Pneuma and Realized Eschatology in the Book of Wisdom 9783666535383, 9783525535387, 9783647535388

Citation preview

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

Forschungen zur Religion und Literatur des Alten und Neuen Testaments edited by Jan Christian Gertz, Dietrich-Alex Koch, Matthias Köckert, Hermut Löhr, Joachim Schaper David Andrew Teeter and Christopher Tuckett

Volume 242

Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

Matthew Edwards

Pneuma and Realized Eschatology in the Book of Wisdom

Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

Bibliographic information published by the Deutsche Nationalbibliothek The Deutsche Nationalbibliothek lists this publication in the Deutsche Nationalbibliografie; detailed bibliographic data available online: http://dnb.d-nb.de. ISBN 978-3-525-53538-7 ISBN 978-3-647-53538-8 (E-Book) © 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen/ Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht LLC, Bristol, CT, U. S. A. www.v-r.de All rights reserved. No part of this work may be reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or any information storage and retrieval system, without prior written permission from the publisher. Typesetting, printed and bound in Germany by

Hubert & Co, Göttingen

Printed on non-aging paper.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

Table of Contents Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

9

Abbreviations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 Principal Abbreviations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 Greek and Latin Abbreviations of Works . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 Part One – Prolegomena 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 1.1 Pneuma and Realized Eschatology in Wisdom . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 1.2 Pneuma . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.3 Eschatology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.4 The Setting of Wisdom . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.4.1 Date and Place of Origin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.4.2 Hellenistic Philosophy in Alexandria . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.4.3 The Sources of Stoicism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.4.4 Genre . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.4.5 Addressees of Wisdom . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

19 20 24 24 28 30 31 35

2. The Unity of Wisdom . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 2.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.2 Literary Unity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.3 The Unified Picture of Salvation – Wisdom 10 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.3.1 The Literary Structure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.3.2 An Exposition of Wisdom 10 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.4 Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

39 39 44 44 48 57

Part Two – Cosmos and Creation 3. The Order of the Cosmos . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61 3.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61 3.2 An Unusual Retelling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61 3.3 The Exodus and The Elements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62 3.4 Sophia and Pneuma . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68 3.5 The Criticism of Stoicism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

6

Table of Contents

3.6 Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71 4. Creation and Matter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73 4.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.2 Creation in Wisdom . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.3 Creation from Pre-existent Matter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.3.1 Creatio ex nihilo . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.3.2 Formless Matter in Plato, Aristotle, the Stoics and Philo . . . 4.3.3 Formless Matter in Wisdom . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.4 Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

73 73 75 76 77 79 80

Part Three – Pneuma in Wisdom 5. Pneuma, Stoicism and Anthropology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.2 Soteriology and the Soul . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.3 The Stoic Human . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

83 83 83 84

5.4 Anthropology in Wisdom . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86 5.4.1 General Issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86 5.4.2 Pneuma and Anthropology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87 5.5 Stoicism, Wisdom and Rationality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91 6. Spirit in the Biblical Tradition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93 6.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93 6.2 The Spirit in the Old Testament . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 94 6.2.1 Summary of the Usage of Rûaḥ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 94 6.2.2 Wind . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95 6.2.3 Breath, Life and the Centre of Personality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96 6.2.4 The Spirit of God . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99 6.2.5 The Spirit of Wisdom . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102 6.2.6 Angelic Spirits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 104 6.2.7 The Unity of Rûaḥ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105 6.2.8 Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106 6.3 Spirit in the LXX . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106 6.3.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106 6.3.2 The Semantic Ranges of the Greek Words Used to Translate Rûaḥ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107 6.3.3 Hebrew Rûaḥ and Greek Pneuma . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 110 6.3.4 The Translation of Related Hebrew Terms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111 6.3.5 Exodus, Isaiah, Solomon, Proverbs, Daniel and Sirach . . . . 112 6.4 Spirit in Philo . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 120 6.5 Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 125

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

Table of Contents

7

Part Four – The Realized Eschatology of Wisdom 7. Personal Eschatology and Immortality in Wisdom . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 131 7.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 131 7.2 Greek Conceptions of the After-Life . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 131 7.2.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 131 7.2.2 The Homeric Soul . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 132 7.2.3 Immortality and the Community . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133 7.2.4 The Platonic Soul . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 134 7.2.5 Religious Conceptions of the Soul . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 136 7.2.6 Hellenistic Souls . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 136 7.2.7 Astral Immortality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 137 7.2.8 Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 138 7.3 Immortality, Incorruptibility and the Soul in Wisdom . . . . . . . . . . 139 7.3.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 139 7.3.2 Immortality and Incorruptibility . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 139 7.3.3 The Platonic Soul in Wisdom? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 143 7.3.4 Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 146 7.4 The Question of Death and Mortality throughout Wisdom . . . . . 147 7.4.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 147 7.4.2 Wisdom 1–6: ‘Evil-Doing Will Overturn the Thrones of Rulers’ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 148 7.4.3 Wisdom 7–9: The Mortal Sage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 152 7.4.4 Wisdom 11–19: An Incredible Journey and a Strange Death 153 7.4.5 The Witness of Egyptian Jewish Burial Inscriptions . . . . . . . 155 7.4.6 Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 157 7.5 Jewish Texts and Theology in Wisdom . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 158 7.5.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 158 7.5.2 Isaiah . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 158 7.5.3 Psalm 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 162 7.5.4 Enoch, Daniel and the Son of Man . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 163 7.5.5 Apocalypticism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 166 7.5.6 Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 174 7.6 The Identity of the Righteous One and Realized Eschatology in Wisdom 1–6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 175 7.6.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 175 7.6.2 The Literary Structure of Wisdom 1–6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 175 7.6.3 The Righteous in Wisdom 1–6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 180 7.6.4 The Visitation of God . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 186 7.6.5 The Transference of Eschatological Hope to Every Age . . . 195 7.6.6 The Shape of Salvation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 195 7.7 Conclusion: The Realized Eschatology of Wisdom 1–6 . . . . . . . . . 198

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

8

Table of Contents

8. Hellenistic Kingship and Wisdom . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 201 8.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 201 8.2 The Practice of Hellenistic Kingship . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 202 8.3 The Ideals of Hellenistic Kingship . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 207 8.4 The Jews in Alexandria in the Hellenistic Era . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 213 8.5 The Sage as King . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 218 8.6 Hellenistic and Cosmic Kingship . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 220 9. Providence and Fate in The Book of Wisdom . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 225 9.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 225 9.2 Fate and Providence in the Greek Tradition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 226 9.3 The Providence of God in the LXX . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 232 9.4 The Providence of God in Wisdom . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 233 9.4.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 233 9.4.2 Wisdom 6:7 – proneō . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 234 9.4.3 Wisdom 14:3 – pronoia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 236 9.4.4 Wisdom 17:2 – pronoia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 237 9.4.5 Wisdom 17:17; 19:4 – anagkē . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 238 9.5 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 239 Part Five – Conclusion 10. Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 243 Bibliography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 245 Anonymous Primary Sources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 245 Ancient Authors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 245 Anthologies of Primary Sources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 247 Dictionaries, Grammars and Concordances . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 247 Commentaries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 248 Secondary Literature . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 249 Indexes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 261 Author . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 261 Subject . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 263 Biblical Texts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 264

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

Acknowledgements Thanks are particularly due to Professor Joachim Schaper, Chair in Hebrew, Old Testament and Early Jewish Studies at the University of Aberdeen, who took me on, supervised the research and writing of the thesis on which this work is based, demanded high standards and offered sage criticism, all at the same time as allowing the thesis and my own interests to explore our own paths. The idea was his of making pneuma a central concept of the work rather than a peripheral issue. Ann and Peter Scott contributed to the author, as well as their daughter, a year of much needed tuition fees. The School of Divinity, History and Philosophy at the University of Aberdeen also granted a bursary which facilitated a trip to Berlin for some German language tuition. Thanks are also due to Marilyn Young for her assistance in proofreading the thesis. Most of all, the thesis could not have been completed without the support in innumerable ways, of my wife Siân, to whom this work is dedicated. May 2012

Matthew Edwards

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

Abbreviations Principal Abbreviations An. Bib. BETL CBQ CBQMS CPJ DK

Analecta Biblica Bibliotheca Ephemeridum Theologicarum Lovaniensium Catholic Biblical Quarterly Catholic Biblical Quarterly Monograph Series Corpus papyrorum Judaicarum Diels, Hermann and Walter Kranz, Die Fragmente der Vorsokratiker, 3 vol. (Berlin, 51934) DSS Dead Sea Scrolls HTR Harvard Theological Review JSJ Journal for the Study of Judaism JSOTSup Journal for the Study of the Old Testament, Supplement Series JSP Journal for the Study of the Pseudepigrapha JSPSup Journal for the Study of the Pseudepigrapha, Supplement Series JSS Journal of Semitic Studies JTS Journal of Theological Studies LS A. A. Long and D. N. Sedley, The Hellenistic Philosophers, 2 vol. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1987) NETS A New English Translation of the Septuagint, ed. by Albert Pietersma/ Benjamin G. Wright (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007) NRSV The Holy Bible, New Revised Standard Version, Anglicized Edition (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1995) OED The Oxford English Dictionary, [Access dates provided with individual references] OG Old Greek OGIS Orientis graeci inscriptiones selectae, ed. by W. Dittenberger, 2 vol. (Leipzig, 1903–05) RSV Revised Standard Version SBL Society of Biblical Literature SJSJ Supplements to the Journal for the Study of Judaism STDJ Studies on the Texts of the Desert of Judah SVF Stoicorum veterum fragmenta, ed. by H. F. A. von Arnim, 4 vol. in 2 bks (Leipzig: Teubner, 1903–24) VTSup Supplements to Vetus Testamentum

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

12

Abbreviations

Greek and Latin Abbreviations of Works Aeschylus Alexander (of Aphrodisias) Aristotle

Cicero

Clement Euripedes Epicurus Eusebius Galen

Homer Hippolytus Josephus Lucretius Philo

Plato

Per. Prom. Mixt.

Persians Prometheus Bound De mixtione

Cael. G. A. Phys. Pol. Rhet. Acad. Fat. Fin. N. D. Strom. Ba. Ep. Hdt. Ep. Men. Praep. ev. Caus. Cont. Intr. Plac. Il. Od. Haer. Ant. C. Ap. Rer. Aet. Agr. Cher. Contempl. Decal. Det. Gig. Her. Hyp. Leg. Mos. Mut. Opif. Plant. Prob. QE Somn. Spec. Crat. Gorg.

De caelo De generatione animalium Physica Politica Rhetorica Academica De fato De finibus De natura deorum Stromateis Bacchae Epistula ad Herodotum Epistula ad Menoeceus Praeparatio evangelica De causis continentibus Introductio sive medicus De placitis Hippocratis et Platonis The Iliad Odyssey Refutatio omnium haeresium Antiquitaties Iudaicae Contra Apionem De rerum natura De aeternitate mundi De agricultura De cherubim De vita contemplativa De decalogo Quod deterius potiori insidiari soleat De gigantibus Quis rerum divinarum heres sit Hypothetica Legum allegoriae De vita Mosis De mutatione nominum De opificio mundi De plantatione Quod omnis probus liber sit Quaestiones in Exodum De somniis De specialibus legibus Cratylus Gorgias

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

Greek and Latin Abbreviations of Works Let. Phd. Phdr. Phlb. Rep. Stat. Sym. Tim. Plutarch Comm. not. Def. orac. Stoic rep. An. Proc. Porphyry Abst. Seneca Ep. mor. Ben. Sextus Empiricus Ad. mat. Sophocles O. C. Xenophon Cyr. Mem.

Letters Phaedo Phaedrus Philebus Republic Statesman Symposium Timaeus De communibus notitiis contra Stoicos De defectu oraculorum De Stoicorum repugnantiis De animae procreatione in Timaeo De abstinentia Epistulae morales De benificiis Adversus mathematicos Oedipus at Colonus Cyropaedia Memorabilia

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

13

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

Part One – Prolegomena

The first chapter deals with introductory matters concerning the Book of Wisdom and the concepts within it of pneuma and eschatology. The second chapter provides an argument for the theological unity of the different depictions of salvation within Wisdom, thereby establishing the importance of the Exodus-Numbers narrative for the interpretation of the whole book.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

1. Introduction 1.1 Pneuma and Realized Eschatology in Wisdom The Book of Wisdom is the work of a Hellenized Jew, most likely written in Alexandria during the first century BCE.1 It exhibits devotion to elements of the Jewish faith that are familiar to any reader of the Old Testament, but at numerous points articulates its position with allusion, and sometimes direct reference, to other philosophical ideas and traditions from the Greek world. That it should do so is not surprising; Greek language and culture were associated with the ruling class around the Jewish Diaspora and so works are to be expected that defend, explain and rearticulate traditional ideas in ways that were comprehensible to minds, both Jewish and non-Jewish, schooled in Greek culture. Commentators on Wisdom have been aware of this dynamic within the work. James Reese set the scene for the relatively little modern English work on the book with his monograph Hellenistic Influence on the Book of Wisdom and its Consequences.2 Similarly, Larcher’s work is steeped in the cultural options that were available to an educated Alexandrian3, and David Winston’s commentary contains a plethora of references to non-Jewish sources.4 This work follows in the same vein, recognizing the engagement with Hellenism in particular that is found in Wisdom, but narrows and deepens the field of vision, so to speak, by focussing on a key interaction with Greek thought within the book: the meeting of Jewish faith with the Stoic understanding of pneuma. The choice of pneuma and eschatology as two interrelated fields of study, brought together by Wisdom’s engagement with Stoic philosophy, was made as it became clear that together they offered an insight into the theology of the whole book. The central thesis of this work, that Wisdom’s understanding of pneuma leads to the realization of Jewish eschatological language within the processes of history, is not itself something that has received attention within the secondary literature. As will be detailed below, various work has been done on pneuma and eschatology in Wisdom as separate concepts, but their interrelationship has not been 1 2 3

4

For discussion of the setting of Wisdom, cf. below, 1.4. J. M. Reese, Hellenistic Influence on the Book of Wisdom and its Consequences, An. Bib. 41 (Rome: Biblical Institute Press, 1970). C. Larcher, Études sur le Livre de la Sagesse (Paris: Gabalda, 1969); C. Larcher, Le Livre de la Sagesse ou la Sagesse de Salomon, 3 vol. (Paris: Gabalda, 1983–85); similarly, Helmut Engel, Das Buch der Weisheit (Stuttgart: Katholisches Bibelwerk, 1998). David Winston, The Wisdom of Solomon, The Anchor Bible, vol. 43 (New York: Doubleday, 1979).

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

18

Introduction

argued, to my knowledge, before. This renders a standard history of research of the topic somewhat difficult. Within this introduction then, can be found attempts to establish the central concepts involved, reaching more broadly into the fields of Biblical and Hellenistic Studies. Discussions and interaction with the secondary literature as it touches on the individual issues of eschatology and pneuma will be found in the body of the text below as the alternative position of this work is set out. The following is primarily an attempt to read Wisdom in its historical context. The interpretation given reasons with Wisdom’s statements within the context of the world to which Wisdom refers. It also seeks to treat Wisdom as a single document. No theological assumptions drove the acceptance of this idea: indeed, at numerous points during research it seemed that it would have been much easier to treat the book’s different sections as theologically incoherent. Nonetheless, it proved finally to be the case that literary and theological aspects of Wisdom demanded consideration of how the book might be understood as a whole. The argument for Wisdom’s unity can be found in Chapter Two. The reception of Wisdom by the Christian Church5 and a comparison of the Latin text with the Greek, would make a fascinating study, particularly when compared with this work’s conclusions. However, the scope of the work has been limited to an examination of Wisdom within the time of its composition, leaving this standpoint only to look backwards into the history of Greek and Hebrew ideas. One exception to this rule is Philo, whom I take to be later than Wisdom but close enough so that at numerous points he proves to be a helpful contrasting foil. A further limitation of this study, which should be noted at the outset, is the lack of engagement with Italian secondary literature, and in particular the three volume commentary of G. Scarpat.6 Undoubtedly, a thorough reading of Scarpat, as well as other Italian and Spanish works would have deepened and nuanced the following argument, although I believe that what follows securely stands on research that is broad and diverse. A brief note will be helpful with regard to terminology. In what follows, ‘Wisdom’ will refer to the literary work The Book of Wisdom and ‘wisdom’ to the sapiential form of understanding. Wisdom understood as a personified female figure within the Book of Wisdom will be referred to as ‘Sophia’. Greek and Hebrew fonts will be used for discussion of original texts, but transliterated words (e. g. pneuma) for more conceptual arguments.

5

6

Moyna McGlynn, Divine Judgement and Divine Benevolence in the Book of Wisdom, Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament, 2 Reihe (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2001), 225–45; Larcher, Études, 11–84. G. Scarpat, Libro della Sapienza, Biblica, Testi e Studi 1, 3, 6 (Brescia: Paideia, 1989–1999).

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

Pneuma

19

1.2 Pneuma The Book of Wisdom is marked by the characteristic Hellenistic concern to conceive of the philosophical task in terms of an explanation of the nature of the cosmos.7 Wisdom, however, is not simply a work of philosophy, seeking human happiness as in Epicureanism or Stoicism through conformity with the rational reality of the cosmos, but is particularly concerned with devotion to the Jewish God. Such devotion, as every Jew knew, did not guarantee well-being, peace or happiness in this life. And yet, Wisdom is not prepared to forego hope in connection with this world. While Wisdom knows of a post-mortem existence, the language and relationships in which it is conceived essentially remain of this world. The detailed explanation of why this is so will form an important part of the research presented below. Pneuma in Wisdom is a neglected but thought-provoking topic. The term is used to describe Sophia, the human soul and the ordering element of the cosmos. Given this, any attempt to explicate the theology of the book on these topics which did not, at the least, ask the question of their mutual relation to one another would seem insufficient, although in the study of Wisdom this has largely been the case.8 It is particularly fascinating that this rich and varied use of the one term brings together biblical and philosophical ideas. So, for instance, in Wisdom, pneuma appears as both the human soul and as Sophia, the spirit who resides with sages. The former usage has caused discussion of Platonism in Wisdom9, and the latter is reminiscent of biblical prophetic inspiration. Further, at numerous points the language of pneuma is allusive of Stoic doctrine.10 A further concern in this work is to treat the whole of The Book of Wisdom fairly. Perfectly understandably, the Exodus-Numbers narrative of Wisdom 11–19 has often been taken as illustration of what is stated more clearly in Wisdom 1–5.11 However, once one notices the attempt to explain the miracles of the Exodus in scientific terms, conceived with allusions to the Stoic doctrine of pneuma, it becomes evident that this narrative is no mere succession of symbols. The use of the language of explanation implies that the past events of the Exodus are conceivable as events that could occur in the present. Once the present significance of Wisdom 11–19 has been noted, then one is forced to reassess Wisdom 1–5: in what sense is the ‘death’ of the righteous individual in Wisdom 2 consistent with the preservation from death of the Israelites in Wisdom 19? On the one hand, salvation is appar7

Christopher John Shields (ed.), The Blackwell Guide to Ancient Philosophy (Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell, 2009), 230. 8 A notable exception is Larcher, Études, 329–414. 9 Cf. below, 7.2.3 Immortality and the Community 10 Cf. especially 3. The Order of the Cosmos, below. 11 For example, Johannes Fichtner, Weisheit Salomos, Handbuch zum Alten Testament: Zweite Reihe 6 (Tübingen: J. C. B. Mohr, 1938), 5.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

20

Introduction

ently conceived as an eternal life independent of the cosmos; on the other, salvation is very much an event of this world. The second chapter, below, will address the unity of Wisdom and attempt to establish the plausibility of a reading of Wisdom that begins with the final part of the book and works backwards, so to speak. The simplest way of doing this will be a close reading of Wisdom 10 and an exploration of the way in which the patriarchal narratives of Genesis are invested with the same language as the eschatological deliberations of Wisdom 1–6. Once this unified picture of salvation has been set out, the way will have been cleared for a discussion to proceed of the miracles of the Exodus, observing how salvation was achieved for the people of God. Part Two will contain this study and a further and broader investigation into the nature of the created world which will raise numerous questions concerning the relationship of the Stoic understanding of pneuma to that found in Wisdom as it interacts with the biblical tradition. These questions will be addressed in Part Three (5 Pneuma, Stoicism and Anthropology and 6 Spirit in the Biblical Tradition) and finally in Chapter 9. Providence and Fate in The Book of Wisdom as the topics of anthropology and fate are considered as well as an analysis of the use of ‘spirit’ language. The discussion of the concept of pneuma in Wisdom quickly reveals its relation to the question of eschatology in Wisdom, including the problem of the nature of the soul and the manner in which the created cosmos fulfils its divine, eschatological purpose. It is Part Four that deals with these issues.

1.3 Eschatology The term ‘eschatology’ is a relatively modern one.12 Deriving from the Greek adjective ἔσχατος (‘last’ or ‘final’) and its use in the New Testament (e. g. 2 Tim. 3:1; 2 Pet 3:3; Jude 1:18), it has been used to refer to death, judgement, heaven and hell: the end of the individual and the world. With the renewed enthusiasm that began to flourish in the nineteenth century for the resetting of biblical studies in its developing near-eastern context, the use of the term broadened to the point where it is routinely used as a collective term for any understanding in Greek, Roman or Near Eastern thought of the end of the world, the change of an epoch or life after death.13 The first part of the Book of Wisdom contains some remarkable eschatological statements. In it is found reflection on the post-mortem fate of the 12 The English term originates from Latin works of seventeenth century Protestant theology; the earliest reference in the OED is to the nineteenth century. OED, s. v. ‘Eschatology’; H. Cancik, ‘The End of the World, of History and of the Individual in Greek and Roman Antiquity’, in J. J. Collins/B. McGinn/S. Stein (ed.), The Encyclopedia of Apocalypticism, 3 vol. (New York: Continuum, 1998) i 84–125, on p. 87. 13 Ibid., 87.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

Eschatology

21

righteous and their oppressors (3:1–11; 4:7–5:14) as well as a depiction of an apparent divine global devastation (5:17–23) leading to a ‘trans-historical era’ of the rule of God.14 These texts, however, and the events they describe have proved difficult to systematize. David Winston’s comment, that Wisdom’s eschatological content forms ‘a sort of chiaroscuro, lacking clear definition’, is both memorable and representative. Part of the aim of this work is to offer some fresh clarity with regard to this eschatological language by setting it in the context of other theological and cultural concerns of the book. It will be argued that a helpful way of understanding this language is to consider it ‘realized’, but in order to consider why this term might be appropriate it will be helpful first to discuss some of the alternatives. J. J. Collins offers an analysis in four categories of the ‘eschatologies of late antiquity’: the ‘political’, ‘cosmic’, ‘personal’ and ‘realized’.15 The first category is concerned with reconceiving the political order as a historical process reaching a climactic, teleological moment. This reconception might be in support of, or in resistance to, a current political regime. Examples of this include the Davidic hope expressed in Isaiah 11 that ‘a shoot shall come out from the stock of Jesse’ (v. 1), the anti-Hellenistic Egyptian Potter’s Oracle16 and the motif of ‘four kingdoms and a fifth’ found in Daniel 2, 7, the Persian Bahman Yasht and the Roman Aemilius Sura.17 The last of these presents the Roman era as the climax of history, thus acting as imperial propaganda, while Daniel and the Bahman Yasht express a revolutionary hope that the fifth kingdom – yet to be established – will overthrow the fourth and create a utopian epoch. In summary, eschatological language can refer to historical, political reality, working to validate or undermine established powers by relating them to greater historical or transcendent processes or purposes. Collins’ second category is that of ‘cosmic’ eschatology. What could be understood in the first category to refer to political reality, is taken literally to refer to the end of the world. The relationship between these first two categories is not always easily settled. In Daniel, for instance, the end of the oppressive regime (a political hope) is envisaged in terms of the coming of the one like a son of man (Dan 7) and the transformation of righteous humanity to an angelic state (12:3). A further example is the presence in early Stoic thought of the cyclical conflagration of the cosmos (LS 46). 14 Winston, The Wisdom of Solomon, 33. 15 J. J. Collins, ‘Eschatologies of Late Antiquity’, in Craig A. Evans/Stanley E. Porter (ed.), The Dictionary of New Testament Background (Leicester: Inter-Varsity Press, 2000) 330– 37. 16 Ludwig Koenen, ‘The Prophecies of a Potter: A Prophecy of World Renewal Becomes an Apocalypse’, in Deborah H. Samuel (ed.), Proceedings of the Twelfth International Congress of Papyrology, American Studies in Papyrology, vol. 7 (Toronto: A. M. Hakkert, 1970) 249–54; Ludwig Koenen, ‘The Ptolemaic King as a Religious Figure’, in Anthony W. Bulloch and others (ed.), Images and Ideologies: Self-Definition in the Hellenistic World (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1993) 25–115 [accessed 19th July 2010], on pp. 83–84. 17 Collins, ‘Eschatologies of Late Antiquity’, 330–31.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

22

Introduction

A third eschatological category is the ‘personal’. Within this fall the various expectations found amongst most peoples of a survival of the individual after death.18 Examples of this might be Plato’s understanding of the reincarnation of the soul, the Israelite and Jewish (Sir 41:1–4) understanding of Sheol, and the Christian hope of heaven and resurrection. Collins’ final category is that of ‘realized’ eschatology.19 This term was coined by C. H. Dodd with regard to the nature of the kingdom of God in the gospels, particularly that of John.20 In this kind of eschatology, the future judgement at death and/or at the end of the world is experienced, usually positively, in the present (John 5:24). Other examples would be the understanding that is found in the Dead Sea Scrolls (1QH 11:19–23) of salvation as a present life amongst the angels, or the Gnostic belief in present enlightenment as the precursor to the soul’s freedom from the body at death. An alternative schematization is found in G. B. Caird’s The Language and Imagery of the Bible.21 Within the development of New Testament biblical studies in the previous two centuries he identifies seven forms of eschatology: ‘individual’, ‘historical’, ‘thoroughgoing’ (German: konsequent), ‘realized’, ‘existential’ and ‘purposive’. Caird’s historical category includes Collins’ political category but also extends to encompass the idea of the end of the world: a central concern of his book is to clarify the relationship between the political and the cosmic eschatological language found in the Bible. ‘Thoroughgoing’ eschatology refers to the ideas pioneered in New Testament studies by Weiss and Schweitzer, who were convinced that Jesus taught the imminent end of the world.22 In stark contrast, Dodd argued that the end of the world, its associated judgement and future blessed state, was already present in Christ and made available to disciples. A modification of Dodd’s position, not categorized separately by Caird, was suggested by Jeremias23 amongst others: the eschatology of the Gospels could be described as ‘being in the process of realization’ (sich realisierende Eschatologie) or, more simply, ‘inaugurated’. This scheme preserved both the future elements of Christ’s teaching as well as affirmed the unconditional, completed nature of his words and acts. ‘Existential’ eschatology is associated with Rudolf Bultmann.24 His reading is concerned for the appropriation of the text by the modern world, and so cosmic and personal eschatological language cannot 18 Ibid., 333–36. 19 Ibid., 336. 20 C. H. Dodd, The Parables of the Kingdom (London: Nisbet, 1935); C. H. Dodd, The Apostolic Preaching and its Developments (London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1963). 21 G. B. Caird, The Language and Imagery of the Bible (London: Duckworth, 1980), 243–71. 22 J. Weiss, Die Predigt Jesu vom Reiche Gottes (1892); A. Schweitzer, The Quest of the Historical Jesus (London: A. & C. Black, 1910). 23 Joachim Jeremias, Die Gleichnisse Jesu (Zürich: Zwingli-Verlag, 1947) and subsequent editions; English edition: The Parables of Jesus (London: SCM, 1954). 24 For example, Rudolf Bultmann, ‘New Testament and Mythology’, in Hans-Werner Bartsch (ed.), Kerygma and Myth: A Theological Debate (London: SPCK, 1953) 1–44.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

Eschatology

23

be taken literally but must be understood, in effect, as code for the significance and nature of the individual’s existential decision. Finally, ‘purposive’ eschatology essentially recognizes the teleological nature of history. In conclusion, the different definitions of eschatology listed by Caird are not all mutually exclusive: for instance, purposive and historical eschatology are closely related. Reflection on the above categorizations reveals the somewhat arbitrary nature of the actual term ‘eschatology’. Why, for instance, except for the origin of the term in Christian dogmatics, should the post-mortem fate of individuals be discussed in the same breath as the end of the world? Nonetheless, the term is widely recognized and associated with literary forms that occur in Wisdom and so some assessment of the content of Wisdom in terms of the categories described above will prove helpful. Our assessment of Wisdom’s eschatological content needs consciously to take place in comparison with the other philosophical and theological positions which we know were available to the author(s) of Wisdom. Wisdom has been located within Middle Platonism although without significant discussion.25 However, there is indication within Wisdom that it contains a deeply nuanced and creative interaction with Hellenistic philosophy and culture and with regard to one topic, that of the soul, important reasons to question the depth and nature of the connection in the book to that of Plato.26 In order to address these questions of eschatology, the work will turn first to an assessment of Wisdom and Greek conceptions of the soul (7.2 Greek Conceptions of the After-Life), before conducting a study of two important terms in Wisdom that are used to describe personal eschatological hope, immortality and incorruptibility (7.3 Immortality, Incorruptibility and the Soul in Wisdom). This will conclude with a comparison of these findings with the results of the discussion of Wisdom’s use of the concept of pneuma. An appreciation of Wisdom’s understanding of the after-life can be aided by an investigation of how Wisdom views the gateway to this state – death. This is the topic of a monograph by Michael Kolarcik on Wisdom 1–6.27 Important material for this issue exists elsewhere in Wisdom and so Kolarcik’s detailed reading will be treated alongside a chapter on the question of death and mortality throughout the book (7.4 The Question of Death and

25 Winston approves Collins’ comment that the ‘concept of Wisdom [… ] is intelligible in the context of the Middle Platonic philosophy of his day’. David Winston, ‘A Century of Research on the Book of Wisdom’, in The Book of Wisdom in Modern Research, Angelo Passaro/Giuseppe Bellia (ed.), Deuterocanonical and Cognate Literature Yearbook (Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 2005) 1–18, 11; (cf. Winston, The Wisdom of Solomon, 3); J. J. Collins, Jewish Wisdom in the Hellenistic Age (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1997), 200, 202. 26 Cf. below, 7.3.3 The Platonic Soul in Wisdom? 27 Michael Kolarcik, The Ambiguity of Death in the Book of Wisdom 1–6, An. Bib. 127 (Rome: Editrice Pontificio Istituto Biblico, 1991).

