic im romischen Agypten,” Mitteilungen aus der Österreichischen Nationalbibliothek (Papyrus Erzherzog Rainer), Neue Serie, V. Folge, ed. H. Gerstinger (Wien:1956), 111-25.

Hermetic literature based in Jewish texts is arguably Jewish. It is logical to surmise -- as I do -- that Judeo-Hermetic authors likewise had some affinity with Philo's literary 'Therapeutae'. I've tracked this thesis back across a number of modern scholars: Ménard, Reitzenstein, Cerfaux, etc. to show how some Weimar-era students of the German Religionsgeschichtliche Schule (especially, our Edelsteins) developed these syncretistic implications to the N-th degree, to produce a modern 'Neo-Alexandrian' kabbalah.

"If the texts in question come from Judaism, what type of Judaism do they represent?" Excellent Question!

[DCHindley]

Your academic gung-fu is very good,

Let me digest what you have there.

It is nice to see at least one other member here who takes the time to slice and dice sources, including modern ones.

You seem to like the tertiary works (like textbooks and academic publications) while I tend to favor the source texts (with limitations as I do not read languages like Hebrew or Syriac, and my Greek or Latin skills are rudimentary at best).

That's cool.

DCH

[billd89]

Furthermore -- given what he has said above, connecting the "old Jewish Magicians of the Papyri" -- isn't Scholem suggesting an older Judeo-Hellenistic tradition, of 'Jewish circles having extremely close contact with' Hermeticism? (In another post, I have already addressed the fact that a number of scholars cite Reitzenstein vaguely, on this very point.) Obviously, it's a dicey topic. Where Rabbi Aha taught in Tiberias c.325 AD, is he addressing an 'Hermeticized' Jewish community there? Or is he exploiting older (Judeo-)Hermetic works, if this knowledge is revealed? Scholem appears, without committing himself outright, to be tacitly alluding to the purported 'Reitzenstein thesis'. (Otherwise, why cite him?)

G. Scholem, Jewish Gnosticism, merkabah mysticism, and Talmudic tradition [1960], pp.65-6:

The eighth heaven to which R. Aha refers is the place where the most hidden mysteries are to be found, and, consequently, speculation about it is forbidden. Ben Sira’s admonishment, ‘Have no dealings with hidden mysteries [3:22],”’ is quoted in the Talmud specifically in this connection. In character, then, this heaven is strictly parallel to that of the Hellenistic highest heaven, the Ogdoas. ... The question, therefore, that the talmudic statement poses for us is whether the thought expressed by the Babylonian rabbi was his own, or whether it represented, as so often happened in such matters, even older Jewish tradition. Did it, perhaps, reflect Hellenistic teaching? Since R. Aha’s statement does, in fact, constitute a parallel to ideas expressed in a famous passage of the Hermetic writings,⁴ and since such teaching would certainly not have entered Jewish thought in Babylonia first, it would not be unreasonable to look for the origin of his ideas in western Jewish circles having extremely close contact with Hellenistic thought.

4 Poimandres (Corpus Hermeticum, 1.26); cf. R. Reitzenstein, Poimandres (1904), pp.53-54.

Absolutely nothing suggests the Hermetica originates anywhere but Egypt. Therefore, geographically, all Jewish traces appearing in the Hermetica must logically have an 'Egyptian' (i.e. Alexandrian) origin before the pogroms of 38 & 115 AD -- not later, as something Palestinian, nor Aramaean.

Likewise, Philo of Byblos (c.125 AD) has his fictious 'Sanchuniathon' receive ancient Thoth books from a Jewish priest: that says more about the true Authorship of the Hermetica than most scholars feel comfortable discussing. And that too is part and parcel of our Edelsteins 1938 synthetic détournement as well: their own cryptic (meta-)justification. The occult implications are telling the rest of the story, here.

[billd89]

'Craving/Desire' is unspecified by character, in the List of Maladies that the Therapeutae can cure.

