An Essence-Energy Distinction in Philo as the Basis for the Language of Deification
This article advances a new interpretation of Philo of Alexandria’s ‘deification’ of Moses. Though previous scholarship has provided a variety of explanations for how the Jewish writer was able to extend the name ‘God’ to Moses, the present study attempts to improve upon earlier theories by rooting...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Electronic Article |
| Language: | English |
| Check availability: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | Drawer...
|
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| Published: |
Oxford University Press
[2017]
|
| In: |
The journal of theological studies
Year: 2017, Volume: 68, Issue: 2, Pages: 551-571 |
| Standardized Subjects / Keyword chains: | B
Philo, Alexandrinus 25 BC-40
/ God
/ Transcendence
/ Immanence
/ Moses
/ Apotheosis
|
| IxTheo Classification: | HD Early Judaism NBC Doctrine of God NBE Anthropology |
| Online Access: |
Volltext (Verlag) Volltext (doi) |
| Summary: | This article advances a new interpretation of Philo of Alexandria’s ‘deification’ of Moses. Though previous scholarship has provided a variety of explanations for how the Jewish writer was able to extend the name ‘God’ to Moses, the present study attempts to improve upon earlier theories by rooting the language of deification in the philosophical distinctions that Philo himself espouses in his doctrine of God. Rejecting the notion that Philo was not a strict monotheist, and that the language of deification implies a mitigated monotheism, it is argued that Philo’s God is indeed one, but that the singular Deity has both an essence, which remains transcendent and imparticipable, and an energeia, or activity, which is operative and present in the world and shareable with such biblical figures as Moses. The distinction, between ‘what’ God is and how he is present in creation, in turn accounts for the well-known but problematic concept of the Logos, which David Winston has properly called ‘the face of God turned toward creation’. That the name ‘God’ encompasses both dimensions of the Deity is what allows Philo to call Moses ‘God’ without attributing to him the very divine essence. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1477-4607 |
| Contains: | Enthalten in: The journal of theological studies
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.1093/jts/flx149 |