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

24

Introduction

Mortality throughout Wisdom). Following this, the analysis will turn to the question of the manner of the use of Jewish sources in Wisdom’s eschatology (7.5 Jewish Texts and Theology in Wisdom). With all these pieces of the jigsaw in place, it will then be possible to see what is required in order to finish the puzzle: an examination of the person and career of the key figure in Wisdom 1–6, the righteous individual (7.6 The Identity of the Righteous One and Realized Eschatology in Wisdom 1–6). An overview of his career and the place in it of the moment of visitation, a divinely authorized judgement, will allow conclusions to be drawn with regard to the interpretation of the cosmic battle of 5:17–23. It is this passage, in connection with the nature of pneuma depicted in the rest of the book that plays a significant role in leading to the understanding of Wisdom’s eschatology as ‘realized’. Following this, two further studies will conclude Part Four and attempt to consider some practical implications that would have followed from a belief in a realized eschatology. Chapter 8. Hellenistic Kingship and Wisdom attempts to set Wisdom’s view of cosmic kingship alongside the reality of Hellenistic kingship and the philosophic genre of kingship treatises. Finally, Chapter 9 addresses the limits of Wisdom’s engagement with Stoicism, with respect to its understanding of the order of the cosmos, by comparing fate, providence and ethics in Stoicism with Wisdom’s eschatological hope, realized in the cosmic order.

1.4 The Setting of Wisdom 1.4.1 Date and Place of Origin The most likely place of composition of Wisdom was Alexandria. The genuine interest in Greek philosophy, found in Wisdom in common with Philo28, and the extended concern with the Exodus narrative makes this the most likely possibility. The most widely accepted analysis of Wisdom’s date of composition has been given by David Winston.29 He places the work in the reign of Gaius ‘Caligula’ (37–41 CE), arguing that only a ‘desperate historical situation’ such as was experienced by the Jews during this period30 could have summoned the ‘ferocious passion’ of Wisdom’s apocalyptic vision. In addition, the remoteness of the rulers in Wisdom 14:16–20 and the passage’s euhemeristic argument is understood to better fit the Augustan period or later: the Ptolomies had established a full ruler cult but the passage envisages a gradual degeneration into idolatry. Winston is aware that the argument of Wis28 Winston, The Wisdom of Solomon, 59–63. 29 Ibid., 20–25. 30 Cf. below, 8.4 The Jews in Alexandria in the Hellenistic Era.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

The Setting of Wisdom

25

dom 14:12–20 is ætiological but argues that the form such works take is generally shaped by social and historical context.31 On this basis, the word κράτησις (Wis 6:3) is taken to refer to the date of the capture of Alexandria by Augustus32 and σέβασμα (Wis 14:20) to be a possible allusion to σεβαστός, the Greek equivalent of Augustus (e. g. Acts 27:41).33 A further argument is found in the presence of thirty-five words or usages that are not found in secular Greek literature before the first century CE.34 Much of Winston’s evidence is important, if his final conclusion seems less secure. An alternative approach has been used by William Horbury, who argues that the high standing of the work in the Church of the second century CE is hard to understand if it first came to light in the reign of Caligula.35 Against Winston, he argues that the size of the corpus available is simply not large enough to be certain about the dating of words and that neither the κράτησις of 6:3 nor the εἰρήνη of 14:22 need be Augustan. It is true that Wisdom likely betrays social tension between rulers, Jews and Egyptians, but there is within the book no attitude of panic or desperation. Its attitude at most points, even when considering persecution to the point of death, is one of calm rational consideration. The prediction of the downfall of leaders is not expected on the basis of their promulgation of idolatry but rather on their failure to exercise justice. On this issue, some consideration should also be given to the texts of the exhortations to rulers in Wisdom 1:1 and 6:1–9. This style of exhortation undoubtedly draws on biblical precedents36: the use of the Solomonic voice in 6:22 plausibly can be traced all the way to the beginning of the book.37 However, just as Winston argued with regard to the ætiological material in Wisdom 14, we can expect such material to reflect the concerns of the period of composition. Given this, it is at least interesting that Wisdom’s appeal is at every point addressed to multiple rulers. Even the κράτησις of 6:3 is the property of multiple kings and judges. It could be argued that Wisdom appeals to all in authority within a unified hierarchy and it is not clear how seriously the historical situation of the literary fiction of the Solomonic voice should be taken, but these passages do make more sense within the context of the existence or memory of multiple Hellenistic kingdoms. 31 Winston, The Wisdom of Solomon, 22; cf. Marie-Françoise Baslez, ‘The Author of Wisdom and Cultured Environment of Alexandria’, in Angelo Passaro/Giuseppe Bellia (ed.), The Book of Wisdom in Modern Research, Deuterocanonical and Cognate Literature Yearbook (Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 2005) 33–52, on pp. 46–48. 32 Winston, The Wisdom of Solomon, 152–53. 33 Henry George Liddell and others, A Greek-English Lexicon, 9th edn with suppl. (Oxford: Clarendon, 1968; repr. Oxford: Clarendon, 1977), s. v. σεβαστός. 34 Winston, The Wisdom of Solomon, 22. 35 William Horbury, ‘The Christian Use and Jewish Origins of the Wisdom of Solomon’, in John Day/Robert P. Gordon/H. G. M. Williamson (ed.), Wisdom in Ancient Israel (Cambridge: Cambridge University, 1995) 182–96. 36 See, for instance, below, 7.5.3 Psalm 2. 37 Engel, Das Buch der Weisheit, 25–36.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

26

Introduction

In addition, Francis Watson has argued that while no direct citation of Wisdom can be observed in the New Testament, the type and order of argument in Romans 1 appears to follow Wisdom 13–14.38 A similar argument can be used with regard to Philo.39 His Platonic concerns40 appear largely absent from Wisdom but one can note similarities at numerous points in his description of the Exodus41 as well as a common use of Stoic physics.42 It is difficult to know whether Philo’s Platonic concerns are indicative of an individual position or evidence of a general movement within educated Alexandrian Judaism. If the latter, this could also be taken as evidence of Wisdom’s priority and a subsuming by Alexandrian Judaism of Stoicism within the concerns of Middle Platonism. Such arguments could push the dating of Wisdom as far back as the early first century BC.43 More recently two authors have argued for the dating of Wisdom at the time of the establishment in Alexandria in the early Augustan period of the laographia, a poll-tax from which citizens were exempt.44 The tax created social divisions between the Greek citizens and the Jews whose status had been as members of their own internally self-governing section of the city – a politeuma.45 The clarification of Jews as non-citizens, in addition to the 38 A common tradition may be involved but since no such tradition is extant, the simplest solution to the problem of Paul’s engagement with the material is that he was familiar with Wisdom (Francis Watson, Paul and the Hermeneutics of Faith [Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 2004], 405). Davila (James R. Davila, The Provenance of the Pseudepigrapha: Jewish, Christian, or other?, SJSJ 105 [Leiden: Brill, 2005], 219–25, fn. 97) claims that the elements that Wisdom and Romans hold in common could have been derived from Isaiah 44 and other scriptural passages. Horbury’s argument (above, p. 25) works against Wisdom’s dependence on Paul. 39 J. Laporte, ‘Philo in the Tradition of Biblical Wisdom Literature’, in Robert L. Wilken (ed.), Aspects of Wisdom in Judaism and Early Christianity (Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press, 1975) 104–41, on pp. 105–06. 40 A primary issue present in Philo, but not in Wisdom, is the distinction between the ideal eternal and the material (J. C. M. van Winden, ‘The World of Ideas in Philo of Alexandria: An Interpretation of De opificio mundi 24–25’, Vigiliae Christianae, vol. 37, no. 3 (1983) 209–17). This can be seen in Philo’s doctrine of the Logos, understood in relation to creation (e. g. Opif. 24–25; Roberto Radice, ‘Philo’s Theology and Theory of Creation’, in Adam Kamesar [ed.], The Cambridge Companion to Philo (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2009) 124–45, on pp. 136–38), which is not present in Wisdom, and in his treatment of the soul (cf. below, 6.4 Spirit in Philo). 41 Consider Mos. 1.96, 118, 140–43, 156. For a list of similarities, see Winston, The Wisdom of Solomon, 59–63. 42 Cf. below, 1.4.2 Hellenistic Philosophy in Alexandria. 43 Horbury, ‘Christian Use and Jewish Origins’, 185. 44 Baslez, ‘The Author of Wisdom’; Luca Mazzinghi, ‘Wis 19:13–17 and the Civil Rights of the Jews of Alexandria’, in The Book of Wisdom in Modern Research, Angelo Passaro/Giuseppe Bellia (ed.), Deuterocanonical and Cognate Literature Yearbook (Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 2005) 53–82. On the laographia, cf. V. Tcherikover, Hellenistic Civilization and the Jews (Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society of America, 1959; repr. Peabody: Hendrickson, 1999), 311. 45 Many of the details of Jewish self-governance are obscure: Mazzinghi, ‘Wis 19:13–17’, 71– 72; Sylvie Honigman, The Septuagint and Homeric Scholarship in Alexandria: A Study in the Narrative of the Letter of Aristeas (London; New York: Routledge, 2003), 98–101.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

The Setting of Wisdom

27

new financial burden of the tax, may have caused increased controversy over the access of Jews to the gymnasium, the gateway to citizenship.46 This down-grading of the social status of the Jewish community may have contributed to the temptation to apostatize with which Wisdom 2:12 is concerned.47 A further issue is the possible allusive reference (Wis 1:16) to the banqueting club founded by Antony and Cleopatra after Actium (31 BCE), the club of ‘waiting for death in common’ (συναποθανουμένων).48 Balsez understands the reference to be part of a broader condemnation of the hedonism of the banqueting clubs in Wisdom 2:1–20. Although certainty is far from possible and the issue is made no simpler by the possibility that the different sections of Wisdom were composed at different points49, the most sensible stance appears to place Wisdom’s date in the early part of the Augustan period (e. g. 30–20 BCE), when controversy was newly ignited over the status of Jews in Alexandria, when the memory and relevance of Antony and Cleopatra has not yet faded, but also when the newly established dominance of Rome has not replaced the cultural significance of Hellenistic kingship nor made the plural references to the judges of the earth needlessly obscure. Such a position would involve a judicious acceptance of Winston’s evidence, an awareness of growing tensions within the Jewish community without yet any dramatic crisis, and the possibility of widespread Jewish acceptance of the work by the time of Paul. A surprising alternative position has been proposed by James R. Davila.50 His succinct treatment of Wisdom’s authorship is one application of a methodology which is developed over the course of a book. He argues for a reconsideration of pseudepigraphic works that are found only in Christian manuscripts and that do not contain distinctive Jewish concerns. A renewed appreciation for the integrity of the pseudepigraphic voice may even lead to the expectation that an author might advocate the preservation of Jewish boundary-markers that have been rejected by Christianity while he continues to speak using his pseudepigraphic character. This is not the place to engage thoroughly with Davila’s methodology. Nevertheless, several things can be briefly considered. Firstly, as mentioned above, the simplest way to understand Wisdom’s relationship to Romans is to see the latter as depen46 The exclusion of Jews from the gymnasium was confirmed in Claudius’ letter to the Alexandrians (CPJ 153). Mazzinghi (‘Wis 19:13–17’) takes Wis 19:16 (τοὺς ἤδη τῶν αὐτῶν μετεσχηκότας δικαίων) as a direct reference to the loss suffered by the Jews of previously enjoyed rights at the introduction of the laographia. 47 Baslez, ‘The Author of Wisdom’. 48 Ibid., 40–41; Plutarch, Life of Antony, 28.2; 71.4. 49 For example, Maurice Gilbert, ‘The Literary Structure of the Book of Wisdom: A Study of Views’, in Angelo Passaro/Giuseppe Bellia (ed.), The Book of Wisdom in Modern Research, Deuterocanonical and Cognate Literature Yearbook (Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 2005) 19– 32, on p. 29. 50 Davila, The Provenance of the Pseudepigrapha, 219–25.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

28

Introduction

dent on the former. If this solution is correct, then despite the lack of Jewish manuscripts, Wisdom is highly unlikely to have had a Christian origin. Secondly, it will be argued in section 7.6 The Identity of the Righteous One and Realized Eschatology in Wisdom 1–6 that the theology of Wisdom does not place any hope on a saviour figure. The persecuted righteous individual of Wisdom 2–5 operates only as an exemplary sage. Although Davila repeatedly allows for the subtlety of the pseudepigraphic author, an explanation of why a Christian author would write in this way needs to be set out in more detail. Thirdly, it also will be argued below that Wisdom contains an innovative engagement with Stoicism, particularly in its understanding of pneuma. If this is a correct reading of Wisdom, one is forced to ask why a Christian author would attempt such a new conceptualization of the faith using the genre of pseudepigraphy. On the one hand, it might be proposed that the author could claim increased authority for the new ideas by associating them with past heroes of the faith. On the other hand, the connection between these new ideas and explicitly Christian doctrine is left undefined: how does Christ and the Holy Spirit relate to Sophia and the ordering of the cosmos? Why would one introduce a new, potentially contentious, articulation of the faith, that makes allusion to the ideas of Stoicism, in a manner that left the connection of these ideas to key ideas of Christianity undefined? This is subtle indeed. The pseudepigraphic appeal to the authority of past heroes of the faith is useful only when what is being advocated can be connected with relative ease to Christian doctrine. Wisdom was accepted and used within the Church51 and the simplest explanation for this is that it was already known in at least some of the Jewish synagogues.52 Wisdom is an unusual work in numerous ways, but its distinctiveness cannot be attributed to its origin in Christianity.

1.4.2 Hellenistic Philosophy in Alexandria At least during the third and second centuries, Alexandria was not renowned for its philosophy. Athens remained the centre for philosophical study, hosting the Academy, Lyceum, and the original centres for Stoicism and Epicureanism.53 Alexandria’s scholarship in the Library and Museum was primarily in literary scholarship and scientific endeavour.54 Only in the first cen51 See Moyna McGlynn, Divine Judgement, 225–45. 52 Martin Hengel, The Septuagint as Christian Scripture: Its Prehistory and the Problem of the Its Canon, assisted by Roland Deines (Edinbugh: T&T Clark, 2002), 123. 53 P. M. Fraser, Ptolemaic Alexandria, 3 vol. (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1972) i, 480. 54 Fraser, Ptolemaic Alexandria i, 317–19; on medical research, ibid., 359–69; Mostafa ElAbbadi, ‘Aspects of Scholarship and the Library in Ptolemaic Alexandria’, Diogenes, vol. 36, no. 141 (1988) 21–37, on pp. 32–37; James Longrigg, Greek Rational Medicine (London: Routledge, 1993), 177–219; on literary studies and philology, El-Abbadi, ‘Aspects’, 21–32; Kathryn Gutzwiller, A Guide to Hellenistic Literature (Oxford: Blackwell, 2007), 19–24.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

The Setting of Wisdom

29

tury BCE does this situation appear to have changed.55 Two philosophers are of note, particularly with regard to Wisdom. Antiochus of Ascalon, who spent a period in Alexandria from 87 to c. 78 BCE in the company of the Roman statesman Lucullus56, and Eudorus. Antiochus is depicted in Cicero’s Academica railing against the New Scepticism of his teacher Philo of Larisa and insisting on the validity and unity of Academic tradition before scepticism.57 In fact, he insisted on the unity of all the great dogmatic schools in everything except minor issues, viewing Zeno as working within the system of the Old Academy and the Peripatetics as differing from the Stoics in terminology only.58 Antiochus’ position became the recognized form of Academic philosophy in Alexandria.59 His new dogmatism can be termed ‘eclectic’ in that it brought together multiple systems and was influential for Cicero although the term itself leaves entirely open the question of how the systems were brought together.60 Eudorus (64 BCE – 19 CE) appears to be evidence of Platonic teaching in Alexandria independent of Antiochus.61 His chief work was an encylopaedia of philosophy in which the main problems of philosophy were listed and the various solutions provided by different philosopher.62 He is also known to have commented on the Timaeus.63 For our purposes, it is worth noting that Antiochus, and likely also Eudorus, accepted a Stoic materialist view of physics.64 Antiochus, however, stands before the subsequent emphasis on immaterial substance and divine transcendence in Platonism, influenced by Pythagorean transcendentalism and number mysticism and evidenced by Eudorus and Philo of Alexandria.65 55 Mithridates’ advance on Athens in 88 BCE led to the flight of many philosophers, including Antiochus, to Rome; the conquest of Athens in 87 BCE by Sulla led to the destruction of Academy, at least temporarily, and the removal of the Lyceum’s library to Rome (John M. Dillon, The Middle Platonists: A Study of Platonism, 80 B. C. to A. D. 220 (London: Duckworth, 1977), 53; Michael Frede, ‘Epilogue’, in Keimpe Algra and others (ed.), The Cambridge History of Hellenistic Philosophy (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999) 771–97, on pp. 790–91). 56 Cicero, Fin. 6; Dillon, The Middle Platonists, 54, 60. 57 Dillon, The Middle Platonists, 55–56; Fraser, Ptolemaic Alexandria i, 487. 58 Cicero, N. D. 1.16; Acad. 1.35, 43; Fraser, Ptolemaic Alexandria i, 488; A. A. Long, Hellenistic Philosophy, (London: Duckworth, 21986), 224; Frede, ‘Epilogue’, 783. 59 Fraser, Ptolemaic Alexandria i, 488–89. 60 John Glucker, ‘Cicero’s philosophical affiliations’, in John M. Dillon/A. A. Long (ed.), The Question of “Eclecticism” (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1988) 34–69, on pp. 45– 50, 63–64; Fraser, Ptolemaic Alexandria i, 488. Eclecticism presupposes a new attitude towards ‘authorities’ of philosophy, positive and negative, and this can be seen in the return to Plato, Aristotle and older texts and the production of commentaries (Frede, ‘Epilogue’, 784, 786). 61 Strabo 17.790; Dillon, The Middle Platonists, 115. 62 Stobaeus 2.42.7; Dillon, The Middle Platonists, 116. 63 Plutarch, An. Proc. 1013B. 64 Dillon, The Middle Platonists, 52–113; Frede, ‘Epilogue’, 776; on Eudorus, Dillon, The Middle Platonists, 129, who points out that a materialist view of the heavens need not conflict with the idea of a transcendent supreme God. 65 Dillon, The Middle Platonists, 114–83; Frede, ‘Epilogue’, 788.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

30

Introduction

It should be noted, however, that in the time of Wisdom’s composition and in such a large city, and as Antiochus’ short stay and Eudorus’ encyclopaedic work demonstrate, philosophers of all types and knowledge of such types would have been present in some form or another.66

1.4.3 The Sources of Stoicism The primary area of philosophical engagement in Wisdom with which this work is concerned is that of Stoic physics. The establishment of this body of thought was achieved primarily through the first three heads of the Stoa, Zeno (c. 334-c. 262), Cleanthes (c. 331-c. 230) and Chrysippus (281–277 – c. 203).67 The sources for Hellenistic philosophy are scarce and diverse. There are very few extant Stoic works.68 What has been preserved is found firstly in Cicero (106–43 BCE), who in many cases presents opinions different from his own fairly, and in Philo of Alexandria (20–10 – >40), who uses and interacts with Hellenistic philosophy.69 Fragments of Stoic physics are found in Eusebius (260–340) and Stobaeus (c. 5th C.). Plutarch (>45 – >120) is a further source of information in his works against the Stoics (particularly De Stoicorum repugnantiis and De communibus notitiis contra Stoicos). Galen’s (c. 130 – c. 210) work De Placita Hippocratis et Platonis is important for Chrysippus’ psychology.70 Two of Alexander of Aphrodisias’ (died after 200 CE) works are against Stoicism (De fato and De mixtione). Another important source is Diogenes Laertius (c. 3rd C.) whose seventh book of his work on the lives of the philosophers covers the Stoics. 66 In passing, two more figures can be noted. Firstly, Aenesidemus of Cnossus established a Pyrrhonic school in Alexandria in 50–40 BCE (Fraser, Ptolemaic Alexandria i, 491). Secondly, the specialist in Egyptian religion Chaeremon, who was a member of the Egyptian embassy to Gaius in 40 CE, was known as a Stoic. In the words of Mansfeld, ‘if even an Egyptian could be a Stoic in Alexandria, there must, of course, have been other Stoics in town’. (Jaap Mansfeld, ‘Philosophy in the service of scripture’, in John M. Dillon/A. A. Long (ed.), The Question of “Eclecticism” (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1988) 70–102, on p. 77). Note as well, Frede’s insistence that Stoicism remained the dominant movement well into the second century CE (Frede, ‘Epilogue’, 778). 67 Tiziano Dorandi, ‘Chronology’, in Keimpe Algra and others (ed.), The Cambridge History of Hellenistic Philosophy (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999) 31–54, on p. 38. 68 Cleanthes’ Hymn is preserved in Stobaeus (1.25.3–27.4). Fragments from Chrysippus have been found at Herculaneum (Pherc. 307). Diogenes Laertes records catalogues of Stoic titles for the lives he records, giving some indication of what is missing (e. g. 8.4, Zeno; 7.174–75, Cleanthes; 7.189–202, Chrysippus). The likely reason for this lies in the decline and loss of the institutional basis of Stoicism in the second and third centuries CE (Jaap Mansfeld, ‘Sources’, in Keimpe Algra and others (ed.), The Cambridge History of Hellenistic Philosophy (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999) 3–30, on p. 3), as well, possibly, as the very practical turn the school took under Epictetus (John Sellars, Stoicism [Berkeley and Los Angeles, California: University of California Press, 2006], 25–30). 69 Frede, ‘Epilogue’, 7–8. 70 Sellars, Stoicism, 21–22.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

The Setting of Wisdom

31

The extraction and reconstruction of Stoic doctrines from such evidence is a difficult task. Each piece of fragmentary evidence comes from a unique context and is not always presented by its champions.71 The choice of material referred to in this work has largely been made on the basis of its nature as being representative of the broader reconstructions by experts in the field of Stoic systems which pre-date Wisdom.72 In no case is it argued that Wisdom is textually dependent on any Stoic work73 or fragment and references will, on occasion, be made to works later than Wisdom where it appears likely that the doctrine being discussed has an earlier origin. Readers will, in most cases, find references to fragments given in terms of the work in which it is found, as well as its location in Stoicorum veterum fragmenta and Long and Sedley.74

1.4.4 Genre The question of the genre of Wisdom has not been settled. The two primary proposals come from the categories of Greek rhetoric. They are that Wisdom is a λόγος προτρεπτικός or ‘speech of exhortation’ or that it is an encomium75, a speech of praise. According to Aristotle, exhortation, along with its opposite dissuasion, is the purpose of deliberative rhetoric; this is the language of the political assembly, although it is not limited to it, and argues over the benefits of future courses of action.76 In the context of Hellenistic 71 Hence the warning concerning modern collections of fragments by Mansfeld (‘Sources’, 27). 72 In particular, David Sedley, ‘Hellenistic Physics and Metaphysics’, in Keimpe Algra and others (ed.), The Cambridge History of Hellenistic Philosophy (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999) 355–411; R. J. Hankinson, ‘Determinism and Indeterminism’, in Keimpe Algra and others (ed.), The Cambridge History of Hellenistic Philosophy (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999) 513–41; R. J. Hankinson, ‘Explanation and Causation’, in Keimpe Algra and others (ed.), The Cambridge History of Hellenistic Philosophy (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999) 479–512; Long, Hellenistic Philosophy, 1999; A. A. Long, ‘Stoic Psychology’, in Keimpe Algra and others (ed.), The Cambridge History of Hellenistic Philosophy (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999) 560–84; Malcolm Schofield, The Stoic Idea of the City (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1991; repr. London: University of Chicago Press, 1999); Malcolm Schofield, ‘Social and Political Thought’, in Keimpe Algra and others (ed.), The Cambridge History of Hellenistic Philosophy (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999) 739–70; Sellars, Stoicism; R. W. Sharples, Stoics, Epicureans and Sceptics (London: Routledge, 1996). 73 Both the nature of the Stoic evidence and Wisdom’s allusive literary style render such connections unlikely. 74 A. A. Long/D. N. Sedley, The Hellenistic Philosophers, 2 vol. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1987). 75 ‘A transliteration of the Latin form of the Greek ἐγκώμιον’: David. E. Aune, The Westminster Dictionary of New Testament and Early Christian Literature and Rhetoric (Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2003), 145. 76 Aristotle, Rhet. 1.3.3. Cf. Abraham J. Malherbe, Moral Exhortation, A Greco-Roman Sourcebook (Philadelphia: The Westminster Press, 1986), 121–24.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

32

Introduction

philosophy, however, the λόγος προτρεπτικός is an exhortation to conversion to the way of life and thought practised in a school or by a philosopher.77 No explicitly named protreptic documents are extant from the Hellenistic period although material does exist from earlier and from the Roman period.78 Significant variety of form was possible, including discourses, letters and dialogues.79 Within modern Wisdom studies the identification of the book as a λόγος προτρεπτικός has been widely discussed and advocated.80 Solomon calls the rulers of the earth (and implicitly those who read it) to love righteousness and seek after Sophia, and presents himself as the ideal sage to be emulated and his teaching as a faithful guide to the acquisition of Sophia (e. g. 6:9; 7:1). Such an identification of Wisdom may involve an understanding of Judaism, at least in some sense, as a philosophical school81 and this idea is substantiated by the philosophical engagement within Wisdom.82 The other genre proposed for Wisdom as a whole is that of the encomium.83 This genre was part of the broad category of demonstrative or epideictic rhetoric.84 An encomium, a speech of praise, could be directed to Gods or human beings85 and could praise anything deemed worthy of praise by the community for the sake of the thing being praised, for the reinforcement of shared community values86 but also as an exercise in demonstrating the rhetorical gifts of the speaker.87 The content and context of any speech would inevitably determine the precise use of the genre. In broad outline, 77 Dirk, M. Schenkeveld, ‘Philosophical Prose’, in Stanley E. Porter (ed.), Handbook of Classical Rhetoric in the Hellenistic Period (330 B. C. – A. D. 400) (Leiden: Brill, 1997) 195–264, on p. 204; Aune, The Westminster Dictionary, 383. 78 Schenkeveld, ‘Philosophical Prose’, 205. 79 Ibid. 80 Reese, Hellenistic Influence, 117–21; Winston, The Wisdom of Solomon, 18–20; David Winston, Book Review, CBQ, vol. 48 (1986) 525–27; Engel, Das Buch der Weisheit, 25–36; J. J. Collins, ‘The Reinterpretation of Apocalyptic Traditions in the Wisdom of Solomon’, Jewish Cult and Hellenistic Culture: Essays on the Jewish Encounter with Hellenism and Roman Rule, SJSJ, vol. 100 (Leiden: Brill, 2005) 143–58, on p. 143. 81 Cf. below, 1.4.5 Addressees of Wisdom. 82 For example, below, 3.3 The Exodus and The Elements and 3.4 Sophia and Pneuma. 83 Latin transliteration of Gk. ἐγκώμιον; Gilbert, ‘Literary Structure’; Maurice Gilbert, ‘Wisdom Literature’, in Michael E. Stone (ed.) Jewish Writings of the Second Temple Period (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1984) 283–324, on pp. 306–09; Lester L. Grabbe, Wisdom of Solomon (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1997), 26–27; Winston, Book Review, 525–26. 84 According to Kennedy, the most problematic of the three general categories of rhetoric (G. A. Kennedy, ‘The Genres of Rhetoric’, in Stanley E. Porter (ed.), Handbook of Classical Rhetoric in the Hellenistic Period (330 B. C. – A. D. 400) (Leiden: Brill, 1997) 43–50, on p. 45). It could include any speech ‘that does not aim at a specific action or decision but seeks to enhance knowledge, understanding or belief, often through praise or blame, whether of persons things or values. It is thus an important feature of cultural or group cohesion’. 85 Aune, The Westminster Dictionary, 145–47. 86 Kennedy, ‘The Genres of Rhetoric’, 45. 87 Aristole, Rhet. 1.3.3.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