2. ἡ δὲ προαίρεσις τῶν φιλοσόφων εὐθὺς ἐμφαίνεται διὰ τῆς προσρήσεως· θεραπευταὶ γὰρ καὶ θεραπευτρίδες ἐτύμως καλοῦνται, ἤτοι παρόσον ἰατρικὴν ἐπαγγέλλονται κρείσσονα τῆς κατὰ πόλεις — ἡ μὲν γὰρ σώματα θεραπεύει μόνον, ἐκείνη δὲ καὶ ψυχὰς νόσοις κεκρατημένας χαλεπαῖς τε καὶ δυσιάτοις, ἃς ἐγκατέσκηψαν ἡδοναὶ καὶ ἐπιθυμίαι καὶ λῦπαι καὶ φόβοι πλεονεξίαι τε καὶ ἀφροσύναι καὶ ἀδικίαι καὶ τὸ τῶν ἄλλων παθῶν καὶ κακιῶν ἀνήνυτον πλῆθος — ἢ παρόσον ἐκ φύσεως καὶ τῶν ἱερῶν νόμων ἐπαιδεύθησαν θεραπεύειν τὸ ὄν, ὃ καὶ ἀγαθοῦ κρεῖττόν ἐστι καὶ ἑνὸς εἰλικρινέστερον καὶ μονάδος ἀρχεγονώτερον. οἷς τίνας συγκρίνειν ἄξιον τῶν ἐπαγγελλομένων εὐσέβειαν;

2. And the life-purpose of these philosophers is readily apparent by their designation (for etymologically, they are called ‘Therapeutae’ and ‘Therapeutrides’), either because they would profess an art {viz., as para-psychiatrists, for a therapeusis} more potent than what is available in the cities – because one treats only bodies, yet the other ministers to souls whose mental maladies are oppressively troublesome and nearly incurable: afflicted by hedonisms, cravings, griefs, greedy fears, follies and iniquities (with all the other passions, and a plethora of never-ending vices) – or because by Nature and the Sacred Laws they have been instructed to serve The Existent: superior to The Good, purer than The One, more ancient than The Monad. Who would be worth comparing, to those professing such piety as this?

However, in DVC 'Craving' is characteristically associated w/ Hunger: Insatiable Appetite.

55. ... ὅταν δὲ τελέως ἀπαγορεύσωσι, τὰς μὲν γαστέρας ἄχρι φαρύγγων πεπληρωμένοι, κενοὶ δὲ πρὸς τὰς ἐπιθυμίας, ἀπειρηκότες πρὸς τὰς ἐδωδάς, ἀλλὰ τί ταῦτα προσῆκε μηκύνειν,

... When they are utterly sated, their bellies stuffed up to their throats but their craving still unsatisfied, exhausted by the act of eating — but why belabor the point?

Intemperate Behavior triggers 'Craving' = Insatiable Appetite (for Food and Drink).

56. ἃ παρὰ πολλοῖς ἤδη τῶν μετριωτέρων καταγινώσκεται προσαναρρηγνύντα τὰς ἐπιθυμίας, ὧν ἡ μείωσις ὠφέλιμον; εὔξαιτο γὰρ ἄν τις τὰ ἀπευκταιότατα, πεῖνάν τε καὶ δίψαν, μᾶλλον ἢ τὴν ἐν ταῖς τοιαύταις εὐωχίαις ἄφθονον σιτίων καὶ ποτῶν περιουσίαν.

56. Such behavior is already condemned by many of the more moderate individuals, as it further inflames the craving, the restraint of which is beneficial. For one would pray for the most dreaded afflictions, Hunger and Thirst, rather than partake in the overabundant excess of food and drink at such banquets.

(Carnal) Nature's Sexual Desire = 'Craving'.

