Plato and the Pentateuch

Discussion about the Hebrew Bible, Septuagint, pseudepigrapha, Philo, Josephus, Talmud, Dead Sea Scrolls, archaeology, etc.
Post Reply
ABuddhist
Posts: 1016
Joined: Wed Jul 21, 2021 4:36 am

Re: Plato and the Pentateuch

Post by ABuddhist »

DCHindley wrote: Sun Jan 22, 2023 7:25 am
andrewcriddle wrote: Sat Jan 21, 2023 4:56 am
DCHindley wrote: Thu Jan 19, 2023 1:47 pm
Looks like a good time to acquire and process some of Xenophon's Socratic dialogues. I believe that one was "On Clouds" which at the time I heard about it I figured it was going to be a parody. Funny, though, is that normally - unlike some - I don't see parodies everywhere.

DCH
The Clouds is a satire on Socrates by Aristophanes.

Andrew Criddle
Looks as though more reading will be required.

I was aware of a fairly extensive collection of Platonic letters, which I have seen described in some tertiary sources (textbooks) but have also never read (in translation, of course).

It does seem to be a truism that "the more one finds out, the more one realizes what has not yet been found."

Thanks again.

DCH
From what I am aware, all of the Platonic letters are suspected by at least some credibile scholarship of being forgeries by later authors, so that scholars of Plato who try to use any of the letters to reconstruct his thought try to use other sources in order to support their claims (the dialogues) lest people think that the letters cannot be trusted.

How different an attitude from that involving the Christians' scriptures, I think.
Last edited by ABuddhist on Sun Jan 22, 2023 1:51 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
DCHindley
Posts: 3412
Joined: Mon Oct 07, 2013 9:53 am
Location: Ohio, USA

Re: Plato and the Pentateuch

Post by DCHindley »

ABuddhist wrote: Sun Jan 22, 2023 11:06 am
DCHindley wrote: Sun Jan 22, 2023 7:25 am I was aware of a fairly extensive collection of Platonic letters, which I have seen described in some tertiary sources (textbooks) but have also never read (in translation, of course).

It does seem to be a truism that "the more one finds out, the more one realizes what has not yet been found."
From what I am aware, all of the Platonic letters are suspected by at least some credibile scholarship of being forgeries by later authors, so that scholars of P[l]ato who try to use any of the letters to reconstruct his thought try to use other sources in order to support their claims (the dialogues) lest people think that the letters cannot be trusted.

How different an attitude from that involving the Christians' scriptures, I think.
My understanding is that there is a consensus of those who believe that certain ones are more likely authentic than not (they don't conflict much with subjects discussed in the Dialogues), several are marked off as certainly spurious (anachronisms to the teachings developed by middle Platonic philosophers or are just plain inept), and the remainder are of mixed reception. Plato it seems was believed to have held a set of "unwritten" teachings, and supposedly these letters contain snippets of these teachings. These may have existed at some point in Plato's mind, but the snippets recovered by scholars are somewhat arbitrary, or at least that was the impression I came away with.

Yes, this is similar to scholarship on the letters of Paul in the NT. Platonic scholarship should identify the weird reasoning used in NT Paul circles to classify Pauline letters as Undisputed, Disputed, and Spurious. As outsiders, they should be able to identify short-circuits in their reasoning processes when they separated them into these categories. Interpolation theories are restricted to specific sentences or clauses in this or that book, but no grand strategy emerges. I'd be interested to know how these issues are handled by Platonic scholars.

DCH
ABuddhist
Posts: 1016
Joined: Wed Jul 21, 2021 4:36 am

Re: Plato and the Pentateuch

Post by ABuddhist »

DCHindley wrote: Sun Jan 22, 2023 11:38 am
ABuddhist wrote: Sun Jan 22, 2023 11:06 am
DCHindley wrote: Sun Jan 22, 2023 7:25 am I was aware of a fairly extensive collection of Platonic letters, which I have seen described in some tertiary sources (textbooks) but have also never read (in translation, of course).

It does seem to be a truism that "the more one finds out, the more one realizes what has not yet been found."
From what I am aware, all of the Platonic letters are suspected by at least some credibile scholarship of being forgeries by later authors, so that scholars of P[l]ato who try to use any of the letters to reconstruct his thought try to use other sources in order to support their claims (the dialogues) lest people think that the letters cannot be trusted.