The Setting of Wisdom

33

understood within this genre, Wisdom 6–9 would form the encomium proper in praise of Sophia88 and includes a characteristic discussion of the origin of the figure of praise (6:22)89, Wisdom 1–6 would form an extended introduction / exordium (Gk. προόιμιον)90 and Wisdom 10–19 would be a section of synkrisis (σύγρισις), or comparison, that considers the actions of the praised individual given their spiritual excellences.91 To identify Wisdom as an encomium emphasizes the religious aspects of the book and perhaps makes sense of the allusive rather than strict use of philosophical language in Wisdom.92 Although a strict division between religion and philosophy cannot always be easily maintained in this period93, a general distinction can be made between an attitude of devotion and worship (expressed in an encomium) and the act of philosophical argument (expressed for instance in a dialogue or diatribe), without implying in any way that they are antithetical. While it is clear that Wisdom 6–9 serves to praise Wisdom and fits well the encomiastic genre, two questions can be raised about the identification of Wisdom as a whole as an encomium. Firstly, to describe Wisdom 1–6 as the exordium is surprising. These chapters could be seen as an introduction in the way they introduce the main topic of Sophia (Wis 1:4; 6:9; Arist. Rhet. 3.14.6), although their threatening tone could hardly be described as a conventional attempt to dispel prejudice and capture the reader’s goodwill (Wis 1:16; 5:1; Arist. Rhet. 3.14.7, 11).94 If they were to be seen as exordium, the full significance of their discussion of what is at stake for humans in their attitude to Sophia through the use of apocalyptic and biblical material, would still need to be emphasized. Secondly, although synkrisis can be used

88 This may have been influenced by aretologies to the goddess Isis (Engel, Das Buch der Weisheit, 132–42). Precise and extended literary connections between Wisdom and the aretalogies have proved elusive, despite Reese’s list of over fifty similarities (Hellenistic Influence, 46–49). Comparative, mythological analysis may offer more potential as part of a cumulative case (Burton Lee Mack, Logos und Sophia (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1973), 63–72, 90–95; John S. Kloppenborg, ‘Isis and Sophia in the Book of Wisdom’, HTR, vol. 75, no. 1 (1982) 58–84). The argument that Wisdom 6–10 follows the hymnic structure of the Isis aretalogies (Reese, Hellenistic Influence, 43, building on A. J. Festugière, ‘À Propos des Arétalogies d’Isis’, HTR, vol. 42, no. 4 (1949) 209–34) is undermined by the problem that the classical Greek hymn was not the unique possession of the worshippers of Isis. For other discussions of the relation of Sophia to Isis, see Reese, Hellenistic Influence, 36–50; Winston, The Wisdom of Solomon, 37–38. Finally, Collins (Jewish Wisdom, 204) offers two words of caution: when Wisdom attacks pagan cults openly in chapters 13–15 there is no obvious focus on Isis; additionally, we have no evidence in Wisdom or elsewhere, that Jewish people found the cult of Isis particularly tempting or challenging. Cf. below, fn. 112 on p. 152. 89 Aune, The Westminster Dictionary, 146. 90 Ibid., 175. 91 Ibid. 92 Consider, for instance, Wis 8:19–20; 9:15 discussed in more detail below in 7.3.3 The Platonic Soul in Wisdom? 93 For example, Long, Hellenistic Philosophy, 149. 94 Winston, Book Review, 526.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

34

Introduction

in an encomium in order to liken an individual ‘to other heroic personalities’95 or, for instance, to contrast a divine being and his or her actions with those of a lesser being, the role of synkrisis in Wisdom 10–19 is not quite so straightforward. Here, the contrast is made not between Sophia and some other rival, but between the righteous and the wicked where the righteous are aided by Sophia and the wicked are not (9:18). Further, in Wisdom 11– 19, Sophia herself recedes into the background and it is God’s actions that are discussed directly. To complicate matters further, it is important not to overlook the significance of Wisdom being a pseudepigraphical work.96 To describe Wisdom as a λόγος προτρεπτικός or as an encomium may be true but it risks leaving important aspects of the literary nature of the work without remark. The work is not merely a written speech within its contemporary context, whether of persuasion or praise, but one that that has at least two interpretative layers.97 Solomon addresses in his speech, of persuasion or praise or both, the rulers of the nations of his day. This is the first interpretative layer. The second involves the contemporary reader listening to this council and drawing their own conclusions. One additional issue that is of relevance for the discussion of the genre of the work is the style of language that is used. Although Wisdom is comfortable demonstrating a ‘rich and spontaneous’ Greek eloquence98, for instance in the sorites of 6:17–20 and the use of homoioteleuton, paranomasia and anaphora, the primary poetic form that is used throughout the book is not Greek verse but the parallelism found in Semitic poetry.99 Given the above, however, some conclusion needs to be reached as to the genre of the speech that Solomon gives. Firstly, caution needs to be exercised in insisting that Wisdom fit one genre. Works of mixed genre were known in the period, some self-conscious of their eclecticism and others not.100 Secondly, given Winston’s comment, that it is ‘extremely difficult to determine 95 Ibid. 96 Engel (Das Buch der Weisheit, 25–36) contains substantial consideration of what it means for the whole of Wisdom to be considered a speech of Solomon. For discussion of ancient attitudes towards pseudepigraphy and bibliography see Aune (The Westminster Dictionary, 387–88). 97 Even if we presume that Wisdom’s earliest readers understood with its author its origin and nature as a literary fiction (although we have no evidence to make such a judgement), Solomon’s words remain one step removed from the immediate context because they refer firstly to the Solomonic setting. See Honigman, The Septuagint and Homeric Scholarship (especially 77–81) for a discussion of ‘truth’ and ‘lies’ in relation to the Book of Aristeas (a work from a similar, though earlier, context to Wisdom) with a conclusion that ‘the notion of fiction was alien to Greek thought’, that different sources had to coincide and that a true account had to conform ‘to the law of nature’ (79). 98 Winston (Wisdom of Solomon, 14–18) offers a generous selection of examples. 99 Engel, Das Buch der Weisheit, 15–19. 100 Aune, The Westminster Dictionary, 419–20, 307; Gutzwiller, A Guide to Hellenistic Literature, 173–74.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

The Setting of Wisdom

35

whether Wisdom is an epideictic composition with an admixture of protreptic, or essentially a protreptic with a considerable element of epideictic’101, one has to turn again to the question of content and context: is Wisdom and its Jewish writer primarily concerned with philosophical truth (1:1) and its ethical consequences (2:21) or with the praise of Sophia (6:12) and her Lord (8:3; 19:22)? The picture of Judaism in Wisdom that is set out in this work encourages the conclusion that one cannot give a final answer to this question both because the form of Wisdom does not fit perfectly into either genre but also because the underlying philosophical theology of Wisdom is itself uncomfortable separating the discussion of physics and ethics from morality, judgement, God and worship.102 In understanding Judaism as true philosophy and calling individuals to embark on a philosophical way of life, Wisdom insists that the aspiring philosopher must interact with Sophia and so be led to worship the Jewish God who is also the creator of all.

1.4.5 Addressees of Wisdom Although at various points and in various ways, educated Judaism of the Diaspora aimed to reach beyond ethnic boundaries and justify its social position by reconceptualizing itself and its law as philosophically universal and foundational, in Wisdom’s case, with its extensive use of biblical resources, it is hard to imagine how Wisdom would operate if it was used to address those outside the Jewish community. The most likely addressees are Jewish students, challenged by the task of managing the attractions of acceptance in the ruling Hellenistic culture and loyalty to Jewish community and tradition.103 The mention of Jewish students raises the question of the context of their learning. There is a marked absence of discussion of this in literature on Wisdom, although this is likely a reflection of the absence of direct evidence outside of the text.104 Leonhardt offers a helpful discussion of Philo’s depiction of Sabbath assemblies in the proseuche105 as a school of philosophy (Spec. 2.61–63; Mos. 2.215–16).106 Philo’s understanding of the Sabbath is 101 Winston, Book Review, 527. 102 A similar conclusion is reached by Engel (Das Buch der Weisheit, 23) in his discussion of the synkrisis of 11–19 when he notes that the simple assignment to the rhetorical form would result in the implicit references to the Scriptures being neglected, as well as the change to a direct form of address to God (10:20). 103 Reese, Hellenistic Influence, 146–51. The identification of Jewish students as the addressees does not limit the extent of the possible recipients of Sophia’s blessings to the Jews (Greg Schmidt-Goering, ‘Election and Knowledge in the Wisdom of Solomon’, in Géza G. Xeravits/József Zsengellér (ed.), Studies in the Book of Wisdom, SJSJ, vol. 142 (Leiden: Brill, 2010) 163–82). 104 Engel, Das Buch der Weisheit, 30. 105 Or ‘house of prayer’: Joseph Mélèze Modrzejewski, The Jews of Egypt (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1995), 91–93. 106 Jutta Leonhardt, Jewish Worship in Philo of Alexandria, Texts and Studies in Ancient Juda-

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

36

Introduction

grounded in an interpretation of Genesis and the cosmic significance of the number seven (Opif. 89–128; Spec. 2.56–70); the Sabbath is ordained by God for the rest of the body and the development of the mind (Decal. 96–105).107 During the Sabbath assembly, the emphasis is placed on the reading and explanation of the ‘holy laws’ (ἱεροὶ νόμοι: Hyp. 7.11–14; cf. Somn. 2.127; Mos. 2.215–16).108 Although Philo’s concern to present Judaism as philosophy, and all attendees at the Sabbath assembly as in some sense students, may betray his own apologetic concerns109, it is at least plausible that these concerns would have been shared by the author and audience of Wisdom, given the connections between the two.110 The question of Wisdom’s relationship to such a context, however, remains unanswered. In the case of Philo we may speculate that the Quaestiones represent his own homiletical notes111 but Wisdom is not of this form. The extent of any use of diatribal form in Wisdom 1–6112 does not seem sufficient for the whole to be regarded as an educative text of philosophical debate. Further, the question may also be asked as to whether Wisdom falls into the category of scripture or interpretation: is Wisdom itself a text which was read in the Sabbath assembly, or a text which aimed to help the reader interpret Scripture? Philo himself predominantly restricts his comments to the Pentateuch113, although he was aware of other Jewish groups which, apparently, placed a higher value on others texts.114 Hengel speculates that the use of Tobit, Judith, Sirach and Wisdom for the instruction of catechumens in the early churches may be an

ism 84 (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2001), 81–95; cf. Jutta Leonhardt-Balzer, ‘Jewish Worship and Universal Identity in Philo of Alexandria’, in Jörg Frey/Daniel R. Schwartz/Stephanie Gripentrog (ed.), Jewish Identity in the Greco-Roman World (Leiden: Brill, 2007) 29–53, on pp. 44–53. 107 Ibid., 55–70. 108 Ibid., 83–86, 89–91. 109 Ibid., 99–100. Leonhardt’s (Jewish Worship, 283–92) proposal – that Philo positions Judaism, its worship and laws, as a realization of Plato’s ideal relationship between traditional cult and society set out in the Nomoi and thus as a legitimate cult and philosophy within Alexandrian society – is strengthened by its similarity to Honigman’s (The Septuagint and Homeric Scholarship, 8, 37–63) argument that Aristeas functions as a ‘charter myth’ for the LXX, declaring it an authoritative, accurate and royally sanctioned law for the Jewish community in Alexandria within the overarching Ptolemaic regime. While Honigman’s work appeals to different facets of Alexandrian society, particularly the best practices of Alexandrian scholarship as practised by Aristarchus (ibid., 130–35) in his edition of Homer, both proposals reveal a similar concern to establish and sustain the position of the Jewish community within wider society using cultural tools. 110 Winston, The Wisdom of Solomon, 59–63. 111 Leonhardt, Jewish Worship, 93–95. 112 Winston, The Wisdom of Solomon, 20. 113 Adam Kamesar, ‘Biblical Interpretation in Philo’, in Adam Kamesar (ed.), The Cambridge Companion to Philo (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2009) 65–91, on pp. 71–72. 114 He comments on the assemblies of the Therapeutae (Contempl. 25), who in addition to the laws, prophets and psalms, daily read ‘other books through which knowledge and piety are supported and perfected’ (translation, Leonhardt, Jewish Worship, 92).

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

The Setting of Wisdom

37

indication that they played an analogous role in a number of synagogues.115 Aside from this question of the relation of Wisdom to Sabbath assemblies, we do not know the extent to which the synagogue employed and trained scribes, or contributed to the general literacy of the Jewish population.116 Philo himself projects an ideal of Jewish participation in the gymnasium (Spec. 2.230)117, and emphasizes the synagogues role in teaching philosophy to all Jews on the Sabbath. The identity of the author remains a mystery. Engel speculates that the author would most likely be a Jewish scribe working within the synagogue, who has himself received and valued a Greek education but who is now responding to the loss of status of the Jewish community118 which has caused some members either to renounce their Jewish identity or to distance themselves from the rest of the community.119 He argues that the author’s social status possibly was not high120 and this may account for the anonymity of the work and its pseudepigraphical nature. This raises the question of how such an individual might have received his education. The scribal profession in Egypt followed the model of Hellenism and was not viewed as a role with interpretative authority. In Alexandrian Judaism, it was the philosophically trained – those who had reached the higher stages of Greek education121, such as Philo122 – who appear to have had the responsibility of interpreting the law.123 It does not seem likely that professional scribal training would have extended to this, although one might speculate that Wisdom’s diverse philosophical engagement was actually the result of learning within the Jewish ‘school’ of the synagogue described by Philo.

115 Hengel, Septuagint as Christian Scripture, 123. Other than this, the reason why Wisdom and not, for instance, Enoch came to be included in Christian ‘canon lists’ ‘remains a mystery’ (ibid., 113). 116 The gymnasium was for prospective citizens; the wealthy might hire tutors and certain professions, such as that of the scribe, would have required training but the ideal of public education is a modern concept (Lester L. Grabbe, ‘Scribes and Synagogues’, in J. W. Rogerson/ Judith M. Lieu (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Biblical Studies (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006) 362–71, on p. 366). 117 Daniel R. Schwartz, ‘Philo, His Family, and His Times’, in Adam Kamesar (ed.), The Cambridge Companion to Philo (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2009) 9–31, on p. 18; Martin Hengel, Judaism and Hellenism (London: SCM, 1974), 67–69. 118 See the above discussion of the dating of Wisdom. 119 Engel, Das Buch der Weisheit, 30–34. 120 Engel, Das Buch der Weisheit, 34. 121 Teresa Morgan, Literate Education in Hellenistic and Roman Worlds (Cambridge: Cambridge university Press, 1998), 193. 122 On what can be said of Philo’s career and education: Schwartz, ‘Philo’, 10–12, 18. 123 Christine Schams, Jewish Scribes in the Second-Temple Period, JSOTSup 291 (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1998), 260–65, 288–89; Grabbe (‘Scribes and Synagogues’, 369) suggests all synagogues would have required a professional scribe for the management of documents.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

2. The Unity of Wisdom 2.1 Introduction This chapter will argue that Wisdom presents a unified picture of salvation. This will provide a solid basis for the fuller investigation of the nature of that salvation in the following chapters. The question of a single or composite authorship1 will be left to one side for a concentration on an argument for the literary, thematic and particularly theological unity of the work as it has been received in its final form.2

2.2 Literary Unity Early attempts to discern the structure of Wisdom concentrated on the presence and transition of different themes within the book.3 It was particularly the work of A. G. Wright and J. M. Reese which encouraged the recognition of a detailed literary structure within the book that could clarify and delimit the thematic content.4 Wright produced detailed work on the presence of numerical patterns within Wisdom, inspired by the stichometric (a stich here being a line on a manuscript) analysis of P. W. Skehan but instead using verse divisions.5 Part of Wright’s observations was the concentric structure of Wisdom 1–6, in which the number of verses in 1:1–15 mirrors that in 6:1–21, and the number of verses in 1:16–2:24 mirrors that in 5:1–23. It was Reese who identified the three primary literary structuring techniques applied by 1

2 3 4 5

The inconclusive arguments for disunity from the 19th and early 20th century – largely based on a variety of emphases and subjects in the book – have, of late, been put to one side on the basis of the work’s consistently elaborate, if varied, literary style (Winston, The Wisdom of Solomon, 12–14; A. G. Wright, ‘The Structure of Wisdom 11–19’, CBQ, vol. 27 (1965) 28– 34; A. G. Wright, ‘Numerical Patterns in the Book of Wisdom’, CBQ, vol. 29 (1967) 524– 38; A. G. Wright, ‘The Structure of the Book of Wisdom’, Biblica 48 (1967) 165–84; J. M. Reese, ‘Plan and Structure in the Book of Wisdom’, CBQ, vol. 27 (1965) 391–99; cf. below 2.2), the common purpose of the variety of genre used (Reese, Hellenistic Influence, 90–121; cf. below 2.2) as well as the observation of a common stock of imagery across the sections (Michael Kolarcik, ‘The Book of Wisdom’, in The New Interpreter’s Bible, vol. 5 (Nashville: Abingdon, 1997), 435–600, on pp. 441–42). Although, if successful, this argument can be added to those in fn. 1 above as part of a cumulative case. Kolarcik, Ambiguity of Death, 3–4. A. G. Wright, ‘Structure of Wisdom 11–19’; A. G. Wright, ‘Numerical Patterns’; A. G. Wright, ‘The Structure of the Book of Wisdom’; Reese, ‘Plan and Structure’. Patrick Skehan, ‘The Text and Structure of the Book of Wisdom’, Traditio 3 (1945).

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

40

The Unity of Wisdom

the author of the Book of Wisdom as inclusion, parallelism6 and flashbacks7 and Wright again who built upon the first two of the preceding three techniques in a more detailed and systematic description of the literary structure of the entire book.8 It should be noted that, on the one hand, no single literary structure exists for the entire book and that the individual literary units are delimited by different literary structures and consequently no argument can be made that the work consists in one overarching literary structure. On the other hand, it is still significant that literary structuring is used throughout the book, even if the manner of structuring varies. Overall, however, Wright’s method of seeking a ‘convergence of indices’, that is, the agreement of multiple literary and conceptual indicators of structure, seems eminently sensible. A further attempt to demonstrate the unity of the book has been made by Reese in his work on genre.9 Reese’s overall conclusion, that the genre of Wisdom is that of logos protreptikos, has been discussed above.10 Within Wisdom, Reese identifies four subsections (the digressions of 11:15–15:19 are taken as a single section), each having their own genre and it is the combination of the four which he argues leads to the overall effect and purpose of the work.11 Reese identifies the genre of the first section of Wisdom, which he takes to be Wisdom 1:1–6:11 + 6:17–20, as ‘diatribe’.12 Diatribe is likely to have been shaped by its origin as ‘records of oral classroom discussions’13 in philosophical schools. It is not in fact a dialogue but rather a monologue that anticipates and deals with objections. The purpose of the diatribe is persuasion to a more ethical way of life, and it often employs rhetorical means to achieve this end, mixing logic with exhortation.14 Given this outline of diatribe, this section of Wisdom can hardly be described as such.15 This is not

Reese, ‘Plan and Structure’. Reese, Hellenistic Influence, 123–45. A. G. Wright, ‘Structure of the Book of Wisdom’. Reese, Hellenistic Influence, 90–121. See above, 1.4.4 Genre. Reese, Hellenistic Influence, 90–91, 117–21. Ibid., 109–14. Ibid., following Stanley Kent Stowers, The Diatribe and Paul’s Letter to the Romans (Chico, California: Scholars Press, 1981). 14 Schenkeveld, ‘Philosophical Prose’, 232. Whether diatribe should be understood as a formal genre or as an informal literary style is perhaps not the point here (Aune, The Westminster Dictionary, 127–28). 15 Reese offers five reasons for identifying this section as diatribe: the first, that Wisdom uses ‘the device of addressing rulers’ (Reese, Hellenistic Influence, 110–11), may well be an indication of Wisdom’s Hellenistic context, but it is not a specific indicator of the presence of diatribe; the second (ibid., 111), the sustained logical appeal for moral uprightness, is consonant with diatribe but does not demand its presence; the third, the use of an imaginary opponent (ibid., 111–12; Winston, The Wisdom of Solomon, 20), is a characteristic of diatribe, but Wisdom does not present its opponents as imaginary interlocutors, but rather as 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

Literary Unity

41

to say that such forms have not at all influenced this section of Wisdom, but rather to argue that because of the absence of any real discussion or conversational tone, and indeed the formality of the structure of Wisdom 1–616, it does not seem accurate to characterize this section of Wisdom in this way. Consequently, the argument for the unity of Wisdom based on the use of the genres within it becomes less convincing. Reese assigns the second section of Wisdom (6:12–16 + 6:21–10:21) to the genre of ‘problem’ (aporia) literature ‘in which questions of logic or moral conduct were discussed’.17 He notes that Sophia herself is described using language conventionally used of Isis and that the moral and intellectual qualities praised are those found in philosophical manuals, particularly on kingship. He points out the use of παράδειγμα – proof from example – in Chapter Ten elsewhere used in rhetorical and moral works of a apologetic and hortatory nature. Following T. Finan18, he agrees that the author is providing a comprehensive value system which embraces both the secular and profane.19 It can be noted here, in contrast to Reese’s conclusion, the likely use of the genre of encomium, as indeed part of Reese’ analysis suggests.20 Further, it is not clear how certainly the proposed sub-genre of aporia should be viewed as a contributory element of the proposed larger genre of protreptikos. The Book of Divine Justice and Human Folly (11:15–15:19) is also classified as diatribe by Reese.21 The target of the author’s attacks are natural philosophical religion (13:1–9), abuses in the mystery cult (14:22–26) and the cult of rulers (14:19–21). Reese contrasts the theology of the σύγκρισις with that used here. The author is not here reflecting on the use of the material world to bless his people and punish the wicked, but on God’s saving will for the whole world (φιλανθρωπία, cf. 12:19) and the existence of sin in it. His conclusion is that sin and its consequences are the result of human responsibility. Reese concludes, ‘by inserting this lively polemic, which draws heavily upon Hellenistic sources, the Sage inserts the entire history of

16 17 18 19 20 21

historical figures: in Wisdom 2:1, the aorist is used and then in 5:1, the future (compare, for instance, Romans 3:1). The fourth reason given is that Wisdom is influenced by the ‘Cynico-Stoic witness theme’ (Reese, Hellenistic Influence, 112). While it may be true that Cynics and Stoics used diatribe more than other groups (Schenkeveld, ‘Philosophical Prose’, 231), no direct evidence is presented by Reese to show that this section of Wisdom is directly influenced by their practice. Reese’s fifth theme, the use of ‘the theme of unjust treatment accorded to the wise man’ (Hellenistic Influence, 112–13), is not supplied with evidence. Cf. below, 2.3.1 The Literary Structure. Reese, Hellenistic Influence, 107–09. Thomas Finan, ‘Hellenistic Humanism in the Book of Wisdom’, Irish Theological Quarterly 27 (1960) 30–48. Reese, Hellenistic Influence, 106. Cf. above, 1.4.4 Genre. Reese, Hellenistic Influence, 114.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

42

The Unity of Wisdom

mankind into the saving plan of the God of revelation’. This is true, although once again, the conclusion that the genre of the piece is diatribe tells us much less than Reese’s analysis of the contents. Reese’s analysis of the fourth section (11:1–14 + 16.1–19:22) contains a long discussion over the question of the genre ‘Midrash’.22 He notes that the author has incorporated in this work a scientific Greek conception of nature which is foreign to the Hebrew Old Testament. ‘It shows effort to integrate a scientific view of a perfectly ordered universe subject to physical laws into Israel’s traditional faith in the free, personal omnipotent God of revelation.’23 Consequently, Reese remarks that the arrangement of the material and the difficulty of identifying particular texts to which the sage refers are both strong objections to the use of the term ‘midrash’ in describing Wisdom.24 In contrast, Reese identifies this section as belonging to the smaller literary genre of synkrisis, or comparison.25 Two things could be said. Firstly, is comparison a genre or a stylistic technique? It seems to tell us less of the nature of Wisdom even than the above discussions of aporia and diatribe. Secondly, while the denial that this section is midrash may be justified, even in its use of comparison and Hellenistic philosophy, the passage is plainly involved in biblical interpretation. To assign the section to a genre that has no relation to this act, appears rather arbitrary. After considering these four sections, Reese turns to decide the genre of the book as a whole.26 Reese asserts that whether such a genre exists depends on whether the work is a unity in the first place. He argues, however, as already noted, that the book belongs to the genre of logos protreptikos – a didactic exhortation – which he believes to have been in wide use at the time and which comprised the smaller literary forms found in Wisdom. Each of the four parts of Wisdom ‘arouse loyalty to the one Creator and Ruler of the universe’.27 As Reese attempts to describe the manner in which his chosen individual genres work together, he resorts to recounting the contents of each section.28 In effect, the literary genres are so loosely defined and disparate that they themselves tell us very little about the unity of the work. To actually demonstrate that unity requires more detailed explication of the contents of the book. A more promising approach to the unity of Wisdom was also pioneered by Reese. He provided forty-five ‘flashbacks’, drawing on the work of Fichtner and Ziener.29 These demonstrate verbal and phrasal repetitions in ways 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29

Ibid., 91–102. Ibid., 97. Ibid., 98. Ibid. Ibid., 117. Ibid., 118. Ibid., 119. Fichtner, Weisheit Salomos; Georg Ziener, Die theologische Begriffsprache im Buche der Weisheit, Bonner Biblische Beiträge 11 (Bonn: Peter Hanstein, 1956).

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

Literary Unity

43

that reinforce semantic content across the two halves of the book. Reese acknowledges what is evident from only a brief perusal of the instances listed, that not all of them have the same persuasive force. A number of them do, however, produce a cumulative effect and their presence ‘throughout the entire work, offers a strong literary argument for a single author’. The flashbacks are not merely a number of repeated turns of phrase or vocabulary, although studies of this are not without value30, but rather operate to create semantic links between diverse material: ‘The Sage kept building up his thesis that the ordered universe in general and man in particular are under the control of the all-powerful Creator and Savior, who guides man to unending friendship with himself’.31 This central thesis is further characterized, according to Reese, by five theological themes which recur throughout the book.32 The existence of a valid flashback is further confirmed when the verses connected by the flashback each use the same theme. Reese’s first theme is the religious knowledge of God by which the just person is equated with the wise person and sinners refuse to know their creator. This is reflected in the ‘natural theology’ of Wisdom 13 and the attack on the false reasoning of the oppressors in the first part of the book (2:1, 21). Secondly, there is the theological use of the language of seeing. This is closely related to the notion of confrontation and judgement which runs through the work. Thus, the sight of the righteous is a burden to the oppressors (2:14) and they exhort themselves to see if his words are true (2:17). In contrast, at the eschatological confrontation of the righteous and the wicked, the latter will see the former be shaken with dreadful fear (5:2). Perhaps suggesting that ‘seeing’ is not quite so important as the mutual knowledge of their respective fates, in 18:1 we read that the wicked hear the voices of the righteous but having being made ‘captives of darkness’ (17:2) they do not see their forms (18:2). Thirdly, and again related to the first theme, is the interaction of malice and ignorance. Fourthly, immortality is presented as humanity’s ‘true destiny’, with its mirror image the punishment of those who reject and ignore God’s means of fulfilling one’s destiny. Reese’s last category is the didactic use of history.33 In the Exodus-Numbers narrative ‘the Sage sees men and events from Israel’s history as types of the salvation of the just and

30 See for instance Goodrick’s comments on the shared and unusual use of μεταλλεύω in 4:12 and 16:25 (A. T. S. Goodrick (ed.), The Book of Wisdom: with Introduction and Notes, The Oxford Church Bible Commentary (London: Rivingtons, 1913), 335). Note also Reese’s critique of Goodrick (Hellenistic Influence, 29). 31 Reese, Hellenistic Influence, 124. 32 Ibid., 140–45. For other options, Georg Ziener’s (Die theologische Begriffsprache) work also offers a helpful summary of repeated words and concepts. Also, related to the third category below, McGlynn (Divine Judgement) has argued that Wisdom has a conceptual unity and that this can be well expressed by using the Mercy Dialogue (11.15–12.27), with its understanding of divine judgement and benevolence, as a lens through which to read the text. 33 Reese, Hellenistic Influence, 144.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

44

The Unity of Wisdom

ruin of the wicked’.34 This is an understandable conclusion, but more care needs to be taken with regard to the nature of this narrative. Wisdom is a remarkably complex and unified theological whole, but in recognizing this, too often the first six chapters of Wisdom have been taken as the primary theological narrative of the work. So, for instance, Reese considers the first section of Wisdom as primary in the sense that the covenant promises made to a people – and as the basis of the story described in the synkrisis – are now to be understood as symbolizing God’s present attitude toward the individual.35 Instead, this work will argue that the Exodus-Numbers narrative and Chapter Ten do not provide mere symbol36 but offer depictions of the same salvation that is described in the first part of the book. There are obvious differences that can be pointed out, but this should not obscure the realistic nature of the retelling of the narrative and the presence of the same agents at work throughout the work. As has been implied in the above, a demonstration of the unity of Wisdom can satisfactorily come only through a discussion of the material content of the work. This work will attempt to discuss part of this through an examination of the roles of pneuma and eschatology in the book. A helpful way to begin this and to set out both the contrasts and connections between the different parts of the book is through a discussion of Wisdom 10. It is here that the unified picture of salvation in Wisdom becomes evident as it illustrates practically the relationship between the sage-king and Sophia in 6–9 (9:18– 10:1) and serves as an introduction to the synkrisis of the Egyptians and Israelites (10:13–21).