59. τὸ δὲ Πλατωνικὸν ὅλον σχεδόν ἐστι περὶ ἔρωτος, οὐκ ἀνδρῶν γυναιξὶν ἐπιμανέντων ἢ γυναικῶν ἀνδράσιν αὐτὸ μόνον — ὑποτελοῦσι γὰρ αἱ ἐπιθυμίαι αὗται νόμοις φύσεως —, ἀλλὰ ἀνδρῶν ἄρρεσιν ἡλικίᾳ μόνον διαφέρουσι· καὶ γὰρ εἴ τι περὶ ἔρωτος καὶ Ἀφροδίτης οὐρανίου κεκομψεῦσθαι δοκεῖ, χάριν ἀστεϊσμοῦ παρείληπται.

59. Plato's symposium is almost entirely about Eros, not just where men are infatuated with women or women for men – for these cravings are subject to the laws of nature – but where men are attracted to males by age. Indeed, if anyone thinks he seems to discourse on Eros and Aphrodite's divine matters with sophistication, it is merely adopted as a veneer of urbanity.

Homosexual Desire is a wasting malady, 'Craving'.

61. λυμηνάμενος δὲ τὴν παιδικὴν ἡλικίαν καὶ εἰς ἐρωμένης τάξιν καὶ διάθεσιν ἀγαγὼν ἐζημίωσε καὶ τοὺς ἐραστὰς περὶ τὰ ἀναγκαιότατα, σῶμα καὶ ψυχὴν καὶ οὐσίαν· ἀνάγκη γὰρ τοῦ παιδεραστοῦ τὸν μὲν νοῦν τετάσθαι πρὸς τὰ παιδικά, πρὸς ταῦτα μόνον ὀξυδορκοῦντα, πρὸς δὲ τὰ ἄλλα πάντα ἴδιά τε καὶ κοινὰ τυφλούμενον, τὸ δὲ σῶμα ὑπὸ τῆς ἐπιθυμίας, καὶ μάλιστα εἰ ἀποτυγχάνοιτο, συντήκεσθαι, τὴν δὲ οὐσίαν ἐλαττοῦσθαι διχόθεν, ἔκ τε ἀμελείας καὶ τῶν εἰς τὸν ἐρώμενον ἀναλωμάτων.

61. Having debased their childhoods, leading them into the role and condition of passive partners, he has even harmed boy-lovers in the most vital things – Body, Soul, and Essence. For a pederast's mind must be wholly focused on his boy-loves, with keen eyes only for them and blind to all else, both private and public affairs. So his body wastes away by Craving, especially if left unquenched, and his {Vital} Estate is depleted in two ways: by negligence, and by the costs towards his beloved boy.

Initiated by the 'Drug of Folly' Alcoholism is related to Stupefaction; Gluttony, to 'Craving'.

74. νηφάλια γὰρ ὡς τοῖς ἱερεῦσι θύειν καὶ τούτοις βιοῦν ὁ ὀρθὸς λόγος ὑφηγεῖται· οἶνος μὲν γὰρ ἀφροσύνης φάρμακον, ὄψα δὲ πολυτελῆ τὸ θρεμμάτων ἀπληστότατον διερεθίζει, τὴν ἐπιθυμίαν.

74. For right reason prescribes to them, as to priests when sacrificing, a sober life. For wine is a drug of folly, and costly delicacies provoke that most insatiable of beasts, Craving.

From De Ebrietate: Drunkenness is willful Intoxication, expression of the Drug of Folly/Insensibility called (Vicious) Stupidity*.

27. τέταρτον τοίνυν καὶ μέγιστον ἔγκλημα ἦν τὸ μεθύειν, οὐκ ἀνειμένως, ἀλλὰ σφόδρα συντόνως· τὸ γὰρ οἰνοφλυγεῖν ἴσον ἐστὶ τῷ τὸ παραίτιον ἀφροσύνης φάρμακον, ἀπαιδευσίαν, ἐντύφεσθαι καὶ ἀνακαίεσθαι καὶ ἀναφλέγεσθαι μηδέποτε σβεσθῆναι δυναμένην, ἀλλ’ ὅλην δι’ ὅλων αἰεὶ τὴν ψυχὴν ἐμπιπρᾶσάν τε καὶ πυρπολοῦσαν.