How different an attitude from that involving the Christians' scriptures, I think.
My understanding is that there is a consensus of those who believe that certain ones are more likely authentic than not (they don't conflict much with subjects discussed in the Dialogues), several are marked off as certainly spurious (anachronisms to the teachings developed by middle Platonic philosophers or are just plain inept), and the remainder are of mixed reception. Plato it seems was believed to have held a set of "unwritten" teachings, and supposedly these letters contain snippets of these teachings. These may have existed at some point in Plato's mind, but the snippets recovered by scholars are somewhat arbitrary, or at least that was the impression I came away with.

Yes, this is similar to scholarship on the letters of Paul in the NT. Platonic scholarship should identify the weird reasoning used in NT Paul circles to classify Pauline letters as Undisputed, Disputed, and Spurious. As outsiders, they should be able to identify short-circuits in their reasoning processes when they separated them into these categories. Interpolation theories are restricted to specific sentences or clauses in this or that book, but no grand strategy emerges. I'd be interested to know how these issues are handled by Platonic scholars.

DCH
I dare to quote Wikipedia as a summary, which you may consider - including its sources - about Plato's letters: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epistles_ ... thenticity

The two letters that are most commonly claimed to have actually been written by Plato are the Seventh and the Eighth, on the supposition that these were open letters and therefore less likely to be the result of invention or forgery. This is not so much because of a presumption in favor of an open letter's authenticity as because of a presumption against that of a private letter: the preservation of the former is unsurprising, while the preservation, dissemination, and eventual publication of the latter requires some sort of explanation.[4] Nevertheless, even the Seventh Letter has recently been argued to be spurious by prominent scholars, such as Malcolm Schofield,[5] Myles Burnyeat,[6] and Julia Annas.[7] George Boas argues that all of the Epistles, including the Seventh, are spurious,[8] a conclusion accepted also, and more recently, by Terence Irwin.[9] On the other hand, George Grote, Anton Ræder, Novotny, Harward, and Bluck reject only the First; and Bentley accepted all of them.[3]

The other letters enjoy varying levels of acceptance among scholars. The Sixth, Third, and Eleventh have the greatest support of the remaining letters, followed by the Fourth, Tenth, Thirteenth, and Second Letter; fewer scholars consider the Fifth, Ninth, and Twelfth to be genuine, while almost none dispute that the First is spurious.[3]
User avatar
neilgodfrey
Posts: 6161
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 4:08 pm

Re: Plato and the Pentateuch

Post by neilgodfrey »

andrewcriddle wrote: Sun Jan 08, 2023 9:59 am There is continual reference to the difference between the ideal society and the practicable society.

The whole section has a feel of thinking outside the box or brainstorming. i do not regard it as a serious proposal to invent a new religion to encourage people to behave as it is held they ought to. (Although it is formally possible that later Platonists could have taken it that way.)

Andrew Criddle
The sentiment expressed re Plato's Laws here has come up a few times and I was reminded of it when I went through classicist Glenn Morrow's commentary on Laws. Morrow, I am sure, would have a different view. He would see Laws as a very serious reflection on how things really should be done in the real world. I have posted extracts from his commentary here: https://vridar.org/2023/02/21/could-pla ... the-bible/

Morrow begins:
No work of Plato’s is more intimately connected with its time and with the world in which it was written than the Laws.
and
This translation of his political ideal into the terms of fourth-century Greek politics was, as he says, “an old man’s sober pastime” (685a, 7x2b), but it was a form of amusement that he must have thought would give guidance to actual statesmen. (p. 10)
Morrow's work is full of instances of Plato and his students being actively involved in advising statesmen on their constitutions and the "real world" influence of Laws long after Plato's death.
andrewcriddle
Posts: 2818
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 12:36 am

Re: Plato and the Pentateuch

Post by andrewcriddle »

neilgodfrey wrote: Mon Feb 20, 2023 5:49 pm
andrewcriddle wrote: Sun Jan 08, 2023 9:59 am There is continual reference to the difference between the ideal society and the practicable society.

The whole section has a feel of thinking outside the box or brainstorming. i do not regard it as a serious proposal to invent a new religion to encourage people to behave as it is held they ought to. (Although it is formally possible that later Platonists could have taken it that way.)