2.3 The Unified Picture of Salvation – Wisdom 10 2.3.1 The Literary Structure Wright’s discussion remains the most detailed treatment of the literary structure of Wisdom 10 and yet, in its intricacy, strains credulity.37 He writes his section in response to Reese’s simpler analysis of the internal structuring and conclusion to the section.38 Most subsequent commentators build on the insights of Wright and Reese.39

34 35 36 37 38 39

Ibid., 144; cf. Ibid., 160. Ibid. Not that this would be a fair representation of Reese’s position: ibid., 147. A. G. Wright, ‘The Structure of the Book of Wisdom’, 175–76. Reese, ‘Plan and Structure’. For example, Winston, The Wisdom of Solomon, 11, 211–12, 226–27; Kolarcik, ‘Book of Wisdom’, 522.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

The Unified Picture of Salvation – Wisdom 10

45

Wright’s preferred second section of his discussion40 identifies the internal structure of the description of Sophia’s saving actions in history, found in Wisdom 10, as involving matching pairs of the words αὕτη and σοφία. So, verses one to four opens with an αὕτη and concludes with a σοφία. The proposed pattern is immediately broken by two consecutive uses of αὕτη (vv. 5, 6) followed by two consecutive uses of σοφία (vv. 8, 9). Finally, in 10:10–11:1, three occurrences of αὕτη (vv. 10, 13, 15) are concluded by a use of σοφία (v. 21). It will be helpful to begin, however, by noting the general statements of Sophia’s saving actions (using the word σοφία) at 9:1841 and 10:9. Sophia is also named at 10:4, 8, 21, but these statements refer specifically to individual events. The anaphoric use of αὕτη is certainly an important structural marker but makes most sense in the contexts that follow clear identifications of Sophia in the first place.42 The use of σοφία in verse nine restarts the pattern after the disruption of the extended discussion in verses seven to eight and introduces the use of αὕτη at 10:10, 13, 15. The use of αὕτη in verse twenty-one neatly concludes the section, although it is difficult to offer a strong argument, given the uses of σοφία in 10:4, 8, 9, about whether or not 9:18–10:21 should be categorized as an inclusion. If the passage is surveyed with regard to content, as opposed to formal literary structuring, seven contrasts can be observed which, with the exception of the Noah section (v. 4), each contain the use of αὕτη to refer to Sophia.43 These are Adam and Cain (vv. 1–3), Noah and the flooded earth (v. 4), Abraham and nations in confusion (v. 5), Lot and his wife/the five cities (vv. 6–9) 44 , Jacob and Esau/Laban (vv. 10–12), Joseph and Potiphar’s wife (vv. 13–14) and Israel/Moses and the Egyptians/Pharaoh (vv. 15–21). In each contrast, this time with the exception of Adam, those saved by Sophia are described 40 A. G. Wright, ‘The Structure of the Book of Wisdom’, 175. 41 This is noted by Wright, but he prefers to treat 9:18 as an announcement, formally outside of what follows. A. G. Wright, ‘The Structure of the Book of Wisdom’, 175. 42 The repeated, emphatic, use of αὕτη is argued by some to have been influenced by the form of Isis aretalogies. See for instance Winston, The Wisdom of Solomon, 212–13; Engel, Das Buch der Weisheit, 132–42; 164. The use of the third person singular, however, is not the norm in the sources we have: note, for instance, the emphatic use of ἐγώ in the Cyme text. Peek contains the texts of the hymns of Cyme, Ios and Andros (W. Peek, Der Isishymnus von Andros und verwandte Texte [Berlin: Weidmann, 1930]); cf. B. P. Grenfall/A. S. Hunt (ed.), The Oxyrhynchos Papyri, XI (London: Egypt Exploration Society, 1915) and the direct address of Isis in Hymns I–III of Isidorus (Frederika Vanderlip, The Four Greek Hymns of Isidorus and the Cult of Isis, American Studies in Papyrology XII [Toronto, A. M. Hakkert Ltd., 1972]). Winston (The Wisdom of Solomon, 212–13) points out the brief exception from Maroneia (Yves Grandjean, Une Nouvelle Arétalogie d’Isis à Maronée [Leiden, E. J. Brill, 1975], 17–18; this also contains a clear and helpful bibliography of source texts). 43 The exceptions to this pattern are largely ignored in the secondary literature. Kolarcik, for instance, does not reconcile the seven contrasts with the six uses of αὕτη. Kolarcik, ‘Book of Wisdom’, 522. 44 Possibly 10:6–7, followed by a two verse digression (A. G. Wright, ‘The Structure of the Book of Wisdom’, 175).

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

46

The Unity of Wisdom

using δίκαιος.45 Both exceptions to the pattern, therefore, occur in 10:1–4.46 The reason for this may well be because of the particular circumstances of Adam, who is the one exemplar of the faith in Wisdom who is explicitly said to sin47, thus rendering it difficult for him to be termed δίκαιος. There may therefore be some degree of scene setting in these first two narratives, in which the pattern is first established using Adam and Noah, and then adhered to. The conclusion to the passage is the subject of discussion between Wright and Reese. Wright argues that the first verse of Chapter 11 should be understood to belong to the preceding section.48 He points to the fact that the instrumental ‘holy prophet’ (προφήτου ἅγίου) to be found in this verse is clearly Moses who has already appeared in a similar role in 10:16 ff. In this case, the verb εὐοδόω in 11:1 is used transitively with Sophia as the implicit subject. Reese argues the opposite49, in accordance with Ziegler’s decision50, taking the verb intransitively and ‘their works’ (τὰ ἔργα αὐτῶν) as the subject. His argument is that Wisdom begins each new section of Chapter 10 with ‘the emphatic “she”’ (as discussed above) and that this is unlikely to be altered at the climax to the passage. He argues further that, although the verb εὐοδόω is ordinarily transitive, an active absolute use is to be found in the LXX and classical Greek and therefore the evidence is inconclusive. Reese’s argument can be strengthened slightly by noting that, taken with the preceding chapter, the verse does not contain a distinct contrast and would have to be taken as a repetition or summary statement for which we might normally expect an explicit naming of Sophia as at 9:18 and 10:9, although these statements precede sections rather than conclude them. Whether Wright or Reese is correct about the appearance or non-appearance of Sophia in 11:1, it is still the case that Sophia ceases to have a central role at this point and that instead God, addressed directly, and his holy peo-

45 The final subsection, 10:15–21, which turns to a summary of the Exodus events, begins by describing the Israelite people as ὅσιος and ἄμεμπτος, leaving δίκαιος until verse twenty. This may reflect a subtle transition, whereby the focus has moved from the saving work of sophia to the moment of visitation and judgement, which is the subject of the synkrisis, in parallel with 5:1–23. 46 Engel (Das Buch der Weisheit, 168) and Larcher (Le Livre de la Sagesse, ii, 615) draw Cain into contrast with Noah as well as Adam and emphasize the connection of the flooded earth (the potential second negative contrast) with Cain. 47 Note that 15:2, of course, allows the possibility of sin, but it is the experience of Enoch that he was taken to preserve him from sin (4:11). Note also the transformation in 18:20–25, where the sin of the Israelites is left implicit in order to emphasize the identification of God with Aaron. For more on this cf. below, 7.4.4 Wisdom 11–19: An Incredible Journey and a Strange Death. 48 A. G. Wright, ‘The Structure of the Book of Wisdom’, 176. 49 Reese, ‘Plan and Structure’, 392. 50 Sapientia Salomonis, Septuaginta: Vetus Testamentum Graecum / Auctoritate Acad. Scientiarum Gottingensis vol. 12.1, ed. by Joseph Ziegler (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1980), 129.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

The Unified Picture of Salvation – Wisdom 10

47

ple take centre stage for the remainder of the book.51 In fact, the direct address of God resumes in 10:20, having last occurred at 9:18, and can be traced back all the way through Chapter 9. This possibly indicates a coherent train of thought – the extended prayer of the ideal sage, Solomon – from 9:1 to the end of the book (19:22). Formally, the discussion of Sophia’s saving actions in history most probably ranges from 9:18–10:2152, although for simplicity’s sake we will still refer to the section as Wisdom 10. Since the section sits in such close connection with what precedes and follows, we will yet feel free to extend discussion into the edges of the bounding chapters where themes or ideas also extend. There are other possible inclusions within the chapter and these can be taken as a complementary structuring. Wright notes διεφύλαξεν/ἐφύλαξεν (1–5), ἐρρύσατο/ἐρρύσατο (6–9) and ἔδειξεν … ἔδωκεν/ἔδειξεν … ἔδωκεν (10–14).53 In the first of these, Sophia (αὕτη) is the subject on both occasions. This could be taken as encapsulating the establishing of the pattern of contrasts in these verses, although one might expect such an inclusion to run from verse one to four rather than to five. In the second of these possible inclusions, ἐρρύσατο appears to bracket together the account of Lot’s rescue with the extended discussion that follows in verses seven and eight.54 The third inclusion contains the Jacob/Joseph sections, although each of these are marked distinctly by their own occurrences of αὕτη (10, 13). Engel thus divides the whole chapter into four sections55, even though the final section (15–21) is without an inclusion. Evidently, no system is perfect and each grouping of verses needs to be considered. However, the use of αὕτη seems clearer and largely works well in a consistent pattern of contrasts. Finally, other word repetitions can be observed56, although none appear to provide significant theological insight, and a potential inclusion between 10:10 and 10:14 with the repetition of βασιλεία, δείκνυμι and δίδωμι in which a parallel is perhaps being drawn to emphasize the descent and ascent of the righteous individual saved by Sophia.

Kolarcik, ‘Book of Wisdom’, 529–30. On 9:18, see above, p. 44. A. G. Wright, ‘The Structure of the Book of Wisdom’, 175. Kolarcik (‘The Book of Wisdom’) takes 10:9 as the opening of the Jacob section on p. 522, but, rightly in my opinion because of the αὕτη in 10:10, sees it as the conclusion to the Lot section (p. 524). 55 Engel, Das Buch der Weisheit, 165. 56 A. G. Wright, ‘The Structure of the Book of Wisdom’, 176. Note also ὀργή (10:3, 5); γινώσκω (10:5, 8, 12); συναπόλλυμι/ἐξαπόλλυμι (10:3, 6); ῥύομαι also occurs in 10:13, 15 in addition to 10:6, 9; φεύγω and φυγάς (10:6, 10); in addition to διεφύλαξεν/ἐφύλαξεν (10:1, 5) διεφύλαξεν also occurs in 10:12; ὁδηγέω 10:10, 17.

51 52 53 54

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

48

The Unity of Wisdom

2.3.2 An Exposition of Wisdom 10 Wisdom 10 is attached closely to the preceding chapter, not merely because of its announcement in 9:1857 but because it offers practical demonstrations in history of the saving work of the cosmic Sophia in the soul of individual sages (7:27).58 Israel’s history is recounted not merely to describe God’s ongoing providential care (although that remains a valid point: 19:22) but rather to indicate that the means of salvation through all history remains common with that available in the present. The use of Israel’s history locates the expected readership within the Jewish community.59 Engel notes that within the Jewish Scriptures, repetition is used in the recounting of God’s dealing with his people (e. g. Deut 26:5–9; Josh 24; Neh 9:7,31; Ps 78) and that this also finds expression in more contemporary Jewish literature such as 3 Macc 2:3–9 and 6:1–15.60 The former of these passages, as also noted by Engel, contains anaphoric uses of σύ (2:3,4,5,6,9) at the beginning of each episode.61 This suggests a convergence of the notion of a salvation history with the anaphoric form of Hellenistic hymns.62 Against Engel, however, caution should be used in making direct connection with Isis religion.63 The anonymous treatment of the characters and the emphasis of only aspects of their stories that are relevant to their salvation by Sophia creates a single, paradigmatic, pattern of salvation which can, in theory, be experienced in the present by Jew and non-Jew alike.64 Within Wisdom 10 Reese identifies four ‘flashbacks’65, however it seems that many more links are present in the text, largely unnoticed by commentators, and that an exploration of these would lead to a fuller understanding of Wisdom. The investigation of word parallels, perhaps of relatively common words, raises questions concerning the criteria by which we are to judge whether such a link really exists. The following exploration of Wisdom 10 will attempt to weigh all possible connections which can be found against a developing view of the central soteriological concerns of the work, building

57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64

See above, p. 45. Larcher, Le Livre de la Sagesse ii, 607. Cf. above, 1.4.5 Addressees of Wisdom. Engel, Das Buch der Weisheit, 166. Ibid. Engel, Das Buch der Weisheit, 167. See p. 45 fn. 42. Possible reasons for this literary use of anonymity, which are not mutually exclusive, range from the influence of the diatribe style (Winston, The Wisdom of Solomon, 20), to the social status of the author (Engel, Das Buch der Weisheit, 30–34). The influence of Daniel 7 (J. J. Collins, The Apocalyptic Imagination, (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 21998), 106) and the fourth Servant Song should also be noted. Cf. Larcher, Le Livre de la Sagesse ii, 615. 65 Reese, Hellenistic Influence, 125–26; cf. above, p. 42.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

The Unified Picture of Salvation – Wisdom 10

49

on the argument indicated by Reese that the flashbacks exist to reinforce central theological issues66, and so begin to identify valid controls for the interpretation of the text. Each link will have to be within its local literary structure (hence the preceding section) and semantic content. Once this has been done, more confidence can be had in ranging more widely through the conceptual possibilities which are raised by the connections. It will be helpful to begin our analysis at 9:18 and to note the continuity of thought that exists between the preceding chapters, which treat Solomon’s experience of Sophia, and Chapter Ten, which demonstrates the benefit that Sophia brings in every age to every human. This continuity is further emphasized by the first anaphoric use of αὕτη in 10:1, which relies on the identity of Sophia having already been established.67 Verses one to three offer the first comparison. The choice of Adam and Cain have been selected for their appropriateness as individuals whose destinies were determined by their attitudes towards Sophia. Enoch has already been mentioned and so is not dealt with again (4:10–15). Lamech is omitted. Adam is described as πρωτόπλαστος (first-formed) a term used in Wisdom here and in 7:1. The link with 7:1 is significant. It reads, Εἰμὶ μὲν κἀγὼ θνητὸς ἄνθρωπος ἴσος ἅπασιν καὶ γηγενοῦς ἀπόγονος πρωτοπλάστου· καὶ ἐν κοιλία μητρὸς ἐγλύφην σὰρξ

I also am mortal, a human like everyone else, a descendant of the first-formed earthborn man; and being flesh, I was molded in the womb of a mother.

The reader is instantly reminded of his or her humanity, held in common with both characters. In the second verse Adam is given strength to rule (κρατῆσαι). This too reinforces the link with royal Solomon’s search for Sophia. Κρατέω occurs also at 3:8 and 6:2. The first of these describes the reversal of fortune of the oppressed righteous one who is vindicated by God and elevated to cosmic kingship to judge the nations.68 The second verse returns to the exhortation of the first chapter, appealing to current rulers to seek righteousness via Sophia on the basis of the prior argument. The implication is summed up in 6:20 – the desire for Wisdom leads to a kingdom. Consequently, those who rule in the present must seek wisdom or lose their privilege. Adam is described as having been guarded by Sophia (διεφύλαξεν) when he alone had been created. The absence of any mention of Eve, may serve to indicate the superior bridal role of Sophia as protector and saviour (8:2).69 No mention of the devil (2:24) occurs; the depiction of Adam is honed as a

66 67 68 69

Reese, Hellenistic Influence, 124. Engel, Das Buch der Weisheit, 164. This will be considered in more detail below, 7.6.4 The Visitation of God. Larcher, Le Livre de la Sagesse ii, 610, 612 following Paul Heinisch, Das Buch der Weisheit (Münster, 1912).

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

50

The Unity of Wisdom

paradigmatic figure, the first-formed ‘ancestor of the world’ (πατέρα κόσμου).70 Κτίζω is used earlier in the book at 1:14 and 2:23, κόσμος is also used at 1:14 and 2:24 as well as on thirteen other occasions. From one perspective, the combination of these two words is not surprising. However, the identification of Adam as a created being living within the κόσμος, is an important step. The world, as it was first created, is good and healthy. Both 1:14 and 2:23 contain defences of the goodness of creation and assertions that evil is not part of God’s good plan for the world and place, in part, the blame for evil on the decisions of humans (1:12; 2:21). Adam, the first human, is no different: he is saved from his wrongdoing (ἐκ παραπτώματος). At the beginning of such a history, it makes sense to disabuse a reader about any wrong assumptions about their own nature: guilt must be admitted, and the quest for wisdom begun. The third verse presents the first contrast. The unjust Cain, in contrast to Adam, departed from Sophia in his anger and perished. The meaning appears straightforward: the creation may be good, but humans must remain close to Sophia, the agent of creation, as did Adam, if they are to enjoy her fruitful benefits. Both ὀργή and θυμός, which are present in this verse, being synonyms are used elsewhere in close proximity to one another (5:20, 22; 16:5; 18:20, 21 and 18:21, 23, 25, 19:1). The combination of them is frequently used to speak of divine retributive wrath at work through the agency of creation.71 In Wisdom 10, the two are being used in ironic contrast: it was because of the anger of Cain that he perished with his passions. The lesson would appear to be that the righteous fear and put their trust in the divine, effective, retributive will. The fourth verse begins a second subsection. Noah is described as τὸν δίκαιον whom Sophia steers to safety. The primary reference in this section is actually forward to 14:1–6. There, in a complicated piece of reasoning and imagery, ξύλον refers first to a wooden idol in which sailors put their trust (14:1), rather than in the providential guidance of God. In 14:5, the smallest raft (ἐλαχίστον ξύλον) is reckoned sufficient, with the good will of God, to traverse the seas. In 14:6 an explicit reference is made to Noah and the flood and κυβερνάω is reused.72 The parallel between the two passages reminds the reader of the antithesis between wisdom and idolatry and serves again to

70 Larcher (Le Livre de la Sagesse ii, 608–9) is correct to point out that any Philonic distinction between an ideal and material human (e. g. Qu. Ex. II, 46) is not found in Wisdom and that πατέρα κόσμου can be taken with the sense ‘ancestor of all humans’. This conclusion is further emphasized by the connection of the verse with 7:1. 71 The conclusion to Wisdom 18 may be an exception which proves the rule. 72 According to Winston (The Wisdom of Solomon, 214), the verb was used by the Stoics to describe ‘the guiding power of Logos’, although the guidance in question here appears to be more personally directed: cf. below, 9.4.3 Wisdom 14:3 – pronoia.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

The Unified Picture of Salvation – Wisdom 10

51

question the value of the appearance of things (3:1), as well as the true role of creation (2:6). Just as in Wisdom 1–6 the righteous were called to look beyond the appearance of physical death and to recognize the true reality of the cosmos, so the righteous individual trusted in Sophia and was saved within a worthless piece of wood. The fifth verse focuses on Abraham who is preserved through the judgement of Babel, kept blameless and strengthened to resist his compassion for his child. The passage takes a concept celebrated in the Hellenistic world as the basis for civic life, that of concord, but insists on the necessity of morality: the nations were ‘of one mind of evil’ (ἐν ὁμονοίᾳ πονηρίας ἐθνῶν), but were yet put to confusion (συγχυθέντων).73 The connections from this verse are difficult. The word ἔθνος receives nine uses in Wisdom, and is generally used of the global nations which the rulers of the world hold sway over. In 3:8, the righteous eschatologically supersede these rulers. That it is the righteous who are kept blameless (ἄμεμπτος) may well be an important subsidiary text for the interpretation of 18:21 ff. Here, Aaron, a blameless man (ἄμεμπτος), fights against the avenger (τὸν κολάζοντα) on behalf of God.74 That it is Sophia who keeps people blameless serves to strengthen Wisdom’s difficult reworking of the tradition. The use of γινώσκω in this verse is also potentially important although no clear flashback is present. An exhaustive detailing of all the word’s theological uses in Wisdom would be an essay in itself. As opposed to Reese’s short treatment of the ‘religious knowledge of God’75, it is the divine subject – Sophia – who does the recognizing. The only other instance of this in Wisdom is in 4:1, where virtue is ‘known by God and by humans’ (παρὰ θεῷ γινώσκεται καὶ παρὰ ἀνθρώποις). One final connection to Wisdom 10:5 can be seen in 18:4–5 in the use of τέκνον 18:5*2, φυλάσσω 18:4 and ὁμόνοια/ὁμοθυμαδὸν 10:5/18:5. The link appears to swirl around the issue of the killing of children. Abraham was kept strong, and his child was delivered. The Egyptians kept the sons of God imprisoned and resolved to kill the infants of the holy ones. In response God took away a multitude of their children (τέκνα) and destroyed them altogether (ὁμοθυμαδὸν) in a flood. Again, the lesson appears to be one of perception. The righteous must trust God and seek wisdom, even when it appears to bring no immediate salvation. The weakest connection here is probably that between ὁμόνοια and ὁμοθυμαδόν. Although the words are different, the repetition of the prefix with terms (νοῦς and θυμός) that, if not synonyms, both refer to the inner-self is notable. Irrespective of this point, verbal connections exist in the repetition of τέκνον and φυλάσσω and a

73 Larcher, Le Livre de la Sagesse ii, 619. 74 Mack, Logos und Sophia, 85–87. 75 Reese, Hellenistic Influence, 141.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

52

The Unity of Wisdom

semantic link appears to be present between the verses that works on more than merely a verbal level. Verses six to seven (v. 6: αὕτη) turn to the story of Lot. There are a number of common words here which operate at the elementary level: δίκαιον, ἀσεβῶν and ἐρρύσατο. The key words, however, are φεύγω and πῦρ. The first occurs three times in Wisdom (1:5; 16:15) and its cognate noun (φυγάς) another three times (10:10; 17:2; 19:3). The first occurrence, in 1:5, is of significance because of its position. In it Sophia’s character is revealed to be that she flees from deceit.76 The contrast between the two passages suggests that the righteous individual who flees from the ungodly and destruction is conforming to the character of Sophia herself and so is rescued. Also, in 10:10 and 19:3, it is again the righteous who are depicted as fugitives, exiled from worldly prosperity. In both narratives divine intervention eventually results in the reversing of the situation. In 17:2 this is illustrated through another ironic contrast: the ‘lawless people’ who ‘thought to oppress a holy nation’ (NETS; καταδυναστεύειν ἔθνος ἅγιον ἄνομοι) were themselves fugitives or exiles from eternal providence (φυγάδες τῆς αἰωνίου προνοίας).77 The one reference that has not yet been considered is found in 16:5 at the beginning of the third antithesis of Egyptian punishment and Israelite blessing.78 This also involves an ironic contrast. Here, to flee from the hand of God is deemed impossible and, in 16:16, those who attempt to do so are flogged by supernatural weather conditions and consumed by fire (πῦρ). This is the first of a series of uses of πῦρ (16:16, 17, 19, 22*2, 27 and also 17:5, 19:20) which describe the contrast of the plague of thunder and lighting sent against the Egyptians with the blessing of heavenly manna given to the Israelites.79 When we return to 10:6, the links discussed encourage us to note the relationship between fire, a cosmic element, and the judgement of God; the necessity of either fleeing to saving wisdom, or failing to flee from judgement. Reese notes within this verse, the first of his four ‘flashbacks’ to be found in this chapter.80 In 10:7 the result of the destruction of the Five Cities is a barren, smoking land which produces (καρποφοροῦντα) fruit for ‘unripe (ἀτελέσιν) seasons’. In 4:5 the metaphor of agricultural failure is used to describe the offspring of the ungodly: immature (ἀτέλεστοι) branches will be broken off and their fruit (ὁ καρπὸς) will be useless. In both cases, the

76 The alternative position of Levison (below, p. 88 fn. 22) would strengthen the connection, in that in both cases the righteous or holy humans would flee ungodly things (John R. Levison, The Spirit in First Century Judaism, Arbeiten zur Geschichte des antiken Judentums und des Urchristentums 29 [Leiden: Brill, 1997]). 77 See below, 9.4.4. 78 Kolarcik, ‘Book of Wisdom’, 446, 529. 79 Ibid. The fifth antithesis. 80 Reese, Hellenistic Influence, 125; Kolarcik, ‘Book of Wisdom’, 524; Engel also notes the reappearance of words here that also used in 4:3–6 (Das Buch der Weisheit, 172).