27. The fourth and most serious accusation was that of Drunkenness, not committed haphazardly, but with great deliberation. For intoxication is tantamount to kindling, igniting, and inflaming the reprehensible drug of folly – Vicious Stupidity – which can never be extinguished, but perpetually consumes and burns the entire soul through and through.

*Proverbs 5:23 has ἀπαιδευσίαν meaning "insubordination" "want of correction" "lack of discipline" "lack of self-control" in the morally erroneous, infatuated man (i.e. one consumed by unrestrained lust).

[DCHindley]

I found your 2021 post describing your beliefs about Philo, and the influence of Hermetic literature on him:

viewtopic.php?p=123894#p123894

I'll look it over, as you cited numerous source and secondary literature.

FWIW, and this is before I have had a chance to read your response to me above, I did a check on ousia in Philo, at least from POV of Wolfson, who does not mention it in relation to individual souls/(there were several concepts of how the human mind operated floating about then, Plato, Aristotle, Stoics). Yes Stoics used ousia for the cosmic "matter." Stoicism may well have influenced Philo, at least in regard to technical terms he used. My understanding is that his underlaying cosmology (with all the heavenly vs material reflections) was basically Platonic, with all the key players moved around from independent divine beings with their own domains to subsidiary attributes of the craftsman god. He would have been good at designing more efficient electronic circuit boards.

Are you of those who think that Egypt was the source for all mystic symbolism and deep knowledge?

DCH

[billd89]

I found your 2021 post describing your beliefs about Philo, and the influence of Hermetic literature on him: ...

No, that post really doesn't describe my thesis that the Hermetica/Hermetic sub-culture influenced Philo; others do. For examples, this, this,this, this, this, especially THIS and THIS, this, plus a number of apt, brief illustrations grabbed from other posts below.

But more simply and succinctly stated above: "Hermetic literature based in Jewish texts is arguably Jewish. It is logical to surmise -- as I do -- that Judeo-Hermetic authors likewise had some affinity with Philo's literary 'Therapeutae'. I've tracked this thesis back across a number of modern scholars: Ménard, Reitzenstein, Cerfaux, etc. to show how some Weimar-era students of the German Religionsgeschichtliche Schule (especially, our Edelsteins) developed these syncretistic implications to the N-th degree, to produce a modern 'Neo-Alexandrian' kabbalah."

I did a check on ousia in Philo, at least from POV of Wolfson, who does not mention it in relation to individual souls...

Not "Soul" (ψυχὴν) -- "Essence" (οὐσίαν) : DVC 61 "σῶμα καὶ ψυχὴν καὶ οὐσίαν." The formula is explicitly tri-partite. And Wolfson is irrelevant. See Scaife for Ousia; examples from Philo's works on Scaife HERE and HERE. You have your work cut out for you.


Some brief excerpts of my posts relating to the 'Hermetic influence on Philo Judaeus' premise:

It has also been suggested the Herakles-Hauron combination represents/allegorizes a homosexual pairing (i.e. Batman and Robin), which is plausible in a masculine military fraternity; see Robert H. Allen, The Classical Origins of Modern Homophobia [2014], p.15:

In the Syrian-Palestinian religious context they reappear as a set of paired divinities: Melqart and Eshmun.78 The late addition to the epic of Enkidu suggests he was being assimilated to the dying and rising-again god of ancient Sumer at a very early period. We first glimpse Melqart in texts at Ugrit, on the sea-coast, where he is the god termed “the valiant shepherd” and named Hauron about 400 BCE.79 The term “valiant shepherd” opens upon a vast mythic realm. Tammuz or Damuzi was the dying and rising-again god of the Sumerians from before history, and his worship spread throughout the Semitic world at a very early date. There he was known as Adonis,80 and Adonis is very close to Eshmun, and both to Gilgamesh-Enkidu.81