Andrew Criddle
The sentiment expressed re Plato's Laws here has come up a few times and I was reminded of it when I went through classicist Glenn Morrow's commentary on Laws. Morrow, I am sure, would have a different view. He would see Laws as a very serious reflection on how things really should be done in the real world. I have posted extracts from his commentary here: https://vridar.org/2023/02/21/could-pla ... the-bible/

Morrow begins:
No work of Plato’s is more intimately connected with its time and with the world in which it was written than the Laws.
and
This translation of his political ideal into the terms of fourth-century Greek politics was, as he says, “an old man’s sober pastime” (685a, 7x2b), but it was a form of amusement that he must have thought would give guidance to actual statesmen. (p. 10)
Morrow's work is full of instances of Plato and his students being actively involved in advising statesmen on their constitutions and the "real world" influence of Laws long after Plato's death.
It seems an interesting work, although maybe sometimes speculative. (I doubt whether the Romans needed Plato as a pretext to destroy Carthage.)

I agree that Ideas were sometimes borrowed from Plato's Laws by later Greek legislators, it is a thought provoking work. However, I can see little evidence that it was regarded as an authoritative work, in the sense that people explicitly used it to justify reforms. One exception, may be Plato's theology as developed in the Laws. It is largely separable from the suggested detailed legal reforms, and may well have been found convincing by those seeking a reformed religion. One issue is that the theology of the Laws seems rather different from that of the Pentateuch as normally understood. There may be a question here about the original meaning of the Pentateuch, but I myself have no doubt about the radically monotheist nature of our present text. (I accept that this is not true of some of its sources.)

One specific point. We appear to have evidence of a Jewish high priest at Jerusalem from the Elephantine papyri, which is too early for influence by the Laws, and Plato's idea of a new high priest each year is not in accord with the Pentateuch.

(Although I agree that it is unlikely that Plato knew the Pentateuch, I can't help feeling that the alleged parallels between Plato and the Pentateuch seem if anything more plausible as a influence on Plato of Semitic ideas rather than vice versa. I repeat that I find such influence historically unlikely, but then I find the influence of Plato on the Pentateuch unlikely too.)

Andrew Criddle
User avatar
neilgodfrey
Posts: 6161
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 4:08 pm

Re: Plato and the Pentateuch

Post by neilgodfrey »

andrewcriddle wrote: Thu Feb 23, 2023 9:44 am (I doubt whether the Romans needed Plato as a pretext to destroy Carthage.)
Oh come on, Andrew! :-) --- the reference was not about Rome's intent to destroy Carthage at all! Read it again:

Was Plato’s condemnation of sea power later used by the Romans to justify the destruction of Carthage? “… [T]he Roman offer that the Car­thaginians should settle at least eighty stades from the sea corresponds exactly to the suggestion of the Laws.” Momigliano… (100)

Also look again and see that the examples listed are for most part actual historical events and persons. Your emphasis on speculative is misplaced.
andrewcriddle wrote: Thu Feb 23, 2023 9:44 amI agree that Ideas were sometimes borrowed from Plato's Laws by later Greek legislators, it is a thought provoking work. However, I can see little evidence that it was regarded as an authoritative work, in the sense that people explicitly used it to justify reforms.
The extracts demonstrate instances where Plato and his students gave advice in case by case instances. No-one has ever suggested that the specifics of Laws be applied exactly to the letter in every practical situation available. That's not the argument by a long shot and I do think you are attempting to stretch things a little there.

andrewcriddle wrote: Thu Feb 23, 2023 9:44 amOne issue is that the theology of the Laws seems rather different from that of the Pentateuch as normally understood.
Of course it is. And that's the very definition of Hellenism. A blend of Asian and Greek cultures. Neither one nor the other.

andrewcriddle wrote: Thu Feb 23, 2023 9:44 amOne specific point. We appear to have evidence of a Jewish high priest at Jerusalem from the Elephantine papyri, which is too early for influence by the Laws, and Plato's idea of a new high priest each year is not in accord with the Pentateuch.
You have missed the point. Sacrifices were also "before the Laws", and "gods" and "temples". Yahweh was not on Plato's horizon. Demetrius of Cyrene adapted ideas from Plato and Aristotle (if Cicero can be trusted) to apply to the situation there. Ditto, we could argue, for other political constitutions. The question is not: Did the priests of Yahweh decide to ditch Yahweh and worship Zeus instead because of Plato or other Greek influences? That's reducing the question raised by Gmirkin and others to absurdity.
andrewcriddle wrote: Thu Feb 23, 2023 9:44 am (Although I agree that it is unlikely that Plato knew the Pentateuch, I can't help feeling that the alleged parallels between Plato and the Pentateuch seem if anything more plausible as a influence on Plato of Semitic ideas rather than vice versa. I repeat that I find such influence historically unlikely, but then I find the influence of Plato on the Pentateuch unlikely too.)