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

The Unified Picture of Salvation – Wisdom 10

53

evil leaves behind a witness of its wickedness (10:7 μαρτύριον τῆς πονηρίας; 4:6 μάρτυρές εἰσιν πονηρίας). This is an important parallel made with more than one word. Reese also points out that both ἀτέλεστος and ἀτελής do not occur in any other canonical book.81 The flashback encourages the identification of the ‘ungodly who were perishing’ (ἐξαπολλυμένων ἀσεβῶν) with the ‘ungodly’ (4:3) whose many progeny will not mature. The general teaching of 4:4–6 is found in practice to be true. The righteous individual was, is and will be saved by Sophia. It is also worth noting at this point the recurring use of ψυχή with a morally qualifying adjective, especially in the first half of the book. So, in 1:4 we have a κακότεχνος ψυχὴ (‘evil/deceitful soul’) and in 2:22 there is ψυχαὶ ἄμώμοι (‘blameless souls’). In 3:1 it is the souls of the righteous which are preserved. In 4:11, the fear is that a righteous soul might be deceived. The list could go on. It is sufficient to say, returning to 10:7, that the soul is considered the morally culpable self and that which is for the righteous really alive although they are physically dead.82 In contrast, in the verse, a pillar of salt is raised, a monument to a disbelieving soul (ἀπιστούσης ψυχῆς μνημεῖον). Wisdom 10:8–9 offers a digression which repeats and generalizes the preceding material.83 The repetition allows two further discrete connections to be made from these verses. Firstly, it was because they (the wicked of the preceding verses) passed by (παροδεύσαντες) Sophia that the monument was left to their folly which would never be able to go unnoticed (λαθεῖν). In 1:8, anyone who utters unrighteous things will not escape notice (λάθῃ), and justice, when it punishes, will not pass him by (παροδεύσῃ). The use of λανθάνω is similar but παροδεύω is being used in contrast: those who pass by wisdom will not by judgement be passed by. Secondly, γινώσκω and βίος recur in 2:1 and in 2:4 μνημόσυνον is paralleled by μνημονεύω. The life of foolishness in 10:8 is placed side by side with the complaint that their life is short and sorrowful of those who are unreasoning. In Wisdom 10, the life of the wicked leads to the erection of a monument to their foolishness. In 2:4, the ungodly bemoan that their life will pass away without a trace and use this as an excuse for their immorality. An ironic contrast is set up between the hopeless complaint of the lasting effect of divine punishment. This point relates to all five of Reese’s themes.84 The confrontation of Wisdom 5, the kingly motif discussed above and the Exodus-Numbers narrative’s synkrisis, 81 Ibid., 125. ἀτελής is used at 3 Macc 5:42, Edwin Hatch/Henry A. Redpath, A Concordance to the Septuagint and the Other Greek Versions of the Old Testament, 2nd edn. with Hebrew/Aramaic Index to the Septuagint by Takamitsu Muraoka (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2 1988). 82 See below, 7.3.2 Immortality and Incorruptibility. 83 Verses eight to nine contain a sermonizing digression marked off by an inclusion of σοφία: note the transition to a use of plurals (A. G. Wright, ‘The Structure of the Book of Wisdom’, 175). 84 Reese, Hellenistic Influence, 140–45. For a summary of these themes, cf. above, 2.2 Literary Unity.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

54

The Unity of Wisdom

all demonstrate a strong desire to see the positions of oppressor and oppressed reversed and seen to be so by all. In passing, it can be noted that θεραπεύω (10:9) also occurs at 16:3, but there it is the divine word who ‘heals’ rather than the human who ‘serves’ Sophia. The verb carries here a religious sense.85 In 10:10–12 the narrative moves on to Jacob’s story. In 10:10 it is the ‘kingdom of God’ (βασιλείαν θεοῦ) that is shown to Jacob. This is another instance of the righteous kingly motif, which was discussed with regard to the use of κρατέω in 10:2.86 In 5:5 the wicked stand amazed as they wonder how the individual that they had persecuted now finds his lot amongst the holy ones (ἐν ἁγίοις). In 10:10 the anonymous Jacob is given knowledge of ἁγίων.87 Although ἅγιος is frequently used in Wisdom, the use of a plural as a substantive to refer to angelic beings88 appears to be restricted to these two occasions. This second clause can be taken to clarify the first and thus give insight into the angelic nature of the cosmic kingship that Sophia secures. Larcher rightly connects the ministry of angels with the exercise of divine providence.89 The word φυγάς has already been discussed. Δείκνυμι will become a frequently used verb in subsequent chapters as justice is meted out – and ‘shown’ to be so. In 10:11 Jacob is enriched (ἐπλούτισεν) by wisdom. In the previous verse she had led him in straight paths (ἐν τρίβοις). In 5:7–8, the wicked complain that they have never known the paths of God but have rather been filled by paths of lawlessness (ἀνομίας τρίβοις) and that their wealth (πλοῦτος) has done them no good. Conventional perception is again questioned: material riches gained without the aid of wisdom will merely be fleeting. Wisdom, however, will lead her disciples in moral paths and bring them riches. There is certainly a temptation to spiritualize the blessing of Jacob with riches. As will become apparent in the rest of this work, however, the blessings of Sophia, even when experienced after death, always seem to be described in terms of include tangible benefits known within the cosmos. This is frequently understood in terms of kingship.90 85 86 87 88

Larcher, Le Livre de la Sagesse ii, 627. In addition, one can note the use of ὁρδηγέω in the royal context of 9:11. Objective genitive, as in 2:13; 6:22; 7:17; 14:22: Larcher, Le Livre de la Sagesse ii, 630. Rather than ‘holy things’ (neuter plural) as in the NRSV and Engel (Das Buch der Weisheit, 173–74), who points to 4 Macc 1:16–17 and holds that the knowledge in question is Wisdom itself, Jacob’s vision at Bethel involved angels and this is the most likely referent; Gen 28:12. Schorch agrees that the reference is to angels, although his search for connections to mystical and magical traditions means he does not develop the coherency of these verses with Wisdom’s unified picture of salvation (Stefan Schorch, ‘Jacob’s Ladder and Aaron’s Vestments: Traces of Mystical and Magical Traditions in the Wisdom of Solomon’, in Géza G. Xeravits/József Zsengellér (ed.), Studies in the Book of Wisdom, SJSJ, vol. 142 (Leiden: Brill, 2010) 183–95, on p. 189). 89 Larcher, Le Livre de la Sagesse ii, 629–31. 90 Cf. especially below, 7.6.4 The Visitation of God.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

The Unified Picture of Salvation – Wisdom 10

55

In 10:12 are found two words that are relatively rarely used in Wisdom, ἐνεδρεύω and ἀσφαλίζω. Wisdom preserves Jacob from those who lie in

ambush for him. The only two other ambushes in Wisdom are at 2:12, where the wicked plot to kill the oppressed righteous, and at 14:21 where the people are entrapped by the beauty of a ruler cult. For the first, the reader is urged to look beyond physical death and to seek the preservation from spiritual death which wisdom offers, which in turn leads to cosmic kingship. For the second, the entrapment is of idolatry, enforced by royal authority, which in turn leads to ethical degradation (14:23–27). The use of ἀσφαλίζω is similar in 10:12 and 4:17 and refers to God’s, or Sophia’s, providential and securing care of Enoch and Jacob. This care exists for the oppressed righteous individual of Wisdom 2 through the redefinition of death and the offering of eschatological kingship.91 In 13:15, Wisdom provides yet another of its ironic contrasts as the idol is ‘secured’ to the wall by its human creator using a piece of iron. The final section of verse twelve (c-d) reinforces the connection between Sophia, piety and power (παντὸς δυνατωτέρα ἐστὶν εὐσέβεια)92 that is denied by the oppressors of the righteous one (2:11). Salvation comes, in part, from recognizing (γνῷ: cf. 2:21–22) this. In 10:13 an ironic contrast is made between the righteous man (δίκαιος), Joseph, whom wisdom saved (ἐρρύσατο) and the oppressors’ comment in 2:18, that if the righteous one (ὁ δίκαιος) really is God’s son, then God will save (ῥύσεται) him.93 The story of Joseph is continued in 10:14 where there is a strong link with 6:21, as well as 3:8, as Wisdom once again reinforces the kingly motif. This fourfold link, following familiar patterns, is underlined below. συγκατέβη αὐτῷ εἰς λάκκον καὶ ἐν δεσμοῖς οὐκ ἀφῆκεν αὐτόν, ἕως ἤνεγκεν αὐτῷ σκῆπτρα βασιλείας καὶ ἐξουσίαν τυραννούντων αὐτοῦ· ψευδεῖς τε ἔδειξεν τοὺς μωμησαμένους αῦτὸν καὶ ἔδωκεν αὐτῷ δόξαν αἰώνιον.

She descended with him into the dungeon and when he was in chains she did not leave him, until she brought him the sceptre of a kingdom and authority over those who ruled over him. Those who had found fault with him she showed to be false, and gave him everlasting glory. (10:14) εἰ οὖν ἥδεσθε ἐπὶ θρόνοις καὶ σκήπτροις τύραννοι λαῶν, τιμήσατε σοφίαν, ἵνα εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα βασιλεύσητε.

Therefore, if you delight in thrones and sceptres, O rulers of peoples, honour Sophia that you may reign forever. (6:21)

Joseph’s elevation to rulership is depicted in direct contrast with those who had formerly ruled him and sent him to prison. In the same way, the king91 Kolarcik, Ambiguity of Death; below, 7.4.2 Wisdom 1–6: ‘Evil-Doing Will Overturn the Thrones of Rulers’. 92 Larcher, Le Livre de la Sagesse ii, 635. 93 Reese’s third flashback (Hellenistic Influence: 126).

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

56

The Unity of Wisdom

ship of present rulers in the first part of Wisdom is seen to be under threat (1:1; 5:23: 6:1) because of their failure to rule justly and to protect the righteous individual of Wisdom 2 and 5 from his oppressors. Their downfall appears to be envisaged in direct correlation with the elevation of the righteous to cosmic kingship (3:7; 5:15–23; cf. 7.6.4 The Visitation of God). In 10:15 Wisdom begins the final contrast of the chapter which sets the pattern for the subsequent synkrisis.94 The change in adjective from δίκαιος to ὅσιος95 may be an indication that the context has changed, in the sense that Wisdom moves from a consideration of the process of salvation of individuals to an examination of the realities of judgement for peoples. In both 10:17 and 2:22 piety (ὁσιότης and ὅσιος) is linked with recompense (μισθός).96 The description of the Egyptians as oppressors (θλιβόντες) evokes 5:1, where the participle is similarly used of oppressors of the righteous individual. Its only other use in Wisdom is in 15:7 where it is used to describe the pressing of clay in idol creation. The reference to the ‘blameless seed’ (σπέρμα ἄμεμπτον) may well have intentional resonances within the LXX where the seed of Abraham is an important theological motif97: within Wisdom, ‘blameless’ is used of Abraham (10:5).98 The introduction of a ‘holy people and blameless race’ (λαὸν ὅσιον καὶ σπέρμα ἄμεμπτον) adds a degree of complexity to the individual salvation that has been envisaged to this point. In practice, however, Israel acts within the chapter as a singular entity, rescued (ἐρρύσατο) by Sophia, just as was Lot (10:6, 9) and Joseph (10:13). Israel is idealized, rational and holy, and the negative aspects of the original stories are largely smoothed over.99 Consequently, any tension between corporate and individual salvation does not arise. In 10:16, Sophia entered into (εἰσῆλθεν) the soul of a servant of the Lord. Such language is consonant with that in 1:4, where wisdom refuses to enter into (εἰσελεύσεται) a deceitful soul. It additionally occurs in Wisdom at 8:8. Both uses indicate Sophia’s mastery of the cosmos.100 The overthrowing of Pharaoh in this verse is a prior occurrence of the overthrowing of the thrones of rulers in 5:23. In 10:19 the term ἐχθρός is reintroduced and used in the plural to describe the enemies of Israel. The term’s one use in the first half of the book (it is used repeatedly in the second) is at 5:17 at the introduction of the section

94 Note Larcher’s (Le Livre de la Sagesse ii, 639–40) discussion of the idealization of the people of God present here, one element of the synkrisis. 95 Note, δίκαιος is still an appropriate title: cf. 10:20. 96 Reese’s fourth flashback (Hellenistic Influence, 126). 97 For example, Gen 13:15, 13:16*2, 15:3, 15:5, 15:13, 15:18, 16:10, 17:7*2 … 98 See above, p. 51 f. 99 Larcher (Le Livre de la Sagesse ii, 639–40). 100 The combination of σημεῖα and τέρατα is common in the LXX (e. g. Exod 7:3; Deut 4:34; Ps 77:43; Isa 8:18; Jer 39:20).

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

Conclusion

57

concerning the vengeance of God, exercised through the creation. This important motif is essential to the synkrisis and with its depiction of the plagues, the manna and quails and the crossing of the Red Sea. The chapter concludes with appropriate praise at the conclusion of the salvation of the righteous, paralleling Wisdom 19 (αἰνέω occurs at 10:20 and 19:9).

2.4 Conclusion It was argued above that a thorough demonstration of the theological unity of Wisdom requires an explication of the contents of the book. This work will seek to set out a central theological concern of the book, its unified vision of salvation. In order to show the potential of such a study and to plot the first steps along the path, an exposition of Wisdom 10 was given in which the verbal and semantic links to other parts of the book were explored. The chapter’s close sequential connection with what immediately precedes and follows it was also noted. The events described in Wisdom 10, particularly as they are elucidated through the discovery of ‘flashbacks’ show how in every age, and therefore by implication in the present, humans can achieve kingship through Sophia. The nature of this kingship in Wisdom 10 is understood as power and authority over other humans within the cosmos (e. g. Joseph: 10:14; Pharaoh and the Egyptians: 10:16, 20).101 Wisdom 10 shows the same pattern of the contrasting movement from oppression to royal salvation found in Wisdom 2–5 and in the ExodusNumbers narrative. In contrast, the wicked find themselves thrust from power. Much like the following synkrisis, the salvation is envisaged within the cosmos, in terms of the reception of cosmic power and kingship, and executed through the cosmos, whether by a piece of wood, a stele of salt or the plagues of Moses.

101 The political nature of this language has not been explored thoroughly in the literature, although the ‘constant mediation of wisdom’ (J. J. Collins, ‘Cosmos and Salvation: Jewish Wisdom and Apocalyptic in the Hellenistic Age’, History of Religions, vol. 17, no. 2 (1977) 121–42, on p. 127; cf. Winston, The Wisdom of Solomon, 211–12) in every age has been noted. It is possible that the view that the kingship language of Wisdom 3 refers to otherworldly or future blessings (Kolarcik, ‘Book of Wisdom’, 447), perhaps enjoyed in the present through the ‘raptures of Divine Knowledge’ (Winston, The Wisdom of Solomon, 31– 32), implicitly relegates the significance of the blessings of Wisdom 10 to the historical.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

Part Two – Cosmos and Creation

Because salvation in Wisdom is understood as an event occurring within and mediated by the cosmos, this part contains foundational studies for the subsequent discussions of pneuma and eschatology. Chapter Three discusses the manner in which the miracles of the Exodus-Numbers narrative are understood as workings of pneuma within the cosmos and begins to explore the relationship of these actions to other uses of the concept of pneuma in Wisdom. Chapter Four turns to the question of how an understanding of the cosmos as ordered by pneuma might be related to a traditional Jewish understanding of the world as created.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

3. The Order of the Cosmos 3.1 Introduction Having made a case for the unified picture of salvation within Wisdom, we now turn to consider the nature of salvation in one portion of the book, the Exodus-Numbers narrative. It is appropriate to start here for two reasons. Firstly, as will become apparent, the Stoic concept of pneuma is alluded to in this section of Wisdom, and appears to operate as part of larger conception of the order of the cosmos. This would be reason enough for consideration, but in addition we will begin here because this retelling of a biblical narrative has been treated as a metaphor for the more explicit eschatology of Wisdom 1–6.1 The use of allusion to Stoic pneuma in order to explain the recorded events will indicate that a deeper engagement with this text may be appropriate.

3.2 An Unusual Retelling If one were to read Exodus 14 and ask the question, ‘How did this great event occur?’ the answer we would likely give, using the language and theology of the book of Exodus, would involve divine will and power, the mediatory role of Moses as he listens to the divine command and raises and lowers his staff, and possibly also the angel of God who goes before and behind the Israelite army and who appears to reside in the pillar of cloud. If one wanted to bring in other Hebrew or Septuagintal material from the Psalms or Isaiah, one might be encouraged to speak of the Red Sea incident as something of a new creation performed by the divine word. However, it seems to me unlikely that one would say something like this: For the elements changed places with one another, as on a harp the notes vary the nature of the rhythm, while each note remains the same. This may be clearly inferred from the sight of what took place. For land animals were transformed into water creatures, and creatures that swim moved over to the land. (NRSV Wisdom 19:18)

There is a musical analogy occurring here, which is being used to illuminate the elemental transformations in the miraculous events of the Red Sea crossing. The description of this miraculous event using elemental language draws the passage into the context of Hellenistic philosophy. This section will begin to investigate the nature of these philosophical concerns and the per1

Mack, Logos und Sophia, 85–87; Fichtner, Weisheit Salomos, 5.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

62

The Order of the Cosmos

haps unexpected consequences which result from them for the wider theology of the Book of Wisdom. Biblical language is, here, being passed through a particular Jewish-Hellenistic prism and the purpose of this section, and much of this larger work, is to identify or characterize that prism and so describe the theology of the book as a whole.

3.3 The Exodus and The Elements Chapters eleven to nineteen of Wisdom contain a retelling of the Exodus narrative. This retelling focuses around seven antitheses between plagues and punishments that were sent on Egypt and blessings that were given to Israel2 and five parallels between Egyptian sins and their consequent punishments.3 The latter structuring principle is based on the statement found in 11:16: ‘that one is punished by the very things by which one sins’ (NRSV; δι᾽ ὧν τις ἁμαρτάνει, διὰ τούτων κολάζεται). The former is built upon the principle set out in 11:5, that ‘through the very things by which their enemies were punished, they themselves received benefit in their need’ (NRSV; δι᾽ ὧν γὰρ ἐκολάσθησαν οἱ ἐχθροὶ αὐτῶν, διὰ τούτων αὐτοὶ ἀποροῦντες εὐεργετήθησαν) and that ‘by the same means by which you punished our enemies you called us to yourself and glorified us’ (18:8). Consequently, in the following chapters, the turning of the Nile to blood (Exod 7:19–24) is contrasted with the granting of water to the Israelites (11:6–14) at Marah (Exod 15:22–27) and Meribah (Exod 17:1–7) and the sending of frogs, gnats, flies and pestilence on livestock and of locusts against the Egyptians is contrasted with the granting of quails to the Israelites (16:1–14), and perhaps also the raising of the bronze serpent (Num 21:6–9).4 The purpose of this structuring and the principles which lie behind it betrays a tension in the theology of the book. Firstly, with Kolarcik5, it is correct to say that the use of creation for the dual purposes of blessing and cursing reveals the lordship of God over creation and history and that the elements in themselves are of ambivalent value in purpose apart from this lordship. It is just as important, however, to stress that in Wisdom the elements of creation are never conceived of apart from this lordship. A consequence of this, is that when Wisdom begins to consider these events using the framework of Stoic philosophy, which was greatly interested in the

2 3

4 5

Reese, ‘Plan and Structure’. A. G. Wright, ‘Structure of Wisdom 11–19’; note the use of ἀντί in 11:6; 16:2: 16:20; 18:3; the final diptych is less clear and involves two punishments (Kolarcik, ‘Book of Wisdom’, 529). See Kolarcik, ‘Book of Wisdom’, 573; A. G. Wright, ‘The Structure of the Book of Wisdom’. Kolarcik, ‘Book of Wisdom’, 532.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

The Exodus and The Elements

63

rational and moral ordering of the cosmos6, a position is arrived at in which creation is revealed to be ordered in its elemental structure to fight against the wicked, to bless the righteous, to offer warning and education. This tension between divine command and divine ordering of creation can be illustrated by Wisdom 11:17–20. (17) οὐ γὰρ ἠπόρει ἡ παντοδύναμός σου χεὶρ καὶ κτίσασα τὸν κόσμον ἐξ ἀμόρφου ὕλης ἐπιπέμψαι αὐτοις πλῆθος ἄρκων ἤ θρασεῖς λέοντας […] (20) καὶ χωρὶς δὲ

τούτων ἑνὶ πνεύματι πεσεῖν ἐδύναντο ὑπὸ τῆς δίκης διωχθέντες καὶ λικμηθέντες ὑπὸ πνεύματος δυνάμεώς σου ἀλλὰ πάντα μέτρῳ καὶ ἀριθμῷ καὶ σταθμῷι διέταξας.

(17) For your all-powerful hand, which created the world out of formless matter, did not lack the means to send upon them a multitude of bears, or bold lions […] (20) Even apart from these, people could fall at a single pneuma when pursued by justice and scattered by the pneuma of your power. But you have arranged all things by measure and number and weight. [My translation.]

The use of the term ‘formless matter’ is typical of Wisdom: it appears to allude to biblical material (the formless earth of Genesis 1, although there is no direct textual connection7) interpreted through a contemporary philosophical framework that assumes the idea that matter required form in order for different substances to be distinguished from one another.8 The passage considers the weight of God’s punishment and contrasts his omnipotence, with what has actually happened and what will in future: the creative Former of the world is able to send all manner of punishing animals, or even just his pneuma of power, but instead he has chosen to arrange all things ‘by measure and number and weight’. Although phrases of this type are found in scripture (Job 28:25; Isa 40:12.), the clearest link is to be found in Plato, when he speaks of the creation of good art and politics.9 And so, in the words of J. P. M. Sweet: Natural law is the personal will of God, who made the earth by his power and established the world by his wisdom, but in deference to the Greek assumption of uniformity the author makes it clear that though God could have done anything he chose, he has in fact ‘arranged all things by measure and number and weight’, and the philosophical phrase ‘out of formless matter’ strengthens the impression of rationality.10

The next passage to be considered is Wisdom 16:16–25. This is the fourth, and therefore the middle, of the seven comparisons. Here, the destruction of Consider Chrysippus, quoted in Plutarch, Stoic rep. 1050B (Plutarch 1927–2004): ‘No particular thing can come into being except in accordance with universal Nature and its rationality’. Cf. Long, Hellenistic Philosophy, 147–50. 7 Genesis 1:2: ἡ δὲ γῆ ἦν ἀόρατος καὶ ἀκατασκεύαστος. 8 An idea common to Plato (Tim. 49–50), Aristotle (Phys. 191a,10) and the Stoics (Long, Hellenistic Philosophy, 154): cf. 4.3 Creation from Pre-existent Matter, below. 9 Plato, Phlb. 55E, Rep. 602D, Laws 757B. 10 J. P. M. Sweet, ‘Miracles in the Wisdom of Solomon’, in C. F. D. Moule (ed.), Miracles (London: A. R. Mowbray, 1965) 113–26, on pp. 116–17. 6

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

64

The Order of the Cosmos

everything in the open field by hail from above (Exod 9:18–33) is contrasted with the feeding of the Israelites by manna from heaven. The ‘fire’ in the Hebrew and the Greek of Exodus 9:24 is interpreted as lightning (Wis 16:22) and a startling example of the juxtaposition of elements with apparently opposed qualities. The manna, which is described as being ‘as fine as frost’ in Exodus 16:14 and having the ‘appearance of ice’ (εἶδος κρυστάλλου) in Numbers 11:7 LXX, is here taken actually to be an icy substance: ‘snow and endured fire without melting’ (χιὼν δὲ καὶ κρύσταλλος ὑπέμεινε πῦρ καὶ ουκ ἐτήκετο).11 This interpretation is strengthened by the description of the manna melting in the heat of the sun in Exodus 16:21. The miracle described in verse twenty-two draws on Numbers 11:8 which says that the manna was cooked by the Israelites and therefore did not melt. And so, in this passage, there is an attempt to describe these biblical events in terms of the surprising coexistence of opposed physical phenomena. In verses twenty-four to five, we are provided not so much with an explanation as an attempt to describe what must have taken place using the framework of Stoic physics. Verse twenty-four envisages these events occurring through the tensing (ἐπιτείνω) and relaxing (ἀνίημι) of creation. These two verbs are part of a musical metaphor of a harmony which is found through the increasing and reducing of the tension (τόνος) of the strings of an instrument. The metaphor is widely present in Greek literature12, but it is in its use by the Stoics13 that it likely comes closest to that of Wisdom. For the Stoics, the traditional Greek quartet of four elements – fire (τὸ πῦρ), water (τὸ ὕδωρ), air (ὁ ἀήρ) and earth (ἡ γῆ) – is divided into two groups.14 Following their understanding of the two principles, fire and air are the active elements and earth and water are the passive elements. Fire is the primary element, even over air and, for those Stoics who believed in the cyclical occurrence of all events resulting in a periodical conflagration, the

11 Cf. Ps 148:8. 12 So, for instance, Plato Phd. 86c; Philo Mut. 87. 13 The pair of words are used in Hierocles (El. Eth. 4.38–53 53B) to describe the tensile motion of the soul (understood as pneuma in Stoicism: Julia E Annas, Hellenistic Philosophy of Mind (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1992), 51–54) that produces sense perception (Long, ‘Stoic Psychology’, 565–67). The health of the soul was linked to whether it possessed good or bad tension (εὐτονία / ἀτονία; SVF 3.471; Winston, The Wisdom of Solomon, 300). Diogenes Laertius (7.157 SVF 2.867 LS 53N) reports Chysippus using the language of tension (τοῦ ὑποκειμένου φωτὸς ἐντεινομένου κωνοειδῶς) to explain sight (Long/Sedley, Hellenistic Philosophers i, 321). In contrast, virtue and the good as characters admit none of the intensification or relaxation of tenors (τὰς μὲν ἕξεις επιτείνεσθαί φασιν δύνασθαι καὶ ἀνίεσθαι; SVF 2.393 LS47S; on the translation of ἕξις, which could be understood as the individual nature of things, cf. Annas, Hellenistic Philosophy of Mind, 51). Similarly, cf. SVF 3.92, 3.259, 3.525 (Winston, The Wisdom of Solomon, 300). For the application of this language more broadly in Stoic physics, see below. 14 On most points in the sources for the following, ambiguity and diversity can be found. Nonetheless, the following represents a summary of recent scholarship’s attempts to recreate a coherent system.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

The Exodus and The Elements

65

other elements ultimately derive from it and return to it. The combination of the two active elements fire and air together form something called pneuma.15 This is not a third substance but rather the proportion of fire to air. This pneuma pervades all matter and determines the properties of individual bodies by the relative proportions of fire and air.16 So, the pneuma of a human body (the soul) will have one proportion of fire to air, and a stone will have a different proportion.17 Every individual body however, will still be permeated by the one dynamic continuum of pneuma, which is the empirical reality of the conceptual rational ordering of all things – the logos.18 Within individual bodies, the pneuma creates a dual movement (returning to the physical application of the tension or τόνος metaphor) of expansion by the hot air and contraction by the cold, producing ‘quantities and qualities’ and unity respectively. If we return to Chapter 16 of Wisdom it can be seen that the harmonic language is being used to explain a practical example. In 16:25 we read that creation ‘changed into all forms’.19 Once again, this assumes the idea that matter can be distinguished from form. This notion is at least comprehensible in the Stoic framework that has been described, although equally a detailed technical discussion is not presented. Stoic physics are being alluded to in these verses, and the effect of this is to encourage the reader to conceive of nature as a rationally and morally ordered domain which defends the righteous.20 The next passage for consideration (Wis 19:18–21) occurs at the end of the book and offers another philosophically allusive description. The event in question is primarily the crossing of the Red Sea, although the passage also contains elements of summary of the whole narrative (19:10–17). The theme is set in 19:6 to be a refashioning of creation in its own nature (ἡ κτίσις ἐν ἰδίῳ γένει πάλιν ἄνωθεν διετυποῦτο), an event which fulfils the divine command as well as the nature of the cosmos. 15 Sedley, ‘Hellenistic Physics’, 388; Long, Hellenistic Philosophy, 156–57; In Galen (Caus. Cont. 1.1–2.4 LS 55F), air thickens and fire expands (ibid.); cf. Alexander, De mixtione SVF 2.442 LS 47I. 16 Plutarch, Stoic rep. 1053F-1054B SVF 2.449 LS47M; S. Sambursky, The Physical World of the Greeks (London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1960), 136. 17 Annas, Hellenistic Philosophy of Mind, 51; Sedley, ‘Hellenistic Physics’, 389. 18 Diogenes Laertius 7.135–36 LS 46B; Sedley, ‘Hellenistic Physics’, 387–88. 19 On μεταλλεύω (also found in 4:12), Winston, The Wisdom of Solomon, 141–42: perhaps through confusion with μεταλλοιόω (Aristeas 17), the appearance of it in ‘most of the manuscripts’ of Philo Gig. 65 indicates that the term had come to have a common usage similar to that of μεταλλάσσω (‘change’, ‘exchange’). 20 Kolarcik, ‘Book of Wisdom’, 578–79; Peter T. van Rooden, in a rare piece of scholarship treating the elements in Wisdom 11–19, makes little of the Stoic allusions (‘Die antike Elementarlehre und der Aufbau von Sapientia Salomonis 11–19’, in J. W. Henten and others (ed.), Tradition and Re-interpretation in Jewish and Early Christian Literature Essays in Honour of Jürgen C. H. Lebram, Studia Post-Biblica 36 (Leiden: Brill, 1986) 81–96, on p. 91).

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

66

The Order of the Cosmos

For the whole creation in its nature was fashioned anew, complying with your commands, so that your children might be kept unharmed. The cloud was seen overshadowing the camp, and dry land emerging where water had stood before, an unhindered way out of the Red Sea, and a grassy plain out of the raging waves. (NRSV Wisdom 19:6–7)

In verse eighteen a musical analogy is used, although the precise sense of the Greek is difficult.21 Δι᾽ ἑαυτῶν γὰρ τὰ στοιχεῖα μεθαρμοζόμενα, ὥσπερ ἐν ψαλτηρίῳ φθόγγοι τοῦ ῥυθμοῦ τὸ ὄνομα διαλλάσσουσιν, πάντοτε μένοντα ἤχῳ, ὅπερ ἐστὶν εἰκάσαι ἐκ τῆς τῶν γεγονότων ὄψεως ἀκριβῶς·

For the elements were transposed22, as on a harp the notes change the mode of the rhythm, while always each note remaining the same. This is to be accurately inferred from the appearance of what took place.