In broad general terms the myth-pattern may be stated as follows. Two paired male deities were thought of as linked, often erotically. One was the sun god, daily resurrected; he was armed with a bow or spear or club as was the god who fought and defeated a serpent deity of chaos {i.e. Seth}. This sun god was associated with health, healing and purification; in the Semitic context he was called Melqart, Haroun and Ba'al, while in the Greek context he was called Herakles, and well as Apollo and Melikertes. The other god, often younger, was a vegetation deity, hence also a dying and rising-again god and associated with the flowers and fertility of spring. He was castrated by a wild animal, or in association with the Mother Goddess, and his sexuality was often thought of as effeminate, or bisexual; in the Semitic context he was called Eshmun or Adon while the Greeks called him Iolaos, Aesculapius, Atthis or Adonis,... and probably Dionysius...

The implication here is that the Man Shepherd's Hermetic paedeia of a young Iolaos/Asclepius (under an elder Herakles or Hauron) was a homophilic adoption. This also explains Philo's homosexual anxiety in describing the Alexandrian Therapeutae, DVC 6.52.

I agree w/ H. Lewy that Philo Judaeus knew well and explored such "gnostic" ideas from - I think - Sethian- or Melchizedekian Jewish groups. Mystical Judaism = Proto-Gnosticism. I won't re-hash all the Aletheian Anthropos material here (again) - this is gnosticism (i.e. palingenesis/ metempsychosis/metanoia etc.) however.

Emile Bréhier Revue des Études Grecques, Vol. 44, No. 205/206 (Avril-Juin 1931), pp. 238-239

The expression νηφάλιος μέθη, "sober drunkenness", which Philo of Alexandria often uses to designate the state of the soul which "drinks in, as he says, the divine words", is part of that set of metaphors, so common, which assimilate religious life to a spiritual banquet, by some memory of an actual ritual banquet. M. L. {=Monsieur Lewy}, who first of all gathers and analyzes with great care the passages where Philo uses the expression, shows that, in spite of the frequent use of metaphors of this kind in the language of the Greek mysteries and in that of the Old Testament, one does not find there anywhere, with its own stamp of originality, this connection of opposites: sober intoxication. On the other hand, the comparison of a passage of the De Vita Contemplativa with the Hermetic writings, on the one hand, with a hymn of pseudo-Solomon, which dates from the 2nd century AD {??}, and finally with a passage of the Pistis Sophia, led him to think that the expression, although belonging personally to Philo in its precise form, was nevertheless suggested to him by the circles whose thoughts these various texts express. Now, according to M. L., who faithfully follows the inspiration of Reitzenstein, all these texts belong to the same group, which the author of the Poimandres calls "gnostics".

Mr. L.'s construction certainly raises several very delicate questions; the texts he cites are all later than Philo, and it must be admitted, in order to use them (one recognizes here the spirit of Mr. Reitzenstein's work), that they merely reproduce much more ancient authors. Moreover, the kinship that is established between the Therapeuts described by Philo in The Contemplative Life, the Hermetists, the authors of the Hymns of Solomon and those of Pistis Sophia, by labeling them all under the term Gnostic, does not appear with evidence; for example, one can ask in what sense the Therapeuts of Philo are "Gnostics", and M. L. has a hard time finding expressions in The Contemplative Life that correspond to gnosis. Gnosticism becomes a category so broad, so vague, that it no longer designates a precise historical reality.

If Philo had studied (c.15 BC) under a Therapeut master of 70 years old (himself educated c.70 BC), said teacher might have studied in a school of the Bible's authors and at a time when Asaphim still openly practiced their arts. In key particulars, Philo's Therapeutae resemble the (Jewish) Biblical Asaphim, who are likewise conflated as scribes and healers (i.e.'magicians') in later definitions. These 'dream interpreters' (i.e. early psychologists) would have been identifiable, if problematic, to a strictly observant Jewish audience in Ptolemaic Egypt. Yet Philo didn't touch this {i.e. the Book of Daniel} material; that's telling.
...