Andrew Criddle
One normally gives reasons for a conclusion rather than subjective impressions, or that's the ideal, anyway. There are indeed scholars who have and do argue for an influence from the Pentateuch to Plato.

I think the power of the Documentary Hypothesis has made it "hard to accept" the idea of Plato's influence on the Pentateuch.

Once we re-examine the hard evidence of archaeology (Adler, being the latest in that line, though not the first) and then examine a comparative literary analysis of the relevant literature, and observe the program of Alexander and the practical influence of Plato, Aristotle and co on real political situations and literature, I think it becomes quite plausible that Plato is behind much of the Pentateuch.

Scholars immersed in the DH have expressed "amazement" at the originality of the Pentateuch's presentation of laws -- -but that amazement suddenly vanishes when we remove the DH and see on the basis of the above data that the authors of the Pentateuch were as human and culturally embedded as any other authors at any other time.
andrewcriddle
Posts: 2818
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 12:36 am

Re: Plato and the Pentateuch

Post by andrewcriddle »

neilgodfrey wrote: Thu Feb 23, 2023 1:39 pm <SNIP>
andrewcriddle wrote: Thu Feb 23, 2023 9:44 amI agree that Ideas were sometimes borrowed from Plato's Laws by later Greek legislators, it is a thought provoking work. However, I can see little evidence that it was regarded as an authoritative work, in the sense that people explicitly used it to justify reforms.
The extracts demonstrate instances where Plato and his students gave advice in case by case instances. No-one has ever suggested that the specifics of Laws be applied exactly to the letter in every practical situation available. That's not the argument by a long shot and I do think you are attempting to stretch things a little there.

andrewcriddle wrote: Thu Feb 23, 2023 9:44 amOne issue is that the theology of the Laws seems rather different from that of the Pentateuch as normally understood.
Of course it is. And that's the very definition of Hellenism. A blend of Asian and Greek cultures. Neither one nor the other.

andrewcriddle wrote: Thu Feb 23, 2023 9:44 amOne specific point. We appear to have evidence of a Jewish high priest at Jerusalem from the Elephantine papyri, which is too early for influence by the Laws, and Plato's idea of a new high priest each year is not in accord with the Pentateuch.
You have missed the point. Sacrifices were also "before the Laws", and "gods" and "temples". Yahweh was not on Plato's horizon. Demetrius of Cyrene adapted ideas from Plato and Aristotle (if Cicero can be trusted) to apply to the situation there. Ditto, we could argue, for other political constitutions. The question is not: Did the priests of Yahweh decide to ditch Yahweh and worship Zeus instead because of Plato or other Greek influences? That's reducing the question raised by Gmirkin and others to absurdity.
...
I'll requote from one of my earlier quotes in this thread.
There may be an underlying issue between us (or alternatively I may be misunderstanding you). IIUC you are sympathetic to an origin of the Pentateuch in which an elite group which really held what you regard as the ideology of Plato's Laws, invented the Pentateuch as a means of indoctrinating ordinary people into accepting their agenda. I doubt whether this is what Plato is really suggesting, (although in principle later Platonists might have understood Plato in this way), and I regard it as deeply improbable as an account of Pentateuchal origins. IF this is what you are suggesting then I would require a clear historical parallel to this sort of process before regarding it as in any way plausible.
If one holds a very late date for the present form of the Pentateuch, then it would be quite plausible to interpret specific passages e.g. the probably late passage about Zelophehad’s Daughters as being influenced by the Laws.

What I have much more difficulty with, irrespective of relative dating, is the idea that Plato's Laws are the covert ideology of the elite who invented the Pentateuch. An ideology which had to be obscured in order for the Pentateuch to be acceptable to ordinary Jews. This idea, IMO, is quite different from the ways in which the Laws may well have openly contributed to the Hellenistic political debate.