In the context of the passage, the primary transformation in view is the emergence of dry-land from where previously there had been water (v. 7). The transformation of land-based animals into water-living creatures (v. 19) is perhaps best understood as a figure of speech, a means of describing the journey of the Israelites (and their cattle23) through the sea on dry land rather than the physical transformation of creatures. This would sit in parallel with the probable reference to the transition of the frogs from the water onto the land in the next clause and does not stand in tension with the fact that the miracle of verse six allowed the Israelites to walk through the sea on dry land. The passage thus describes the miracle of the emergence of dry land through the sea by a musical analogy. It thus alludes to the Stoic physical theory discussed above with regard to 16:24.24 The above should not be called into question if Winston’s particular plausible interpretation using musical theory cannot be accepted with certainty. He suggests that ῥυθμός (literally ‘rhythm’) was initially used to refer to ‘certain specific rhythms and certain tetrachord genera’ that were associated with musical modes. A musical mode was a sequence of notes that held fixed relationships to each other and which could be transposed into higher and lower pitches (each pitch being called a τόνος or τρόπος) while yet preser21 Rosario Pistone, ‘The Lyre and the Creation. Music Theory and Persuasive Strategy in Wisdom’, in The Book of Wisdom in Modern Research, Angelo Passaro/Giuseppe Bellia (ed.), Deuterocanonical and Cognate Literature Yearbook (Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 2005), 195–217; Andrew D. Barker, ‘Music’, in Simon Hornblower/Antony Spawnforth (ed.), The Oxford Classical Dictionary, (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 31996), 1003–12; David Winston, ‘The Book of Wisdom’s Theory of Cosmogony’, History of Religions, vol. 11, no. 2 (1971) 185–202, on pp. 200–02; Larcher, Le Livre de la Sagesse iii, 1082–89. 22 Winston, ‘Cosmogony’, 200. 23 Goodrick, Book of Wisdom, 375. 24 Historically, the musical use of these terms preceded their Hellenistic physical use (Pistone, ‘The Lyre and the Creation’).

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

The Exodus and The Elements

67

ving the melody. Certain rhythms may have become associated with particular modes (εἴδη) forming recognized styles of music and so ‘common usage may have simply designated ἁρμονίαι or εἴδη as ῥυθμόι’.25 The result of all of this is that it allows Winston to offer the paraphrase that ‘the notes vary the key [ῥυθμός here operating as shorthand for a musical mode, as above], while sticking to the melody [ἦχος; RSV takes this ‘sound’ to refer to each individual note, as opposed to their combination in a melody]’. He takes this then as offering a depiction of the Stoic cosmic theory of the tension of pneuma and ‘that the tonos of the elements [τὰ στοιχεῖα: the technical term for fire, air, earth and water] was either heightened or lowered through a change in the relative proportions of fire and air constituting their pneumata, just as the tonos of a musical mode is varied by the transposition of the notes within it’. ‘Both the elements and modes retain their identity despite the transposition, which only effects their tonos’.26 In effect, the elements (τὰ στοιχεῖα) disposed themselves differently, the dry land became water and from the water emerged dry land.27 The miracle can best be explicated with reference to Stoic physics, and the music analogy is brought to bear as a helpful analogy of the explanatory Stoic theory.28 Despite the difficulties with regard to the musical analogy or analogies, the intention remains relatively clear. Both 19:6 and 19:20–21 allude back to Wisdom 16 in which the miraculous is not to be understood as a disruption of the normal workings of the cosmos but rather instances of the expression of its true nature. Similarly, 19:18, by the use of a semi-technical musical metaphor, attempts to explicate the manner in which the miraculous occurred through the use of musical tonos as a metaphor for Stoic tonos. It is 25 Winston, The Wisdom of Solomon, 202. 26 Ibid., 200. 27 Rosario Pistone (‘The Lyre and the Creation’) has produced an analysis of these verses with more discussion of musical theory. Although differing in detail, the conclusions reached are broadly similar. There, it is the rhythm of the notes of a chord that could change, while yet producing the same chord. In the interpretation of Wisdom 19:18, this means that the elements changed position (water swapping with dry land) while yet remaining essentially the same because of the created goodness and adequacy for fulfilling God’s purposes – a point Pistone is eager to emphasize by quoting Wis 1:14 (196, 205). As with Winston’s reading, while it is clear that the musical analogy alludes to physical reality care should be taken in attempting to deduce a too detailed description of Wisdom’s physical theory from these verses. 28 In addition, in verse nineteen the verb μεταβάλλω is used, which according to Engel (Das Buch der Weisheit, 309) is a technical term in musical transposition, although given the above argument that it was the elements that were transformed (v. 18) and not the Israelites and that verse nineteen also refers to the movement of frogs onto the dry land, this would have to be a separate musical analogy that speaks of the non-literal transformation of the Israelites (and their cattle) into water-based creatures. Note the musical use of similar language in Philo, Cher. 110. For further discussion of the connections to Stoic thought in these verses, see Angelo Passaro, ‘Cosmology and Music. Wis 19:18 and the Concept of Creation in the Book of Wisdom’, in Géza G. Xeravits/József Zsengellér (ed.), Studies in the Book of Wisdom, SJSJ, vol. 142 (Leiden: Brill, 2010) 101–23.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

68

The Order of the Cosmos

true that tonos is neither mentioned here, nor directly in Chapter 16, and yet in its framing of the question in terms of the elements (τὰ στοιχεῖα) and its use of the verb μεθαρμόζω, the consistency of this chapter with Chapter 16 is increased. At different points, as Larcher is at pains to point out29, Wisdom uses less autonomous language for creation, treating it as an instrument in the hand of God.30 The dichotomy need not be pressed, however: the autonomous ordered creation can itself be understood as God’s instrument and this is in fact what Wisdom 16:24 says.

3.4 Sophia and Pneuma The nature and purpose of pneuma in Stoic cosmology has already been discussed in the context of Wisdom’s descriptions of the miraculous. It is not insignificant then that in Wisdom, Sophia herself is referred to as pneuma. So in Wisdom 1:5–7 we read that ‘wisdom is a benevolent pneuma’ (φιλάνθρωπον πνεῦμα σοφία) and is described using the Stoic ‘that which holds all things together’ (τὸ συνέχον τὰ πάντα). For the Stoics, that which holds things together is pneuma and that which is held are the passive elements of water and earth.31 In Wisdom 7:22 Sophia is described as the fashioner of all things (ἡ γὰρ πάντων τεχνῖτις). The noun τεχνῖτις (the feminine of τεχνίτης) means artisan or craftswoman. It recalls the Stoic definition of nature or god as ‘intelligent, artistically working fire going on its way for the generation of the world … and a pneuma pervading the whole world’ (νοερὸν … πῦρ τεχνικὸν ὁδῷ βαδίζον ἐπὶ γενέσει κόσμου … πνεῦμα μὲν ἐνδιῆκον δι᾽ ὅλου τοῦ κόσμου).32 It also seems provocative that the verb used in Proverbs 8:30 LXX, which this verse also alludes to, is ἁρμόζω which brings to mind the Stoic harmonic tension which pneuma achieves in the elements. In the following verses the spirit within Sophia33 is described using a series of twenty-one 29 ‘Réduit-il, pour autant, ces phénomènes à de simple fait naturels et le miracle n’est-il qu’un cas, parmi d’autres, de l’interaction continuelle des elements? […] On ne peut oublier non plus l’idée, fondamentale en Sag., d’une dependence continuelle et totale de la nature entière par rapport à son Auteur: par consequent, meme si metharmozomena a directement un sens moyen et renvoie à un processus naturel, le sens passif reste latent.’ Larcher, Le Livre de la Sagesse iii, 1087. 30 For example, Wis 5:17–23; 16:20; 19:6. For similar concerns in Philo, David Winston, “Philo’s Theory of Eternal Creation: ‘De Prov.’ 1.6–9”, Proceedings of the American Academy for Jewish Research, vol. 46, part 2 (1979–80) 593–606, on pp. 601–03. 31 Diogenes Laertius 7.148 SVF 2.1132 LS 43A, also SVF 2.439. 32 Aetius 1.7.33 SVF 2.1027 LS 46A. See Winston, The Wisdom of Solomon, 176. 33 But note also Wisdom 1:6, where Sophia is herself described as pneuma. Support could be found in the above phrase for the notion that Sophia herself remains transcendent of the material world and that pneuma is her tool. A consistent case cannot be made however. One

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

Sophia and Pneuma

69

attributes34, a number of which would also be appropriate for Stoic pneuma35: intelligent (νοερόν)36, subtle (λεπτόν) and agile (ευκίνητον)37, penetrating through all spirits that are intelligent, pure and most subtle (διὰ πάντων χωροῦν πνευμάτων νοερῶν καθαρῶν λεπτοτάτων)38. Sophia herself is more mobile than any motion (πάσης γὰρ κινήσεως κινητικώτερον σοφία)39 and because of her pureness she extends through all things (διήκει δὲ καὶ χωρεῖ διὰ πάντων διὰ τὴν καθαρότητα).40 Pneuma is described and conceived here physically, as in Stoicism. The Stoics had no interest in Pla-

34

35

36

37

38

39 40

only needs to read down to the phrase ‘Sophia is more mobile than any motion’ to realize that the physical language, even if superlatively, is still being applied directly to Sophia rather then her pneuma. Perhaps what needs to be said is that a distinction can be made between Sophia and pneuma; not every pneuma is Sophia. The accumulation of epithets (cf. Oxyrhynchus Papyri XI 1380) as well as the feminine gender of Sophia has also drawn comparison between her and Isis religion: Kloppenborg, ‘Isis and Sophia’; Engel, Das Buch der Weisheit, 132–41; cf. below, p. 152, fn. 112. While this study emphasizes the Stoic resonances of this passage, it does not argue that other connections are absent. The first two epithets are not obviously Stoic. The only, perhaps tenuous, connection that Larcher (Le Livre de la Sagesse ii, 484), who is aware of the significance of Stoic cosmic pneuma language in the rest of Wisdom, can offer is that a Leiden papyrus exists (VII.41) which describes fire as πολυμερής, that the term λεπτομερής (note the following adjective) was used of the composition of fire and that fire and pneuma are closely related to Stoic thought (cf. p. 68, fn. 33). One can at least note that πολυμερής evokes physical connotations. The term, and the related νόος, was widely used in Greek philosophy (Cf. Liddell and others, Greek-English Lexicon). In Stoicism, mind is identified with God and with pneuma: cf. the description of God quoted above from Aetius 1.7.33; Diogenes Laertius 7.135–36 LS46B, also 7.147 54A; Cicero attributes to Chrysippus the thought that ‘divine power resides in reason and in the mind and intellect of universal nature’, N. D. 1.39 LS54B. These two words could be taken to carry a passive, atomic sense (Larcher, Le Livre de la Sagesse ii, 484–85). The clause considered next, however, indicates that the lightness of the spirit is emphasized as an explanation of Sophia’s ability to penetrate and influence all things, as does Stoic pneuma (Long, Hellenistic Philosophy, 159–60). The pre-Socratic Anaxagoras describes νόος as λεπτότατον (Wis 7:23), the material and directive force in the formation of the universe (DK B12; A. H. Armstrong, An Introduction to Ancient Philosophy, (London: Methuen, 31977; repr. Littlefield: Rowman and Allenheld, 1983), 17). See also SVF 2.780, 785; 1.484, in which the Stoic soul is described as a ‘subtle (λεπτομερής) selfmoving body’ (Winston, Wisdom of Solomon, 180–81). The phrase is reminiscent of the Stoic theory of ‘blending’ κρᾶσις (Larcher, Le Livre de la Sagesse ii, 491), which was used by Chrysippus (Alexander On mixture 216.14–218.6 SVF 2.473 LS48C) to explain the penetration of passive matter by pneuma (Long/Sedley, Hellenistic Philosophers I, 292–94). On the use χωρέω (‘pervade’) in close connection with διήκω (‘permeate’) as a Stoic trait, Kolarcik, ‘Book of Wisdom’, 504. This carries a similar meaning to εὐκίνητος, above, with added active emphasis (Larcher, Le Livre de la Sagesse ii, 493–95). Once again, compare the use of διήκω here with ἐνδιήκω which is used in the quote from Aetius 1.7.33 above. Consider also Diogenes Laertius 7.138 SVF 2.634 LS47O, where ‘intelligence pervades every part of [the world], just like the soul in us’ (εἰς ἅπαν αὐτοῦ μέρος διήκοντος τοῦ νοῦ, καθάπερ ἐφ᾽ ἡμῶν τῆς ψυχῆς) (Winston, The Wisdom of Solomon, 182).

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

70

The Order of the Cosmos

tonic ideal reality: their pneuma was a proportion of the elements of fire and air.41 The adjectives are ‘light’ and ‘fine’ because it was believed that by these qualities active pneuma could permeate through all passive matter, rationally ordering it. In Wisdom 8:1 we find Sophia ‘reaches mightily from one end of the earth to the other, and she orders all things well’. All of the above appears to reinforce the hypothesis that in the Book of Wisdom nature has a relative autonomy, along the lines of the Stoic cosmos, ordered by the spirit of God, Sophia. The created structures of the cosmos are such that it works for the righteous, and against the wicked. God himself is at times seen to relate to the cosmos through Sophia and at other times is described as acting directly on the cosmos. One final point is worth noting from Wisdom 7. The description of Sophia as having ‘an intelligent spirit’ (πνεῦμα νοερόν) is striking. In Stoic philosophy god is sometimes called an intelligent spirit, although god for the Stoics was either identical with the cosmos or with active pneuma within it.42 This last comment appropriately raises the issue of God as one which stands in tension with Stoicism, and to this we now turn.

3.5 The Criticism of Stoicism In the preceding analysis there has been seen in Wisdom both a use of Stoicism and at the same time a dedication to certain biblical language, particularly as it relates to the sovereign command of God. This section will address more precisely what the relationship is between these different domains of thought. The second excursus within the Exodus-Numbers narrative is found at Wisdom 13:1–15:19 and addresses the issue of idolatry.43 The first nine verses concentrate on the worship of nature. What is noticeable here, when compared with the following treatment of idolatry and animal worship, is how comparatively moderate the criticism is. There is sympathy for those who delight in the beauty of creation (v. 4), even if they are ultimately not excusable for failing to appreciate how much more delightful the creator must be (v. 9). The significance of this lies in the likely presence in verse two of criticism of the Stoics. Firstly, God is described as the artisan (ὁ τεχνίτης), language used by the Stoics of creative Nature.44 In contrast to the use of the word for Sophia (7:22; 8:6), in this passage it seems evident that God’s transcendence is being emphasized: while Wisdom betrays an enthusiasm for 41 For example, Alexander, On mixture 224, 14–17 SVF 2.442 LS47I; Long, Hellenistic Philosophy, 156. 42 Cf. above, p. 69, fn. 36; p. 68, fn. 33. One can at least note that πολυμερής evokes physical connotations. 43 Winston, The Wisdom of Solomon, 11. 44 Cf. p. 68.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

Conclusion

71

Stoic physics, it would not be acceptable for God to be identified with nature. In verse two, the first three elements to be criticised are fire (πῦρ) wind (πνεῦμα) or swift air (ταχινὸν ἀέρα). The combination of the Stoic active elements, fire and air, as was discussed above, is pneuma. The worship of other aspects of nature is also criticised, but this does not negate the presence of these terms which do not appear together in the same verse in the LXX.45

3.6 Conclusion It has been shown how Wisdom contains reformulated traditional Jewish doctrines, expressed allusively in the contemporary idiom and conceptuality, if not in a technically precise manner, of Stoic physics. In this way, Wisdom’s own understanding of the autonomy, justice and rationality of nature have been strengthened. However, Stoicism has certainly not been taken on uncritically. It is particularly with regard to the doctrine of God that Wisdom offers criticism. Wisdom wishes to benefit from the philosophical explanation of the workings of the cosmos that Stoicism supplies, but it is not acceptable for the Jewish creator God to be identified with the cosmos. Instead, Sophia operates in the role of Stoic pneuma. This allows God to be understood to remain transcendent, while retaining the philosophical benefits of Stoic physics. Within the Exodus-Numbers narrative, the ordering of the cosmos is not simply understood as rational as in Stoicism, unless the Jewish faith and law is understood as embodying the rational.46 Instead, it is ordered for the good of the righteous and is active in the miraculous to judge and educate humans.47 This study raises numerous questions. For instance, what more can be said about the relationship between God and creation? What difference does it make to view the cosmos, conceived in Stoic influenced terms, as ‘creation’? Further, in what other areas has Stoicism proved influential for Wisdom? How is the work of Sophia in ordering creation related to her work in bringing sages to enlightenment and how does the unified picture of salvation, discussed in Chapter Two, relate to this view of the cosmos? We will turn first to the question of creation in Chapter Four, considering the soul in Chapter Five. A full picture of the relationship between pneuma, the Exodus-Numbers narrative and the personal eschatology of the first part of the book will have to wait until Chapter Seven.

45 Hatch/Redpath, Concordance. 46 See below, p. 145. 47 A point discussed in more detail below, 9.4 The Providence of God in Wisdom.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

4. Creation and Matter 4.1 Introduction The previous chapter discussed how in Wisdom the nature of the cosmos is understood with the aid of the Stoic doctrine of pneuma, as being ordered by God through the work of Sophia in order to bless the righteous and judge the wicked. It could justifiably be asked at this point, however, how a Stoic doctrine of the cosmos – which essentially views matter as eternal – might relate to a Jewish doctrine of creation. Evidence that Wisdom connects these two ideas can be found at 16:24 and 11:17. For creation [κτίσις], serving you who made it [σοὶ τῷ ποιήσαντι ὑπηρετοῦσα], strains itself for punishment against the unrighteous […]. [NETS] For your all-powerful hand, which created [κτίσασα] the world out of formless matter [ἐξ ἀμόρφου ὕλης], was not at a loss to send out on them a multitude of bears or bold lions […]. [NETS]

In both of these passages, God’s providential work is set in the context of his creative activity. In 11:17, God’s creative ability is used to argue for his present ability to manipulate the world. His present activity is guaranteed not just because of the power he displayed in creation, but rather because of his character. Hence, both creation and providence flow from a single purpose and are consistent in character with one another. He can indeed do as he likes (11:17), but has chosen to order all things ‘by measure and number and weight’ (11:20) and the foolish are taught by an infestation of irrational creatures that ‘a person is punished by the very things by which the person sins’ (11:16). This language explicitly speaks of God, but it is apparent that his instrument in this is Sophia. She also fashioned all things (7:22), and orders all things well (8:1).1 In order to set out Wisdom’s thoughts on this matter more fully, the relevant texts will first be set out and discussed before we turn to the controverted issues of the ‘formless matter’ of 11:17 and creatio ex nihilo.

4.2 Creation in Wisdom We can begin with Wisdom’s recognition of the goodness of creation. The instrumental role of Sophia in the creation (7:22) is not used in order to allow a transcendent God to bridge the incommensurability of the sensible and 1

Winston (The Wisdom of Solomon, 189–90) discusses the likely Stoic allusions.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

74

Creation and Matter

intelligent.2 The nature of the world is a direct result of God’s will and so in Wisdom 1:14 we read: For he created [ἔκτισεν] all things that they might exist, and the generative forces of the world are wholesome, and there is no destructive poison in them, nor is the kingdom of Hades on earth. [NETS]

And in Wisdom 11:24 the following is found: For you love all things that exist and detest none of the things that you have made [ἐποίησας], for you would not have formed [κατεσκεύασας] anything if you had hated it. [NETS; my italics]

Consequently, death (1:13) and all evils in creation must be caused by something other than God; in Wisdom, the Devil (2:24) and humans (1:16) are blamed.3 In Wisdom, creation has an ethical role. The oppressors of the righteous individual (2:6) exhort themselves to make hedonistic use of the ‘good things which exist’ (τῶν ὄντων ἀγαθῶν) and to ‘make use of the creation [ἡ κτίσις] to the full as in youth’ but make no acknowledgement of the creator of these good things. Further, in failing to recognize the origin of their own existence they overlook the purpose of their lives (2:21–24), a purpose described in Wisdom in royal terms (9:2–3; 10:1–2). A recurring motif which is of relevance for Wisdom’s creational ethics is that of ‘works’ (τὰ ἔργα). In 8:4, Sophia chooses God’s works. In 9:9, it is said that she knows God’s works. Μετὰ σοῦ ἡ σοφία ἡ εἰδυῖα τὰ ἔργα σου καὶ παροῦσα, ὅτε ἐποίεις τὸν κόσμον, καὶ ἐπισταμένη τί ἀρεστὸν ἐν ὀφθαλμοῖς σου καὶ τί εὐθὲς ἐν ἐντολαῖς σου.

With you is wisdom, who knows your works and was present when you made the world, who understands what is pleasing in your sight and what is right according to your commandments.

In the same breath, Sophia’s presence at the creation of the world is mentioned and her knowledge of what is pleasing to God. Just as Stoicism based its ethics on the nature of things4, Wisdom too looks for a consistency between created nature and the way humans should act.5 God’s works of creation are educative (12:19; 13:1, 7). Humans are to respond accordingly with their own works. The contrast is made most starkly in Wisdom’s idolatry polemics (12:23–16:1). An idol is the ‘work’ of 2 3

4 5

Consider the role of the powers in Philo (Radice, ‘Philo’s Theology’, 136–37), particularly the Logos (Opif. 24–25; Cher. 127). On pneuma in Philo, cf. below, 6.4 Spirit in Philo. In contrast, note Wisdom’s view of the animals worshipped by the Egyptians, the ‘most despised and loathsome of animals’ (12:24). These are elements of God’s creation in which Wisdom finds little to praise. For detail, cf. below, 9.2 Fate and Providence in the Greek Tradition. The similarity is facilitated by Wisdom’s use of the biblical wisdom tradition, e. g. Prov 8:22 (Roland E. Murphy, The Tree of Life: An Exploration of Biblical Literature, [Cambridge: William B. Eerdmans, 32002], 112–21).

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

Creation from Pre-existent Matter

75

human hands, a mistaken response to the work of God’s hands (πλάσσω 15:8, 16; κατασκευάζω 13:4, 11), the product of someone who has failed to recognize the creator of all from his works (13:10). The language of creation thus carries with it an analogy to human creation, but God is the true craftsman (Compare τεχνίτης in 13:1 with 14:18) and Sophia the craftswoman (7:21; 8:6. Also 14:2).6 In summary, God is responsible for the nature of his creation at the same time as remaining transcendent above it. This is achieved through the ordering work of Sophia. The creation therefore reflects God’s good nature in its original state and in its present operation. It therefore plays a significant role in theological epistemology, in determining the purpose of human life and, consequently, ethics.

4.3 Creation from Pre-existent Matter The LXX of Genesis plays a foundational role Wisdom’s view of creation.7 In Wisdom 11:17, then, where the all-powerful hand of God ‘created the world out of formless-matter’ (κτίσασα τὸν κόσμον ἐξ ἀμόρφου ὕλης), it is the account of the creation in Genesis, where the earth is described as ‘invisible and unformed’ (Gen 1:2; ἀόρατος καὶ ἀκατασκεύαστος), which is the primary authoritative story behind the text. This is the case despite the fact that more textual and theological connections between the two texts might have been made. No reference is made here to the spirit who hovers over the waters which, as will be shown, is understood in the rest of Wisdom as Sophia (9:9).8 Also, the adjective used to describe the unformed matter is different: Wisdom uses ἄμορφος in contrast to Genesis 1:2 in which ἀκατασκεύαστος is found. Equally, the verb of creation that is used differs: ποιέω is used in Genesis 1:1; κτίζω is used in Wisdom 11:17. In other passages Wisdom is content to use ποιέω to describe the creation act (Wis 1:13; 2:23; 6:7; 9:1, 9; 11:24; 16:24). Consequently, although the LXX is foundational in the Book of Wisdom, it is being read here distinctively. This section is concerned with the probable philosophical allusions that contribute to this and how they relate to the philosophical and theological view of nature that has already been described.

6 7

8

Cf. 3.4 Sophia and Pneuma and 3.5 The Criticism of Stoicism. Larcher, Études, 86–87. Also, with regard to one portion of Wisdom, Udo Schwenk-Bressler, Sapientia Salomonis als ein Beispiel frühjüdischer Textauslegung: Die Auslegung des Buches Genesis, Exodus 1–15 and Teilen der Wüstentradition in Sap 10–19, Beiträge zur Erforschung des Alten Testaments und des antiken Judentums 32 (Frankfurt am Main: Lang, 1993). See below, 6. Spirit in the Biblical Tradition.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

76

Creation and Matter

4.3.1 Creatio ex nihilo The doctrine of Creation from Nothing is a Christian doctrine, ‘the intellectual preconditions’ for which took shape in the second century in the midst of the Church’s engagement with philosophical gnosticism and rejection of any notion of the use of unoriginate matter in creation. It was intended to express the omnipotence, freedom and uniqueness of God.9 There has been a concern in the history of interpretation of ‘formless matter’ in Wisdom 11:17 to discover this important doctrine in Jewish sources before it was formulated in Christian controversy.10 Gerhard May’s work has sounded an effective cautionary note in this regard.11 It has already been seen how important the biblical language concerning God’s creation of the world is in Wisdom. The question remains, however, as to how the Genesis creative act is understood in Wisdom to relate to other more philosophical conceptions of the world and God. The challenge seen by most commentators is to discover whether the presence of ‘formless matter’ implies some notion of the preexistence and therefore eternity of matter, in apparent disagreement with the later doctrine of creation from nothing.12 In order to deal more adequately with this discussion four things need to be said. Firstly, the central idea behind the later formulation of creatio ex nihilo cannot be of concern to the author of Wisdom. The context of 11:17 is a defence of the omnipotence of God in which it is argued that God could, in judgement, have performed a miracle and broken the autonomous natural order. However, he chose not to because the created natural order was, amongst other reasons, sufficiently powerful. Consequently, the passage has the same concern as the formulators of creatio ex nihilo to defend God’s omnipotence. If ‘formless matter’ had been perceived to be a threat to God’s omnipotence then it would hardly have been helpful to use that phrase to defend it. It seems evident, therefore, that ‘formless matter’ was not perceived to be a dangerous philosophical concept and therefore to be guided by the later concerns of creatio ex nihilo risks being anachronistic. Secondly, as David Winston points out, inspired by his reading of Grimm13, creation from nothing is the miracle par excellence and therefore the greatest argument for the omnipotence of God. If the author had held to such a doctrine it seems likely that it would have been brought forward at 9 Gerhard May, Creation ex Nihilo (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1994), xii–xiii. 10 For a brief history, Larcher, Le Livre de la Sagesse iii, 677, whose own treatment of the matter is not insubstantial (ibid., 676–81). For further discussion: cf. Winston, who sees the concern as anachronistic (Wisdom of Solomon, 38–39). 11 In addition, Winston, ‘Cosmogony’. 12 See for instance Reider’s strong antithesis between ‘Hebraic’ and ‘Greek’ views (Joseph Reider, The Book of Wisdom (New York: Harper, 1957), 145). 13 Winston, ‘Cosmogony’, 192–94; Carl Ludwig Wilibald Grimm, Das Buch der Weisheit, Kurzgesfasstes exegetisches Handbuch zu den Apokryphen des A. T. (Leipzig: S. Hirzel, 1860), 213.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

Creation from Pre-existent Matter

77

this point. In addition, the explanation of the ‘lesser’ miracles of the Exodus using Stoic conceptuality would be similarly surprising if the author held to an understanding of the creation of the world from nothing. Why explain these lesser miracles using contemporary ‘scientific’ theories if the power and will of God are understood to have been the only explanation for physical existence itself? Given this, it appears that the connection between creation and providence in Wisdom is as close as was expected. We should expect to discover that God’s interactions with the world at creation and in the present are conceived using the same conceptuality. While not unnecessarily closing other avenues of enquiry, it is therefore appropriate to ask how the formless matter of Wisdom 11:17 relates to the question of pneuma. Thirdly, Wisdom’s frequent expressions of the universal extent of God’s creative act (‘all things’ / τὰ πάντα: 1:14; 8:5; 9:1; 11:24) proves little. The verse under our consideration demonstrates this. If the creation of the world is a ‘formation’ of unformed matter, then even the most enthusiastic declarations of the universal extent of the creative act can be interpreted as a universal formation of unformed matter. One fourth and final note can be made here concerning the connection between later Christian doctrine and Wisdom. As will become more apparent, ‘formless matter’ is an inherently difficult concept. It implies that material without form is irrational. Philo’s treatment of the concept significantly uses negative adjectives.14 It is not at all clear what the eternal status of such matter is. The doctrine of creatio ex nihilo is a logical conclusion based on other scriptural and traditional foundations which the Book of Wisdom shares, as can be seen by the arguments for God’s sovereignty over creation. Wisdom’s reading of Genesis 1:2 is conceptually open enough that it should not be understood to contradict flatly the later formulation. 4.3.2 Formless Matter in Plato, Aristotle, the Stoics and Philo Adequately dealing with philosophical use of the word ὕλη is no small matter.15 The phrase ‘out of formless matter’ (ἐξ ἀμόρφου ὕλης) has possible textual antecedents in Aristotle and Plato. Aristotle should probably be placed to one side, as Wisdom contains few close textual affinities with his work and similarly, the conceptual shapes of the philosophy of Wisdom could not be said to draw profoundly on him.16 The appearance of the phrase in Physica 191a10 makes this apparent. The distinction in Aristotle between formed and unformed is merely conceptual and used to describe a

14 Philo, Opif. 22; James Drummond, Philo Judaeus, 2 vol. (London: Williams and Norgate, 1888) i, 298. 15 Heinz Happ, Hyle (Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 1971). 16 Larcher, Études, 212.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