Athanasius Kirchner, Obeliscus Pamphilius [1650],p.109:

Asaphim, who from an ancient Latin translator are called 'philosophers', and the translators of the Septuagint are 'wise-men'. They philosophized about all things divine, as well as the causes of human things; some think that Baal was prepared by Hermes (a contemporary author), and I find that Origen wrote this in his book Against Celsus - even after many centuries, admonished by the writing of this prophecy: “the magi from the East set out into Judea to adore Christ.” But we prove that this came from Zoroaster (which we have also shown elsewhere) and whose claims will be examined elsewhere in greater detail.

Furthermore, the Chartumim (who in the Septuagint are called ἐπαοιδοι or 'enchanters', and by St. Jerome 'soothsayers') possessed by demonic curses, trace their origin (by witnesses Justin and Augustine) to 'Hermes the Egyptian Zoroaster', true inventor of magic, which was subsequently corrupted by another magus of this name, and said magic was reduced to the ravings of enchantments.

Without all the distracting clausal asides, reducing what A.Kirchner has written to its simplest form is quite radical in its implications:

Porrò incantatores (=Asaphim) originem duxerunt ab Hermete Zoroastro Ægyptio...= "Furthermore, the Chartumim-Asaphim originated from Hermes 'the Egyptian Zoroaster'..."

This means - in no uncertain terms - that A.Kirchner believed the 'Egyptian' Asaphim were fundamentally Hermetic. The implications are again quite clear. If the Therapeutae (c.15 AD) are descended from or relic of the (Semitic) Chartumim-Asaphim, that ancestry is explicitly Thothic.

...
That Therapeuts would continue to 'Jewishly' write Hermetic tractates (c.75 BC - 10 AD) is therefore no surprise at all; this was their own lineage and culture. Likewise, as the 'Judaic' scribes of the Septuagint (c.272 BC) came from the cult of Thoth/Hermes (supporting Daniel Völter’s thesis re: Moses), so the Jewish Author of Daniel (c.165 BC) described 'ancient Chaldeans' with Egyptian terms, describing recent and local mantic specialists. The Jewish Hermetica is perfectly understood as a product of this occult, syncretistic and heterodox culture.

Middle-Platonic ideas of the Oracles were already current in the First Century AD (i.e. Philo Judaeus) and therefore older. Julian the Theurgist (born c.160 AD), son of Julian the Chaldean (c.125-185 AD), participated in the culture of a region then influenced by Sethian doctrines and other Alexandrian teachings. Theurgist/Therapeut ideas permeated Alexandria a generation or two earlier, 'Egyptian theurgy' (Isis & the Jews) was the most in/famous in Rome, and book-production & dissemination by (Judeo?) Egyptian traders all lent an outsized spiritual (Hermetic-Gnostic) influence to the cosmopolis in the Eastern Mediterranean. In short, it's really no surprise to see such 'Egyptian' (Judaic intellectual) traces in Alexandrian-taught or -derivative Syrian writers of the 2nd C. likewise.

In the 1st C. AD, Alexandria was basically like New York in the 20th C. You may not realize how much 'New York' produced ideology you are consuming, but if you regularly watch(ed) American tee-vee you're basically brainwashed by New York product. (A similar argument can be made for 'London'.)

Eusebius tells us that Philo of Byblos (c.135 AD) records Sanchuniathon of Berytus "received records from Hierombalus the priest of the god Ieuo" and those books were "Hermetic." Based on other threads, logically working through dates, Philo's source material should be c.300-150 BC. If or if not Ieuo = 'Horus of Kasios' (= Horus-Harpokrates/Eshmun), in any case the Semitic priest of the god Ieuo is and indisputably 'Priest of the Son of God.'

Etc.