(I am deeply uncertain about Plato's intention in writing the Laws, which was apparently published posthumously. But I accept that Plato's intention is largely irrelevant to how the work was or was not made use of.)

Andrew Criddle
User avatar
neilgodfrey
Posts: 6161
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 4:08 pm

Re: Plato and the Pentateuch

Post by neilgodfrey »

What follows is a quite different objection now, and that leads me to think your arguments are somewhat ad hoc. The above criticism of a classicist whose work had nothing to do with the Pentateuch -- even misreading his point about Carthage and Rome and presumably on that point alone mis-characterizing the entire body of evidence was somewhat speculative -- was presumably prompted by a concern that such a study was indeed very close to the kind of example you asked for in your earlier quote.

andrewcriddle wrote: Sat Feb 25, 2023 5:27 am
If one holds a very late date for the present form of the Pentateuch, then it would be quite plausible to interpret specific passages e.g. the probably late passage about Zelophehad’s Daughters as being influenced by the Laws.
The reverse is also possible and is what has happened in my case, at least: it was the comparative analysis of the Laws with the Pentateuch that opened up the strong likelihood, in my view, that the Pentateuch post-dated the Laws.

It is the inability to accept the possibility that the Pentateuch could be so late -- and the only reason for that inability is the strength of a theory and tradition -- is what has shut off any serious comparison between the Laws and the Pentateuch. Not all -- some have certainly seen the strong echoes of Plato in the Pentateuch and have attempted to explain the evidence they see as arising with the Documentary Hypothesis in mind.

You yourself said you would think this to be a more likely scenario: that the Pentateuch somehow influenced Plato, however indirectly.

Of course, it probably goes without saying that such a model has far more problems with identifying how such an influence could have been channelled that the Hellenistic era thesis for the Pentateuch.

What I see here is the overwhelming power of the Documentary Hypthesis to guide our assumptions and all our interpretation of other evidence.
andrewcriddle wrote: Sat Feb 25, 2023 5:27 amWhat I have much more difficulty with, irrespective of relative dating, is the idea that Plato's Laws are the covert ideology of the elite who invented the Pentateuch. An ideology which had to be obscured in order for the Pentateuch to be acceptable to ordinary Jews. This idea, IMO, is quite different from the ways in which the Laws may well have openly contributed to the Hellenistic political debate.
I think you will need to be clearer about what you mean by "ideology" in this context. What is it you are objecting to, exactly? What is it you imagine is the argument re Plato's influence on the Pentateuch?

andrewcriddle wrote: Sat Feb 25, 2023 5:27 am (I am deeply uncertain about Plato's intention in writing the Laws, which was apparently published posthumously. But I accept that Plato's intention is largely irrelevant to how the work was or was not made use of.)

Andrew Criddle
Again, I see a kind of ad hoc approach here -- or attempt to throw up any idea in the hope that some of them stick. Why even introduce the posthumous publication of the Laws when you immediately backtrack and admit it is irrelevant?

You have suggested that Plato's intentions for Laws -- as you perceive them -- are not so practical, but more theoretical or even whimsical. But by bringing up this objection again you are simply ignoring the far-from-speculative evidence set out by Morrow about Plato's intent for and actual influence in the real political world.

The examples from Morrow's work show that Plato's principles and ideas were applied in very real ways in very real circumstances in the ancient world - and the local situations influenced how those ideas were introduced, often with modifications to suit local conditions.

It was not an "ideology" being imposed in the sense that societies had to be totally restructured from anything they previously knew -- as in, say, the ideologies of Stalinism and Maoism being imposed on Russia and China.

What one sees is another instance of Hellenism, a blend of Greek and Asiatic. Plato's Laws spoke of adaptation to local gods, the preservation of local forms of worship. That's what you see in the cults of Yahweh dominating the Pentateuch. Those cults (Samarian and Judean) were the leading ones in Samaria and Jerusalem at the time of Alexander's conquests.

What one sees in the Pentateuch is a dramatic and narrative presentation of a body of law that is so unlike any other presentation of laws in anywhere --- with the only exception being in Plato's Laws. The "unique" presentation of the Pentateuch is explained by scholars as "remarkable" or "astonishing" creativity by its authors.

One could argue that Plato was inspired to describe such a literary work as the Pentateuch in his Laws because he somehow knew about it. But the problems that scenario raises are far more difficult and numerous than the relative dating that is prepared to abandon the Documentary Hypothesis.