78

Creation and Matter

‘third principle’, the factor of persistence in every change. The cosmos itself is eternal and had no original unformed state.17 Wisdom seems to be more familiar with some of Plato’s works, although whether this engagement was directly with Plato or through intermediaries is hard to judge. Even where there is a direct textual connection with a Platonic dialogue, the philosophical and theological context of the passage differs.18 The Timaeus is the most likely Platonic source. Comparisons between the creation accounts of Genesis and the Timaeus provided much debate in Jewish Alexandria.19 The description of the unformed matter as ‘invisible’ in LXX Genesis 1:2 (Timaeus 51A20 and 52A) can hardly be accidental and could only have encouraged Jewish meditation on the text. However, even if it is assumed that the dialogue was read literally (of this, more below) what can be made of a reader of the Timaeus, such as the author of Wisdom, who shows no interest in the doctrine of the Ideas?21 In addressing these ancient philosophers, care needs to be taken to distinguish between what we perceive Plato and Aristotle to be saying, and the potentially distinctive manner in which they were read in Hellenistic times. To pursue this further consideration, a brief discussion of Philo’s reading of the Timaeus and understanding of the act of creation may prove helpful.22 Philo’s early Middle Platonism23 can clearly be distinguished from the Book of Wisdom’s lack of interest in Platonic Ideas. Both thinkers, however, show a use and transformation of Stoicism and it is likely that this is the key factor in any reading of the Timaeus by Wisdom. The problem that Platonic Ideas present in using Philo for this purpose is most apparent when considering De opicifio mundi. In this work, Genesis 1:2 is not read with regard to the creation of the physical world, but rather with regard to the creation of the world of Ideas and in typical Middle Platonic fashion, these Ideas are subordinated as a principle to the one God and located in his mind (Opif. 19). God is thereby distanced from the creation by an intermediary, although not for the same reasons as in Wisdom.24 Although Philo reads Genesis 1:1–5 as referring to the creation of the world of Ideas, and takes the adjective ‘invisible’ not for unformed matter – as in

17 Aristotle, Phys., 191a,10; Long, Hellenistic Philosophy, 154. Also, see Phys. 209B for a discussion of the relation of this to ὕλη in Plato’s Timaeus; Happ, Hyle, 121–30. 18 See particularly Wisdom 9:15 and the comments in Larcher, Études, 208–11. 19 David T. Runia, Philo of Alexandria and the Timaeus of Plato (Leiden: Brill, 1986). 20 This first reference only occurs in some manuscripts. 21 Note the distinction on this matter between Antiochus and Eudorus (above, 1.4.2 Hellenistic Philosophy in Alexandria). 22 Runia provides a survey of readings of the Timaeus between Plato and Philo (Runia, Philo of Alexandria, 38–51). 23 Dillon, The Middle Platonists, 139–83; such an assertion should not be taken as a denial of Philo’s Jewishness (Runia, Philo of Alexandria, 20–22). 24 In Spec. 1.328–29 it is not deemed appropriate for God to come into contact with the misshapen and confused original matter. Cf. above, 4.2 Creation in Wisdom.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

Creation from Pre-existent Matter

79

the Timaeus – but for the ‘model of the world’ (Opif. 29), he has not thereby lost the language of creation as formation. So, for instance, in De plantatione 5 all matter is used in the creation of the world (See Opif. 171 and Tim. 33a). Philo’s preference for the literal Platonic schema in contrast to the available alternatives is set out most clearly in De aeternitate mundi 7–15. Aristotle himself encourages the literal reading of Plato, even while he cannot accept it, and Philo is aware of this (Aristotle Cael. 1:10; Philo Aet. 14–16). The three positions are that the cosmos is either eternal and uncreated (Aristotle), created and destructible (Atomists and Stoics) or created and indestructible (Plato).25 This last is also argued to be anticipated by Moses (19). The reasons for the rejection of the first two are laid out clearly in De opicifio mundi 7–11 where creation, providence and piety are linked.26 Those who believe God has nothing to do with the world (7) will be impious. In contrast, piety is called forth by God’s providential activity, which flows from his nature as ‘father and creator’ and ungrudging beneficence to all (10, 21; Tim. 28C3; 29E). This providential concern, once established by his creative nature, thence guarantees the cosmos’ indestructibility. Finally, it will be useful to consider Philo’s understanding of matter in the Timaeus, the ‘unformed, quality-less substrate out of which the cosmos is created’.27 This receptacle is interpreted through an understanding of Stoic οὐσία and Aristotelian ὕλη. However, as David Runia discusses, while with Aristotle and the Stoics unformed matter remained mental abstraction, for Philo this substance had a temporal reality at the beginning of creation. What then for Plato was “a ‘plastic’ spatial continuum in which random events take place and in which/out of which body is constructed”28 becomes in Philo merely a passive substance, waiting to be formed by an active principle. At the heart of Philo’s physics are the Stoic passive and active principles (Opif. 8) and these simplify his reading of the Timaeus and establish the philosophical basis of his language of creation by formation.29

4.3.3 Formless Matter in Wisdom It appears from the above that although Philo differs from Wisdom in his more explicit philosophical language, his understanding of a transcendent and separated – as opposed to transcendent and immanent – deity and his use of Platonic Ideas, it is still the case that Philo’s understanding of form 25 Peter Frick, Divine Providence in Philo of Alexandria, Texte und Studien zum antiken Judentum 77 (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1999), 102–09. 26 See above, 4.2 Creation in Wisdom; Frick, Divine Providence, 118. 27 Runia, Philo of Alexandria, 54, 142. 28 Ibid., 142. 29 Cf. Cher. 127; Radice, ‘Philo’s Theology’, 130, 136–38.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

80

Creation and Matter

and matter depends on the two Stoic active and passive principles, which find expression in ordering pneuma and passive matter, and this brings together his doctrines of providence and creation.30 It now appears likely that the form and matter of Wisdom 11:17 should best be read in continuity with the more developed allusions to Stoic physics which present elsewhere in the book. Given this, and given the caution we expressed with respect to direct connections between Wisdom and the Platonic dialogues, it is appropriate to assume that the author of Wisdom engaged with the concepts of Plato’s physics through the Stoics. The creation of the world from formless matter is then the foundation of the ordering of the cosmos into fire, air, water and earth and the establishing of its operation in the purposes of divine justice. For the Stoics, ironically, there was no creation but rather the eternal cycle of ἐκπύρωσις.31 However, we have shown repeatedly that Wisdom contains no mere repetition of the philosophy of its day and this topic of creation is no different.

4.4 Conclusion It has been argued that Wisdom’s reading of creation in Genesis fits coherently with its understanding of the cosmos, ordered for the benefit of the righteous. This coherency flows from a sharing of the Stoic conceptual framework of the two active and passive principles. The act of creation is then simply the initial forming of creation through the tensing and relaxing of pneuma which continues into the present. The current operation of pneuma, in realizing God’s purposes can be understood to be the continuation of that creative act.

30 See above, 4.3.2 Formless Matter in Plato, Aristotle, the Stoics and Philo. 31 Long, Hellenistic Philosophy, 211: this doctrine became less widely held from the period of Panaetius (c. 185–109 BCE) onwards; it would have been replaced by a view of the eternal nature of the cosmos.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

Part Three – Pneuma in Wisdom

The nature of pneuma in Wisdom can be analysed in terms of its different uses as the agent of cosmic order, the substance of the soul and Sophia. Chapter Five addresses the issue of pneuma in Wisdom from an anthropological perspective. Chapter Six explores the resources of biblical literature, in the Hebrew and in the Septuagint, that may have influenced Wisdom: in what sense can Wisdom’s use of pneuma, even as it was influenced by Stoicism, be understood as an interpretation of Jewish scripture?

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

5. Pneuma, Stoicism and Anthropology 5.1 Introduction It was argued in Chapter Three that Wisdom draws on Stoic philosophy in order to present its view of the cosmos as ordered for the benefit of the righteous and the punishment of the wicked. This discovery raises questions about the extent of Wisdom’s use of Stoicism. The discussion of Creation and Matter in the previous chapter highlighted some of the limitations of that engagement, particularly as it interacted with the transcendence of God. The unified picture of salvation in Wisdom (Chapter Two), also implies a philosophical connection between the roles of Sophia as the giver of cosmic order and the divine agent who enters the sage’s soul (Wis 1:4). Further, in Stoicism pneuma, which orders the cosmos, is also found the substance of which souls are composed.1 Any consideration of the personal eschatology of Wisdom, with which we will be concerned later in this work, must then ask the question as to whether Wisdom’s engagement with Stoicism extends to its understanding of the soul.

5.2 Soteriology and the Soul Inherent in the eschatological language of Wisdom is the issue of judgement. It is an uncontroversial point that the humans are judged in Wisdom because there is placed on them an expectation of certain types of behaviour. The character of this expectation is determined by who and what humans are in the eyes of their creator and judge. Anthropology is, from this point of view, an indirectly necessary topic for study when considering the eschatology of the book. The language of immortality is prominent in Wisdom and is also connected to the question of anthropology.2 Are humans immortal by the nature of their souls, or is immortality something which can be gained or lost? Once again, these questions direct us to consider further the creative purpose and nature of humanity. It has been argued that Wisdom’s understanding of the cosmos is framed, at least in part, by the Stoic understanding of all-pervading pneuma which is identified with Sophia herself. The Stoics’ understanding of the human soul 1 2

Cf. Annas, Hellenistic Philosophy of Mind, 50–56, and the discussion below for sources. Winston, The Wisdom of Solomon, 25–32; Kolarcik, ‘Book of Wisdom’, 446–47; below 7.3.2 Immortality and Incorruptibility.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

84

Pneuma, Stoicism and Anthropology

is that it is also pneuma and therefore part of the cosmic order.3 The soul can be distinguished from other parts of the one pneuma because of its particular tonos or tension.4 This discovery bring us to an awkward position. It implies that human beings already possess pneuma, or Sophia, because that is the nature of their soul. However, returning to the eschatological concerns above, Wisdom’s soteriology demands that humans do not already possess Sophia, as it is she whom humans are to seek in order to achieve salvation (1:4–5; 9:10, 18).5 To address this problem it will be necessary to investigate further the Stoic understanding of the soul and the nature of salvation and judgement in Wisdom.

5.3 The Stoic Human The Stoics were materialists.6 For them, the only things that existed were bodies.7 Even souls, being pneuma8, must fall into this category of body. Behind this standpoint lies the assumption that only corporeal things may act upon another thing, or be acted upon by something else.9 Therefore souls, which perceive the world and act upon it, must be physical. Even though a soul acts upon the world mediatorially through an animal body, even this demands that both be corporeal. In Stoicism the soul-body divide is a sub-category of a larger distinction in matter between the active and the passive principles, or that which ‘holds all things together’ and that which is held together.10 The reason for this is 3

Diogenes Laertius 7.156–57; for English translation, Brad Inwood/L. P. Gerson (trans.), Hellenistic Philosophy: Introductory Readings, (Indianapolis: Hackett, 21997); Long, Hellenistic Philosophy, 171. 4 Nemesius 70.6–71.4 LS 47J; Plutarch Stoic rep. 1053F-1054B SVF 2.449 LS 47M; Sellars, Stoicism, 104–6; Long, ‘Stoic Psychology’, 561. 5 For an alternative but provocatively similar text and interpretation that deals with the question of the relationship between soul and spirit, see J. J. Collins, ‘Life after Death in PseudoPhocylides’, in Jewish Cult and Hellenistic Culture: Essays on the Jewish Encounter with Hellenism and Roman Rule, SJSJ, vol. 100 (Leiden: Brill, 2005) 128–42. Here, body, soul and spirit each have different destinations at death. Pseudo-Phocylides shares with 1 Enoch and Wisdom a similar narrative regarding the fate of the soul after death. The primary difference between Collins’ interpretation of Pseudo-Phocylides and this reading of Wisdom is that in the latter pneuma cannot be considered a part of one’s being distinct from the soul. Pneuma is rather the essence from which soul and Sophia are composed. 6 Armstrong, Ancient Philosophy, 121. Note, however, that the world as a whole, formed by pneuma, and can be considered an ‘intelligent organism’ (Long, ‘Stoic Psychology’, 561; cf. Sedley, ‘Hellenistic Physics’, 384). 7 For example, Nemesius (De natura hominis SVF 1.518 LS 45C) on Cleanthes; Cicero, Acad. 1.39 SVF 1.90 LS 45A; Sedley, ‘Hellenistic Physics’, 383–84. 8 See above, 5.2 Soteriology and the Soul. 9 Nemesius De natura hominis SVF 2.773 LS 45C. 10 Diogenes Laertius 7.134 SVF 2.299, 300; Sedley, ‘Hellenistic Physics’, 384–86.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

The Stoic Human

85

that the Stoic soul is, elementally, pneuma, that is the active component of the entire cosmos and a combination of the two active elements, fire and air.11 The distinction between active and passive justifiably can be compared to Aristotelian form and matter in that the active principle creates order and structure in the universe.12 The important distinction between the two schemes is that in Stoicism even the active and passive principles are corporeal. At this point it would be understandable to wonder what has been gained by such a theory. If the human soul is pneuma, and pneuma permeates all passive matter throughout the entire cosmos – indeed giving the cosmos its form – then why are humans distinct from any other part of the cosmos? The answer to this must come in two parts. Firstly, for the Stoics, and indeed for Plato and Aristotle, the possession of soul does not in and of itself determine the uniqueness of humanity. Soul is the possession of animate life, that is life which is able to perceive and respond to the world around it, and this involves all animals as well as humans. In Platonism, metempsychosis presupposes the possibility of the foolish spending a subsequent life in a lesser, although still animate, life form. In Stoicism, however, soul is only one type of pneuma. The form of pneuma is determined by its tonos or tension; with the alteration of the tension of pneuma, different substances result.13 There is a scale of things, in which the beings higher in the hierarchy possess a greater level of unification in their functioning than the lower: that which grants cohesion to dead matter is called ἔξις; that which is found in inanimate living things is called φύσις and that found in animate life, ψυχή or soul.14 Secondly, if we were to ask what then does make humans distinct, the answer would be rationality. The joint possession of soul with animals does not render humans and animals essentially the same thing, but merely points us to the fact that it is not soul in and of itself which determines the distinction. That which does determine the distinction is reason. The conclusion of Balbus’ (representing a Stoic position) speech in Cicero’s De natura deorum (ii. 98–153) is that humanity and the gods stand at the pinnacle of cosmos, and justifiably so because of their reason (ii. 133). The hallmark of rationality for the Stoics is the ability to use language and they use this to emphasize the uniqueness of humans. It is even denied that animals possess emotions and desires because they are unable to express in language the content of their inner life. The most that could be said is that they have non-rational, animal forms of emotions and desires.15 Sedley, ‘Hellenistic Physics’, 384–88. Ibid., 385; cf. above, 4.3.2 Formless Matter in Plato, Aristotle, the Stoics and Philo. Cf. above, p. 65, 84 fn. 4; Long, Hellenistic Philosophy, 157. David Furley, ‘Cosmology’, in Keimpe Algra and others (ed.), The Cambridge History of Hellenistic Philosophy (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999) 412–51, on pp. 440– 41. 15 Annas, Hellenistic Philosophy of Mind, 64.

11 12 13 14

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

86

Pneuma, Stoicism and Anthropology

Stoic anthropology, especially in Chrysippus, was influenced by the medical advances of the Hellenistic age which were made particularly in Alexandria.16 Theories about the use of arteries to transmit pneuma, and the later discovery of the nervous system, were not accepted wholesale by the Stoics but rather influenced the idea of a controlling centre surrounded by peripheral sensors. The soul was conceived as extended throughout the body and having eight faculties or functions. These are the five senses, voice, reproduction and τὸ ἡγεμονικόν or ‘the governing part’. Like a spider sitting at the centre of its web, this receives and transmits sensations and instructions to the extremities.17 It functions in four ways: appearance (the reception of information), assent (the interpretation of information), impulse (our acting in response to information) and reason. It is as reason develops in the maturing human that impulse, in particular, ceases to be an innate response and instead becomes a rational choice.18 As a child, the human is little different from an animal, except in terms of potential. The irrational human lowers himself or herself to the level of an unthinking animal. The above has presented a brief but technical picture of the Stoic understanding of pneuma as soul and of human distinctiveness. The influence of the Stoic theory of pneuma on Wisdom’s cosmology has already been discussed, as has the connection in Stoicism between cosmology and anthropology. The question must still be asked as to whether this influence, which is apparent in Wisdom’s cosmology, extends to Wisdom’s anthropology. If it does not we may wish to consider how Wisdom’s theology might be considered cohesive.

5.4 Anthropology in Wisdom 5.4.1 General Issues Tackling the question of Wisdom’s anthropology is no small matter. The question of Platonic influence in Wisdom’s understanding of the soul will be discussed below in section 7.2.4 The Platonic Soul. The conclusions of that study will be that there is a partially common structure to Wisdom and Plato’s thought, as it is found in Phaedo, which involves an identification of the individual with the soul, and a recognition that the mortal life is determinative for future existence. From this, Wisdom is able to use philosophical language to describe its own belief system.

16 Ibid., 20–26; on the early Alexandrian medical use of pneuma, Longrigg, Greek Rational Medicine, 177–219. For the following see Galen Plac. iii.1.10–15. 17 SVF ii, 287. 18 Long, Hellenistic Philosophy, 174.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

Anthropology in Wisdom

87

The question of the origin of souls has no clear answer. On the basis of Wisdom 8:19–20 it seems possible that some form of the pre-existence of the soul is held along the lines of Philo’s understanding where souls are created before their incarnation. There is no evidence for a doctrine of metempsychosis in Wisdom. Given the above and given the absence of Stoic technical description and philosophical argument in Wisdom, a note of caution should be sounded. It is plain that Stoicism is not the only philosophical tradition which has influenced Wisdom. Wisdom’s position will have to be characterized by taking into account all of these influences. The identification of the self with the soul that is made in Platonism and which Wisdom implicitly also takes up, is less clear in Stoicism for the same reason that it is clear in Wisdom. In Wisdom the conscious preservation of the soul after death implies an identification of the self with it. In Stoicism, the ambiguity concerning the length of persistence of the soul after death undermines such a strong identification. In practice, however, and in popular usage, the identification of the self with soul is likely to have been uncontroversial. 5.4.2 Pneuma and Anthropology Wisdom contains a provocative connection between pneuma and anthropology in 15:16, as noted by Joachim Schaper.19 Here, the idolater is described as being τὸ πνεῦμα δεδανεισμένος (‘one whose spirit is borrowed’). By extension, this description applies to all human beings. Schaper rightly identifies that the issue in question in the passage is that of the comparison between the living idolater and the lifeless idol (v. 17), and that the determining factor for life and death is the presence or absence of this spirit. It seems clear from 15:8, 11 and 16:14 that the language of the borrowed spirit is interchangeable with that of the soul.20 In 15:8 the debt of a soul is demanded when the idol creator returns to the earth which he moulds. In 15:11 the idolater is described as ignorant of the one who formed him, inspired (ἐμπνέω) an active soul into him and who similarly breathed (ἐμφυσάω) a lively spirit. In 16:14, pneuma and soul are again placed in parallelism. Plainly, Genesis 2:7 is an important influence for this language.21 There, God forms the man from the dust of the earth and breaths (ἐμφυσάω) into his face the breath of life (note the use of πνοὴν and not

19 Joachim Schaper, ‘“… denn er ist besser als das, was er anbetet” (Sapientia Salomonis 15:17)’, Michaela Bauks/Kathrin Liess/Peter Riede (ed.), Was ist der Mensch, dass du seiner gedenkst? (Psalm 8:5) (Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener, 2008) 455–64. 20 In addition, in 9:15 soul and mind are also positioned in parallel. 21 For more on this below, 6. Spirit in the Biblical Tradition.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

88

Pneuma, Stoicism and Anthropology

πνεῦμα). The man becomes a living soul (ἐγένετο ὁ ἄνθρωπος εἰς ψυχὴν ζῶσαν).

The nature of the relationship between this borrowed pneuma and the other uses of the term in Wisdom is not straightforward. The nub of the problem can be clarified by defining three types of pneuma language which occur in the book. Firstly, there is cosmic pneuma. This permeates the cosmos, providing order and structure in a Stoic fashion (1:7). A simple reading of Wisdom 1:4–7 would identify this pneuma with Sophia although, as will be seen, within these four verses there can be found reason to question this. Secondly, there is the pneuma that is the living element of a human (15:11). Thirdly, there is Sophia, within whom there is an intelligent pneuma (7:22). Like the first pneuma, she pervades through all things (7:24) and ‘orders all things well’. She is also described as ‘pneuma of wisdom’ (7:7) and appears to be equated with God’s ‘holy pneuma’ in 9:17. While Sophia may pervade all things, she is the possession of no human by birthright but is always the gift of God (8:19–21). The first and third pneuma appear to be identical, but even within the opening verses of the book an ambiguity is apparent, in that Sophia will not enter a deceitful soul (1:4) because ‘a holy and disciplined pneuma will flee from deceit’ (1:5).22 And yet, the spirit of the Lord is present throughout all of creation (compare 7:24 and 8:1). No explanation is given for the simultaneous universal presence of pneuma and unfailing absence of any holy and disciplined pneuma (of which we assume Sophia is one). Perhaps the expectation that Wisdom should address these questions is unfair. After all, to imagine constructively a solution is not particularly difficult: one simply has to conclude that the spirit of God is capable of existing in different modes or that the possession of Sophia by a soul is a personal and relational dwelling as opposed to the mere physical permeation and ordering of all things, including souls. Such speculation, however, takes us beyond the categories of Stoicism. It is not clear that a Stoic would be able to discern the difference between a personal relation and a physical connection. Having discussed the relationship between pneuma and Sophia in Wisdom, it is now necessary to address our middle category – that is pneuma as soul – and identify how this is connected to the others. A simple connection with the pneuma of Wisdom 1:7 seems unlikely: the all pervading pneuma of Stoicism and Wisdom could not be described as the defining and life-giving possession of humans. After all, stones are not alive or human but they are

22 Note Levison’s interpretation of this verse; the ‘holy and disciplined spirit’ is a human soul. Although the commentators tend not to follow this line, it is not without merit. Firstly, verses one to five may offer an inclusion (δικαιοσύνην / ἀδικίας). This would create parallel between the opening exhortation to humans in verse one and a description of the holy and disciplined human life. Secondly, παιδεία is usually associated with the sage’s life (Wis 2:12; 3:11; 6:17x2; 7:14). Such an insight does not change the argument in question but rather provides more evidence for the understanding of the soul as pneuma (Levison, Spirit, 69).

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

Anthropology in Wisdom

89

pervaded by cosmic pneuma just as much as any human (8:1). Stoicism has the conceptuality to explore this issue further in its use of the concept of tension23, but this type of language is not used in Wisdom in direct relationship to the soul. Might the soul be related to Sophia? This seems unlikely as well. Sophia is not the possession of all humans and certainly not of idolaters. On this topic, Wisdom 11:24(25)-12:2 is a potentially important passage and to this we now turn. Schaper argues that Wisdom 11:24(25)-12:2 shows that the life of humanity is founded in the gift of God of a share in his spirit.24 With regard to 12:1, he finds that ἐν πᾶσιν should be translated as referring to all people rather than all things. The phrase could be masculine or neuter. In doing this he argues that the phrase anticipates τοὺς παραπίπτοντας (‘those who fall into error’) in 12:2 rather following τὰ ὄντα πάντα (‘all things which exist’) in 11:24. In 11:15–20, however, Wisdom reflects on the manner of God’s interaction with sinners. God was perfectly capable of destroying idolaters by terrible creatures (vv. 17–19), but instead has ordered matters ‘by measure, number and weight’ (v. 20) in order that ‘they might learn that a person is punished by the very things by which the person sins’ (v. 16). The reflection on divine might is continued in 11:21–22: the whole world is ‘like a drop of dew’ (v. 22) before him. In 11:23 another reason, in addition to the one of order, is given to explain why divine power is not immediately unleashed in response to sin. God is merciful to all (πάντας: masculine plural). In 11:24 the argument becomes more general. We read that God loves τὰ ὄντα πάντα (‘all things which exist’: neuter plural) and detests nothing that he has made. The movement in the argument from 11:23 to 11:24 is from the particular to the general. The latter serves to justify the former. God is merciful to all humans, for (γὰρ) he loves all of his creation. In 11:26, the focus turns again to the human: God is described as φιλόψυχος (‘loving human beings’25). In 12:1, then, the immediate preceding and following focus is on human beings. However, in 11:24 a movement was made to the general truth in order to prove the particular and the same could be happening here. The claim that God’s immortal pneuma is in ‘all’ is similarly preceded by the explanatory ‘for’ (γὰρ). The same move is made in a less ambiguous fashion in 1:14 and in 12:13–16. In 12:13–14, the context is revealed to be one of judgement and therefore personal. In 12:15 it says that God rules τὰ πάντα (‘all things’) righteously. In 12:16 the two ambiguous uses of πάντων are clarified by reference to the preceding verses and the themes of sovereignty (impersonal because of 12:15) and judgement (personal): God’s sovereignty over ‘all things’ causes him to spare all people.

23 See above, 5.3 The Stoic Human. 24 Schaper, ‘… denn er ist besser’, 460; alternatively, Larcher, Le Livre de la Sagesse iii, 687, 700. 25 Larcher, Le Livre de la Sagesse iii, 697.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

90

Pneuma, Stoicism and Anthropology

If we return to 12:1, it can be seen that the argument of the passage is unaffected by this discussion. This is because the larger category of all created things includes humans. God’s proprietorial mercy could apply to the inanimate creation as much as to the animate creation, but the argument that the spirit of God exists particularly in humans and that it is this which distinguishes humans from ‘dead’ matter seems difficult to sustain for several further reasons. Firstly, in this passage the benevolence of God is directed towards all things that exist. This benevolence is also directed towards humans, but not to the exclusion of all else. Humans are viewed as a subset of creation. Therefore, it would be surprising to discover in 12:1 that humans were being strongly distinguished from the rest of creation. This would be a change in the form of the argument that is found in 11:23–24, when it does appear that the same form of argument is being used. Alternatively, it would be consistent with the preceding argument to assert God’s universal benevolence towards all creation as a basis for his benevolence towards humanity.26 In addition, it has already been argued that the cosmic pneuma of 1:7 is not the sole possession of humans and that humans do not in fact possess Sophia by nature.27 On this basis then, it would be a surprising conclusion to discover that 12:1 taught the universal possession of the spirit of God by humanity. Returning briefly to Chapter 15, it may be noticed that the context is an epistemological one. In 15:3, knowledge of God is asserted to be ‘complete righteousness’ and in 15:4 the tirade against idolatry begins again because of its potential to mislead humans from the contemplation of what is truly divine. Given this context and the epistemological role of Sophia in 9:17, it would (again) be surprising to discover that Wisdom, in its language of pneuma as soul, wished to assert the particular innate presence of God in humanity in contradistinction to the absence of the divine in an idol, and this would be the case if a strong connection was present between 15:16 and the pneuma of 1:7. The pneuma in 15:16 is plainly soul, but the relationship of soul to Sophia and divine pneuma remains unclear without the help of Stoicism. If we turn to Stoicism for help, we discover that the soul is not the unique possession of humans.28

26 The issues and arguments addressed in the preceding paragraphs are not widely considered in the secondly literature. This would appear to be because the issue of the relationships of pneuma, Sophia and soul have not been seen as a significant problem in the book: Larcher (Le Livre de la Sagesse iii, 687, 699–701) identifies this pneuma with a unique and transcendent creator spirit, referring to LXX Ps 103:30, drawn into close proximity with the Stoic cosmic pneuma. His translation (dans tous les êtres), with the reference to Ps 103, implies a reference to all living beings; Winston (The Wisdom of Solomon, 231) does not discuss the issues, but his translation (‘in them all’) implies a common subject of human beings in view from 11:26–12:2. 27 Larcher (Le Livre de la Sagesse iii,700) argues for the influence of Stoic cosmic pneuma here. 28 See the discussion of animate life above, p. 85.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

Stoicism, Wisdom and Rationality

91

In conclusion to this section something more positive must be said and this can be done through an assessment of the language of reflection in Wisdom 2:23 and 7:26. For God created human beings for incorruption, and made them the image of his own nature. (NETS Wisdom 2:23) For she is a reflection of eternal light, a spotless mirror of the working of God, and an image of his goodness. (NRSV Wisdom 7:26)

The first verse above has caused debate in scholarship. Attention has been paid to the nature of incorruption, with its intimations of Epicurean divinity29, and to the textual critical question regarding the genitive noun.30 For our purposes it is sufficient simply to reflect on the most familiar, anthropological aspect of the sentence. Humanity, not all animate life, was created in the image of an aspect of God. This in itself is relatively unenlightening, but more can be gained by combining it with the second statement where three parallel statements declare that Sophia is also, in some manner, a reflection of the divine being. When it is considered that in the very next verse Sophia’s role is described as ‘passing into holy souls and making them friends of God’, the connection between human identity and purpose and the work of Sophia is somewhat clarified. Humans were created in the divine image and in this lies their uniqueness. More could be said about the precise nature of that image but this much is clear: the image either cannot be complete or is in some sense impaired (2:24). Sophia, with her superior and unimpaired likeness to the divine, has the imperishable (12:1) qualities required in order to restore or complete humanity. She is able to enter the human soul and reform it in the divine image.