(updated)
andrewcriddle
Posts: 2818
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 12:36 am

Re: Plato and the Pentateuch

Post by andrewcriddle »

neilgodfrey wrote: Sat Feb 25, 2023 6:36 am <SNIP>
andrewcriddle wrote: Sat Feb 25, 2023 5:27 amWhat I have much more difficulty with, irrespective of relative dating, is the idea that Plato's Laws are the covert ideology of the elite who invented the Pentateuch. An ideology which had to be obscured in order for the Pentateuch to be acceptable to ordinary Jews. This idea, IMO, is quite different from the ways in which the Laws may well have openly contributed to the Hellenistic political debate.
I think you will need to be clearer about what you mean by "ideology" in this context. What is it you are objecting to, exactly? What is it you imagine is the argument re Plato's influence on the Pentateuch?
...
I am objecting to the idea of the surreptitious use of the Laws as an underlying ideology for the Pentateuch.
(This is an incomplete answer but I'm about to temporarily lose access to the web.)

Andrew Criddle
User avatar
neilgodfrey
Posts: 6161
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 4:08 pm

Re: Plato and the Pentateuch

Post by neilgodfrey »

andrewcriddle wrote: Sat Feb 25, 2023 7:04 am
neilgodfrey wrote: Sat Feb 25, 2023 6:36 am <SNIP>
andrewcriddle wrote: Sat Feb 25, 2023 5:27 amWhat I have much more difficulty with, irrespective of relative dating, is the idea that Plato's Laws are the covert ideology of the elite who invented the Pentateuch. An ideology which had to be obscured in order for the Pentateuch to be acceptable to ordinary Jews. This idea, IMO, is quite different from the ways in which the Laws may well have openly contributed to the Hellenistic political debate.
I think you will need to be clearer about what you mean by "underlying ideology" in this context. What is it you are objecting to, exactly? What is it you imagine is the argument re Plato's influence on the Pentateuch?
...
I am objecting to the idea of the surreptitious use of the Laws as an underlying ideology for the Pentateuch.
(This is an incomplete answer but I'm about to temporarily lose access to the web.)

Andrew Criddle
Again, I don't know what you mean by "ideology" in this context. Nor do I think I know what you are implying or suggesting by your reference to "surreptitious". When you return online it might be helpful to make clear what exactly you mean by those terms as criticisms of Gmirkin's argument -- or with any of the other arguments for a Greek-influenced Hellenistic era Pentateuch. (On the face of it your use of "surreptitious" and "underlying ideology" come across as pejorative characterizations of G's argument.)

If we stick with Gmirkin's argument for the moment, he argues that a particular "program" (I could not say "ideology") by pro-Hellenistic authors that is detectable in much of Genesis was flatly rejected by the authors of Exodus-Joshua.

The picture that emerges is that of two contemporary groups with competing ideologies: one whose agenda was ethical and philosophical, whose influence was most pronounced in Genesis, and another whose agenda was cultic and nationalistic, whose influence dominated Exodus-Joshua. -- Plato's Timaeus, 273

I don't think you are using "ideology" in the same sense as Gmirkin does here --- though I might be wrong, of course. I have not seen your explanation for your use of the word.

The evidence we have in the Pentateuch and subsequent history (as reflected in Ezra-Nehemiah, as I understand those works, and the history of the Hasmoneans) is that the intolerant imposition of "Yahwism alone" was forced upon Judeans and others by anti-Hellenists.

If you're looking for the imposition of an "ideology" on a people I think it is there -- in the anti-Hellenist intolerant Yahwist priests.

Platonism as we see it expressed in the work (Laws) that, in Morrow's view, represents reflections arising out of his life-time of Plato's thought, was not imposed on the Samaritans and Jews.

One sees other examples of betrayals of elements of Plato's program where they were introduced, presumably with good intention, as Morrow's examples illustrate (e.g. with the introductions of the "guardians of the laws").

(updated)

added later.....
andrewcriddle wrote: Sat Feb 25, 2023 7:04 am I am objecting to the idea of the surreptitious use of the Laws as an underlying ideology for the Pentateuch.

Andrew Criddle
Or another approach that might help towards a better understanding between us would be if you could spell out the actual reasons you object to what you describe as "a surreptitious use of the Laws as an underlying ideology for the Pentateuch".
Post Reply