5.5 Stoicism, Wisdom and Rationality In conclusion, it is now time to return to the issue of Stoicism and ask whether it illuminates or offers contrast to our discussion of Wisdom. Wisdom’s loose use of pneuma language with regard to its understanding of soul is broadly compatible with the picture of Stoic anthropology set out in Section 5.3 The Stoic Human. In Stoicism, as has been discussed, the portion of the all-pervading pneuma that is in animate life is called soul. Souls can be distinguished from other portions of pneuma because of the particular tension they have. Although a human’s soul is different from an animal’s, the possession of a soul does not in and of itself determine humanity’s uniqueness. At this point, a degree of tension can be observed between the two thought-worlds. Wisdom’s loyalty to the narrative of Genesis 2:7 entails a 29 Reese, Hellenistic Influence, 65–70. 30 Sapientia Salomonis, 101.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

92

Pneuma, Stoicism and Anthropology

commitment to an assumption of humanity’s uniqueness in comparison to the animal kingdom and the most natural way of expressing this, encouraged by the LXX, is by establishing this uniqueness on the basis of the soul. Wisdom would therefore be uncomfortable with an unqualified expression of the Stoic commonplace that souls were possessed by all animate life.31 A related phenomenon may be the characterization of the hated Egyptian animals of worship as ‘irrational’ (11:15x2) and ‘foolish’ (15:18). In Stoicism, it was rationality which distinguished humanity from the animal world, a concept directly related to the tension of the soul.32 Identifying the irrationality of animals is therefore an effective way of reinforcing human superiority if the language of pneuma and soul were to appear ambiguous. The similarity between Sophia and the Stoic cosmic pneuma encourages one to see Sophia as the source of order and rationality. We have also seen how unification of matter increased proportionately with pneumatic tension and that this could affect the length of time a departed soul could persist in existence before dissolving. Although the oppressors of Wisdom 2 are even less obviously Stoics than Epicureans, the description of the dissolving of the soul in 2:2–4 is characteristically Hellenistic and would not be considered inappropriate for many Stoics.33 It is perhaps possible, and this is the most that can be said, that Sophia’s attractiveness for a Jewish sage influenced by Stoicism, was that through her divine rationality, and the ordering and unification that would result from the possession of her, she provided an explication and reassurance of the possibility of an enduring eternal life of the soul for those who otherwise would have heard from all around of its dissolution at death.

31 On animate life, see above on p. 85. 32 See p. 85, above. 33 Discussed below, 7.2.6 Hellenistic Souls.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

6. Spirit in the Biblical Tradition 6.1 Introduction The preceding chapters have engaged with the Book of Wisdom’s allusions to Greek philosophy in its use of the concept of pneuma with regard to the cosmos, Sophia and the human soul. It is apparent, though, that Wisdom is a work saturated with references to biblical literature. A full picture of Wisdom’s use of pneuma cannot then fail to explore the manner in which this biblical material is being read. This is the task of this chapter. The first section of this chapter (6.2 The Spirit in the Old Testament) will consider the Old Testament background of ‘spirit’. The second (6.3 Spirit in the LXX) will attempt to assess the use of ‘spirit’ in the LXX, following the material from the first section as it is translated, discussing the choice of translation terms and noting any relevant new material so as to appreciate the manner in which Old Testament categories, texts and ideas have been received by the forebears of Wisdom and in so doing been related to contemporary Hellenistic ideas. The chapter will conclude with an assessment of ‘spirit’ in Philo (6.4 Spirit in Philo), in order to highlight the distinctiveness of Wisdom. In treating the Old Testament material, two different trajectories of thought need to be managed. Firstly, the Hebrew material must be allowed to speak for itself. Only then will the distinctiveness of any Hellenistic interpretation of it be made distinct. Secondly, it is apparent that some aspects of the texts are simply not taken up in the later interpretation of our era and are therefore of limited importance to Wisdom.1 The purpose will be to emphasize the particular hermeneutical choices which Wisdom makes and receives from its cultural context, thus highlighting the particularity of Wisdom’s interpretation. There is then the need for both a general assessment of the available material, as well as a directed examination of particular passages. This is not the place for detailed discussion of the word ‫ח‬ ַ ‫ רוּ‬in its ancient near-east context, or even for an adequate description of its usage in the Old Testament, Septuagint and Greek culture. Each of these topics would provide ample resources for book length treatments. Inevitably then, the following will aim for a brief but representative summary for each section of material. A cautious maximalist approach to the varying usages and understandings of words will be appropriate: all references to ‘spirit’ could be potentially meaningful for a philosophically and theologically motivated 1

Consider, for instance, the absence from Wisdom of Bezalel (Exod 31:2–3), filled with a spirit of God; cf. below, p. 124.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

94

Spirit in the Biblical Tradition

Hellenistic reader. We cannot simply add all the possible meanings of one word in order to find one concept.2 Instead, we are concerned to find the literary, philosophical and theological possibilities of the texts within a Hellenistic context. We must presume that our Hellenistic readers were capable and willing to connect the different uses of the same term.

6.2 The Spirit in the Old Testament For the purposes of modern Old Testament study it would be important to assess material according to the different categories of biblical authorship (e. g. the Jahwist, the Elohist and Deuteronomist). For this work, these categories cannot play a role in our final assessment because they are alien to our area of study. Hellenistic authors and readers would not appreciate such distinctions. A similar assessment can be made of comparative-semitic analyses. Important as they are in their own field, and while it is possible to note the ַ ‫ רוּ‬in the concepts of breath and the wind, this apparent common roots of ‫ח‬ is not an attempt to write a history of the development of a concept, but rather to sketch that which is necessary in order to best appreciate the use of a term in the Hellenistic era. When this study finally turns to Wisdom itself we will be enabled to see the choices in interpretation that have been made by the author, or his forefathers, in the preferences shown for certain parts of the Old Testament sources. 6.2.1 Summary of the Usage of Rûaḥ ַ ‫ רוּ‬may be categorised as a verbal noun based on the infinitive.3 The form ‫ח‬ In the Old Testament it occurs 378 times in the Hebrew and 11 times in the Aramaic.4 The gender of the word is predominantly, although not exclusively, feminine.5 It may be onomatopoeic and carries the sense of the movement of the wind and the breathing of a human.6 By extension it also refers to the life of the human who breathes and in some cases to the life of other animals as well. It also refers to the emotional, intellectual or volitional dis2 3 4

5 6

Marie E. Isaacs, The Concept of Spirit (London: Heythrop Monographs, 1976), 59. Wilhelm Gesenius/E. Kautzsch/A. E. Cowley, Gesenius’ Hebrew Grammar, 2nd english edn (Oxford: Clarendon, 1910), §83a-b. S. Tengström, ‘‫ח‬ ַ ‫ רוּ‬Rûaḥ ’, parts I–VI, in G. Johannes Botterweck/Helmer Ringgren/ Heinz-Josef Fabry (ed.), Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament, 15 vol. (1974–), xiv (2004) 365–96, 372. Ibid.; for discussion of gender and the particular uses of ‫ח‬ ַ ‫רוּ‬, see the footnotes in the relevant sections below. Ibid., 367–68.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

The Spirit in the Old Testament

95

position of such a life at a moment in time. Theologically, usage extends to life understood as a divine gift and therefore closely related to a divine spirit. The creative divine spirit, perhaps best understood as the presence and agency of God in the world, also operates soteriologically or re-creatively and is present in the midst of the exodus community as well as empowering Israelite leaders with intellectual and physical abilities. This role of the spirit is also manifest, with some exceptions, in the role of the prophet. Spirit also has an important eschatological function. Finally, the evidence will be examined for connections between the concepts of wisdom and spirit. 6.2.2 Wind ַ ‫ רוּ‬extends from the storm (Jonah 1:4) to the lightest The physical sense of ‫ח‬ of breezes (Gen 3:8).7 Metaphorically, the word is used for the worthless or insubstantial, such as in descriptions of idols (e. g. Isa 41:29). The basis for this comparison is the ineffectiveness of the idol: they are worthless in their powerless to benefit the worshipper. Closely associated with this usage is the term ‫בל‬ ֶ ‫ה‬ ֶ (vapour, breath, vanity (fig.); e. g. Eccl 1:14), which implies that in this context powerful storms are not envisaged but rather the ephemeral breath of wind. Similarly, treacherous humans are compared to a breath ֶ ‫ה‬ ֶ ), as are idols (Jer 51:18; ‫בל‬ ֶ ‫ה‬ ֶ ) that weigh little in the balance. (Ps 62:10; ‫בל‬ ַ ‫ רוּ‬in the context of Storm and ephemerality come together in the usage of ‫ח‬ judgement where the wind blows away the light and insubstantial chaff (Ps 1:4). In these texts, wind is depicted as an instrument of God (e. g. Gen 8:1; Exod 10:13; Nu. 11:31; Jonah 1:4; Jer 49:36). Fifteen texts refer to a wind of the Lord or of God8, although the phrase ‫הים‬ ִ ‫ל‬ ׂ ‫א‬ ֶ ‫ח‬ ַ ‫ רוּ‬does not occur with this sense – with one exception – but only of a possessing or an enabling spirit of leadership or prophecy. The one exception is a crucial text ַ ‫ רוּ‬is plainly for this topic. In Genesis 1:2 the meteorological sense of ‫ח‬ important because of the physical language that is present of creation, water and movement.9 The text of itself gives no encouragement in understanding ַ ‫ רוּ‬as underpinning or ordering the creation (as might be considered if the ‫ח‬ spirit of God was to be identified with a personified wisdom). It rather presents a forceful wind, the potential creative power of God, standing in tandem with the unformed world, waiting for the divine command. A close

7

8 9

As in the Dead Sea Scrolls, the gender of ‫ח‬ ַ ‫ רוּ‬as wind can be either masculine (e. g. Exod 10:19; 1QM 9:13) or feminine (Jonah 1:4; 1QH 7:23) (Arthur Everett Sekki, The Meaning of Rûaḥ at Qumran, SBL Dissertation Series 110 (Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1989), 173). Tengström, ‘‫ח‬ ַ ‫ רוּ‬Rûaḥ ’, 382. Whether the construct should be interpreted as genitive or superlative is largely irrelevant for our discussion: we are not looking for the ‘correct’ reading, but rather attempting to identify theological possibilities that would have presented themselves to the Hellenistic Jewish mind.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

96

Spirit in the Biblical Tradition

connection between God and ‘his wind’ is also plain in Psalm 147:18, 148:8 and particularly 33:6 where, in parallel with the ‘word of the Lord’, the wind is described as the breath of God’s mouth.

6.2.3 Breath, Life and the Centre of Personality The next area of usage is in regard to respiration and subsequently human life.10 For example, in his suffering Job’s breath is strange to his wife (Job 19:17); all the host of heaven were made by the breath of the Lord (Ps 33:6); and the hated idols have no breath within them (Jer 51:17). This last of these uses breath ‫ח‬ ַ ‫ רוּ‬as the principle of life in the body.11 Conseַ ‫רוּ‬ quently, in Genesis 6:17 (and also 7:22) we read of the ‘breath of life’ (‫ח‬ ‫חִיימ‬ ַ ) which is used to describe all the creatures that will be destroyed by the ַ ‫ רוּ‬of creatures flood. Similarly in Psalm 104:29, it is the taking away of the ‫ח‬ which leads to their death and in the following verse it is the sending forth of God’s spirit that leads to the creation of creatures. This last verse encourages ַ ‫( רוּ‬understood as breath, life and spirit) in its relaa synthetic analysis of ‫ח‬ tion to a divine creative agent. A further verse which might, on first glance, be seen to do the same should be treated cautiously. In Genesis 2:7 the ‘man of dust’ is formed from the ground. God breathes into his nostrils the breath of life (‫ח ִיּימ‬ ַ ‫מת‬ ַ ‫שׁ‬ ְ ‫ )נ ׅ‬and the man becomes a living being (‫ח ָיּה‬ ַ ‫פשׁ‬ ֶ ֶ ‫)נ‬. The idea of man’s life being directly connected with God’s breathing and breath is ַ ‫ רוּ‬is linked to the life of humans. It fostered by Genesis 6:3 in which God’s ‫ח‬ is noteworthy, however, that in 2:7, where God’s ‘breath’ and human life is ָ ‫שׁ‬ ָ ְ ‫ נ‬is used and not ‫ח‬ ַ ‫רוּ‬. Elsewhere in the Hebrew connected so closely, ‫מה‬ Bible, the two words are used interchangeably with the sense of breath in close relation to the ideas of this passage (Job 27:3; 32:8; 33:4; also see Isa 57:16). Although it is not clear that a direct connection with the spirit of God (below, 6.2.4 The Spirit of God) is intended, such a connection can be read.12 In Genesis (6:17; 7:22) we have already come across the phrase ‫ח‬ ַ ‫רוּ‬ ַ ‫מת‬ ַ ‫שׁ‬ ְ ‫ נ ׅ‬of ‫ח ִיּים‬ ַ in a J passage which appears to be synonymous with the ‫ח ִיּים‬ 2:7. It is also difficult to argue with any confidence that the choice of word in 2:7 has been used to avoid the connection with the Spirit of God of Genesis 1:2, this passage being from the later Priestly writings. However, despite all of this, for a synthesizing reader the absence of ‫ח‬ ַ ‫ רוּ‬here discourages easy harmonization. 10 In the Bible, ‫ח‬ ַ ‫ רוּ‬as breath can be either masculine (Eccl 3:19) or feminine (Isa 33:11). In the DSS, there is no evidence for its gender (Sekki, The Meaning of Rûaḥ , 179). 11 The associated words ‫מה‬ ָ ‫שׁ‬ ָ ְ ‫ נ‬and ‫פשׁ‬ ֶ ֶ ‫ נ‬are both feminine. In the DSS, the ‫ח‬ ַ ‫ רוּ‬as the spirit of a human is consistently feminine (Sekki, The Meaning of Rûaḥ , 99–100). 12 Note also Isa 57:16 which is another instance of the parallel usage of the two terms but in which the spirit of man is stated to have been made (George T. Montague, The Holy Spirit: Growth of a Biblical Tradition (New York, Paulist, 1976), 6).

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

The Spirit in the Old Testament

97

In order to nuance the argument still further it is worth turning to Ezekiel 37. Here, the restoration of the dead to life is stated to be a metaphor for the return from exile and the granting of the spirit of the Lord (‫חי‬ ִ ‫ )רוּ‬to the exiles (v. 14). The metaphor relies on the effectiveness of its image, in that it ַ ‫( רוּ‬v. 9) which causes life to return to bones. Even here, howis ‘breath’ or ‫ח‬ ever, the same reticence seen in Genesis 2:7 is present. The breath from the four winds (v. 9) sent directly from God (v. 5) to give life to the bones at the command of Ezekiel (v. 7) is not identified with the restorationist gift of the spirit. While it is sent from God it is not identified possessively and singularly as ‘his’ spirit. The verbal and semantic overlap between the uses is being exploited for poetic and rhetorical impact. Humanity has its life – its breath – directly from the mouth of God. And yet, the relationship between the breath of life and the spirit of God remains ambiguous. ַ ‫ רוּ‬as life, and also the centre of personality, is cloThe understanding of ‫ח‬ ֶ ֶ ‫נ‬. With respect to a life princisely associated in meaning with the noun ‫פשׁ‬ ֶ ֶ ‫ נ‬is linked with the blood of a creature in Genesis 9:4–5 and is present ple, ‫פשׁ‬ ַ ‫שׁ‬ ְ ‫ח ִיּימ נ ׅ‬ ַ ) into the in Genesis 2:713 where God breathes the ‘breath of life’ (‫מת‬ man, making him a living being (‫חָיה‬ ַ ‫פשׁ‬ ֶ ֶ ‫)נ‬. Both words can carry the sense of a distinct interior component of a person, the self conceived in potential ֵ , see independence from the body, in much the same way as ‘heart’ (‫לב‬ ֶ ֶ ‫ נ‬can be used simply for the whole person Ps 51:19).14 It is true that ‫פשׁ‬ (Exod 1:5; Lev 2:1). However, with respect to the centre of personality, both words refer to the attitude or character of the person by describing this interָ ‫פ‬ ְ ‫ר‬ ָ ior component. So, in Judges 8:3, the anger of the Ephraimites calms (‫תה‬ ַ ‫אי־רוּ‬ ֵ ‫כּ‬ ְ ‫דּ‬ ַ ) In Pro‫חם‬ ָ ‫ )רוּ‬and Ps 34:19 speaks of the ‘crushed in spirit’ (‫ח‬ ַ ‫רוּ‬, understood verbs 16:2, the ‘spirit’ is the ethical centre of a person. The ‫ח‬ as the centre of intellectual activity is also seen in passages such as Isaiah 29:24, where ‘erring in spirit’ is juxtaposed with coming to understanding, Job 32:18, where we read of the desire of Elihu to communicate his ideas and Ps 77:7, in which the Psalmist expresses his intention to ‘search his spirit’ in self-reflection. In each of these instances, ‘spirit’ refers to the human person by referring to something within the person and potentially distinguishable from the merely physical. Consequently, in Isaiah 26:9, where we ִ ‫פ‬ ְ ַ ‫ ]נ‬yearns for you in the night, my spirit [‫חי‬ ִ ‫ ]רוּ‬within read that ‘my soul [‫שׁי‬ me earnestly seeks you’, although a perfectly reasonable paraphrase might be ‘I yearn for you, I earnestly seek you’, the text still encourages the imaginative distinction to be made between the person conceived holistically and the person conceived as soul, spirit or mind.15 Such a nascent dualism is fostered ַ ‫ רוּ‬which determines by passages that indicate that it is the presence of ‫ח‬ ָ ‫ב‬ ָ ) is opposed whether or not a thing is animate. So, in Genesis 6:3, ‘flesh’ (‫שׂר‬

13 Above, p. 96. 14 Tengström, ‘‫ח‬ ַ ‫ רוּ‬Rûaḥ ’, 375–76. 15 Ibid., 375.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

98

Spirit in the Biblical Tradition

to the spirit of God that brings life16, and in Ps 104:29, creatures return to ‘their dust’ when their ‫ח‬ ַ ‫ רוּ‬is taken away by God. One might argue that these verses refer to a ‘life-principle’ and not the self. But, as has been noted, ַ ‫ רוּ‬is close to an understanding of the an appreciation of a life-principle as ‫ח‬ ַ ‫ר וּ‬. self as ‫ח‬ ַ ‫ רוּ‬for the self can also stretch to the mind, or ‘spirit’, of The usage of ‫ח‬ God (e. g. Isa 30:1; 40:13; Mic 2:7). In these cases the divine mind, emotions or will are conceived anthropomorphically.17 In certain cases an internal state of an individual can be described by reference to an external spirit. So, for instance, in Numbers 5:14, 30, there is a ‘spirit of jealousy’ that comes over or upon a man (‫ליו‬ ָ ‫ע‬ ָ ‫בר‬ ַ ‫ע‬ ָ ‫אה‬ ָ ְ ‫קנ‬ ִ ‫ח־‬ ַ ‫)רוּ‬. The externality of such language is emphasized when the emotional state is depicted as being caused by God. So, for instance, in 2 Kings 19:7 the Lord speaks through Isaiah and declares that, ‘I myself will put a spirit in him’ ַ ‫)בּוֹ רוּ‬. Further examples can be found in Judges 9:23 (that is Sennacherib) (‫ח‬ ָ ‫ר‬ ָ ‫ח‬ ַ ‫ )רוּ‬is sent and 1 Samuel 16:13–14. In the first of these, an ‘evil spirit’ (‫עה‬ by God between Abimelech and the lords of Shechem. In the second, an ‘evil spirit from the Lord’ torments Saul after the granting of the charismatic spirit of the Lord (‫ח ְיהָוה‬ ַ ‫ )רוּ‬to David and the removal of the same spirit from Saul. The ambiguous connection between the human and the divine spirit present in the language of divine manipulation of human spirit, is also illustrated ַ ‫שׁ‬ ַ ‫מת‬ ַ ‫שׁ‬ ְ ‫ )נ ׅ‬within a mortal by Job 32:8.18 Here, the ‘breath of the Almighty’ (‫דּי‬ ִ ‫ח־‬ ַ ‫ )רוּ‬and is the source is equated with the spirit of (‘in’: NRSV) a man (‫היא‬ of understanding. The apparent connection with Genesis 2:7 is obvious although the attribute which the spirit imparts is here related to reason rather than life.19 Such a verse encourages a synthesizing reader to ask whether texts that speak of human spirit can ever be fully divorced from talk of divine spirit. As is being discovered, attempts to reduce the variety of biblical expression to neat homogeneous categories inevitably simplify the individual expressions. In treating these words and concepts the difference between metaphysical reality and poetic expression can be formidably difficult to discern. However, it is sufficient to note the range of possible meanings in order that the significance of the hermeneutical choices made in the Hellenistic era can then be highlighted.

16 Cf. Isa 31:3; David J. A. Clines, The Dictionary of Classical Hebrew, 6 vol. (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1993–), s. v. ‫שׂר‬ ָ ‫בח‬ ָ . 17 Tengström, ‘‫ח‬ ַ ‫ רוּ‬Rûaḥ ’, 377. 18 Note also Isaiah 19:14. 19 Claus Westermann, Genesis 1–11: A Commentary (Minneapolis, Augsburg, 1984), 203–07.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

The Spirit in the Old Testament

99

6.2.4 The Spirit of God The spirit of God in the Hebrew Bible can be described initially as the divine agent, that is as God at work in the world and amongst humans.20 In the latter role, a broad division can be made between an innate life and a special gifting. Into the first category would fall Genesis 6:3 and, with some caution, Genesis 2:7. Although the spirit is described in these verses as coming from God, it is unexceptionable for it to be conceived of elsewhere as an independent entity.21 A balance needs to be achieved between the understanding that all life comes from God, and the independence of an individual human personality: the human spirit cannot be simply understood as the spirit of God. The confusion arises particularly because the language of self-hood can also involve ‫ח‬ ַ ‫ר וּ‬. In the second half of the division is found God’s spirit acting to empower humans in a variety of ways for his service. A first brief example is to be seen in the reception of the spirit of God by Bezalel and Oholiab (Exod 31:1–11; 35:30–36:2) to aid them in the construction of the Tabernacle. The enabling of artistic skill is unusual in the Hebrew Bible, unless we count the poetry of the writing prophets. There is no obvious moment of reception or ecstasy. The picture of Moses in most of the Pentateuch does not stress his endowment with or reception of a special spirit from God.22 He is not depicted as receiving the spirit at any particular time. The description of Moses as a prophet may confirm this absence in its understanding of Moses as being unlike any other prophet in that he knew the Lord ‘face to face’ (Deut 34:10): perhaps such direct communication with God undermines any necessity for the ַ ‫רוּ‬.23 The exception to this picture of Moses is influence of the prophetic ‫ח‬ 20 The gender of the spirit of God is predominantly feminine in the Bible (Sekki, The Meaning of Rûaḥ , 71), but can be masculine (e. g. 2 Sam 23:2). Similarly, in the DSS the gender is not clear, although the available evidence points to it being feminine (ibid., 186). God’s spirit is not distinguished there from other uses of the word by gender, but by context and vocabulary (ibid., 72–93, 190–91). The spirit is given by God to each member when he joins the community (e. g. 1QH 13:19; 14:13; Heinz-Josef Fabry, ‘‫ח‬ ַ ‫ רוּ‬Rûaḥ ’, parts VII–VIII, in G. Johannes Botterweck/Helmer Ringgren/Heinz-Josef Fabry (ed.), Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament, 15 vol. (1974–), xiv (2004) 396–402, 399); the Two Spirit Treatise (1QS 3:13–4:26) may propose an amended pneumatology in which the eschatological gift of the spirit is essentially the same as the good spirituality given at creation (Sekki, The Meaning of Rûaḥ , 217–19; note especially 3:18–19). 21 On the interpretation of the language of independence, Manfred Oeming, ‘Geist/Heiliger Geist: II. Altes Testament’, in Hans Dieter Betz (ed.), Religion in Geschichte und Gegenwart: Handwörterbuch für Theologie und Religionswissenschaft, 6 vol. (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1998–2003), iii (2000) 564–65. 22 Tengström, ‘‫ח‬ ַ ‫ רוּ‬Rûaḥ ’, 391. 23 Other prophets are said to have ‘seen the Lord’. Although the distinct nature of the inspiration is difficult to specify, a difference in status is plainly implied (John Barton, Oracles of God (London: Darton, Longman and Todd, 1986), 117). For a discussion of the variety of ecstatic prophecy, J. Lindblom, Prophecy in Ancient Israel (Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1962), 105–219.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

100

Spirit in the Biblical Tradition

Numbers 11:16–30. Here, in order to ease the burden of leadership on Moses, the Lord promises to take from the spirit that is on Moses and to put it on the seventy elders in order that they might share in the responsibility (vv. 16–17). When this is achieved the seventy themselves begin to prophesy, indicating the unitary nature of the spirit shared by Moses and the prophets24 even if the particular enabling granted by the spirit differs.25 The receiving of the spirit for the enabling of leadership is associated with the laying of hands in commission in Deuteronomy 34:9 although the connection between the two is not obviously causal in other instances: in Numbers 27:18 Joshua is identified as a suitable successor to Moses because he already is indwelt by the spirit.26 It is probably better to distinguish between a commissioning of individuals at a divine behest from a divine enabling even if the enabling is for the task for which the individual was commissioned. Consequently, although the anointing of David immediately precedes his reception of the spirit (1 Sam 16:13), Saul receives the spirit after his anointing (10:10), amongst the prophets as Samuel had predicted (10:6).27 The reception of a spirit (including an evil spirit: 1 Samuel 18:10) in Judges-1 Samuel is most often described as a ‘rushing’ (‫לח‬ ַ ‫צ‬ ָ : Judg. 14:6, 19; 15:14; 1 Sam 10:6, 10; 11:6; 16:13, 18:10) of the spirit on the individual.28 Because the reception of the spirit in the case of the judges, Saul and David, is associated with their enabling for leadership and the protection of the people, the departure of a leader from the purposes of God can signal the removal of the spirit, as in the case of Saul. For Samson, his strength is associated with his Nazirite status and his uncut hair (Num 6:5; Judg 16:17). It is the spirit, however, that rushes on him, and motivates and guides his great warring feats. 24 Note the similar statement to Deut 34:10 in Num 12:6–8. 25 The hithpael form of ‫בא‬ ָ ָ ‫ נ‬used here is most often found, although not exclusively or uniquely, in association with ecstatic forms of prophecy. For a helpful summary of the issue with respect to Numbers 11, see Robert R. Wilson, ‘Prophecy and Ecstasy: A Reexamination’, Journal of Biblical Literature, vol. 98, no. 3 (1979) 321–37, on pp. 329–36. 26 Péter identifies the doubled handed gesture as an action of transfer (Réne Péter, ‘L’Imposition des Mains dans l’Ancien Testament’, Vetus Testamentum, vol. 27, no. 1 (1977) 48–55). In this case the transfer (Num 27:20) of the ‘majesty, dignity, authority of Moses’ (ibid., 51; Francis Brown/S. R. Driver/Charles A. Briggs, The Brown-Driver-Briggs Hebrew and English Lexicon (Boston: Houghton, Mifflin and Co., 1906.; repr. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 2004); Ludwig Koehler/Walter Baumgartner, The Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament, rev. by Walter Baumgartner/Johann Jakob Stamm with Benedikt Hartmann and others, 5 vol. (Leiden: Brill, 1994–2000), s. v. ‫)הוֹד‬. 27 Montague minimizes the distinction between anointing and the reception of the spirit by emphasizing Samuel’s foretelling of the reception (10:6) at the anointing (Montague, Holy Spirit, 19–20). 28 The exceptions are Othniel (Judg 3:10), Gideon (6:34), Jephthah (11:29) although in each of these cases, despite the use of a different verb, the conception of the spirit is the same: as an external agent which transforms the individual’s interior. On the meaning of ‫לח‬ ַ ‫צ‬ ָ , J. Hausmann, ‘‫לח‬ ַ ‫צ‬ ָ ṣ ālaḥ ’, in G. Johannes Botterweck/Helmer Ringgren/Heinz-Josef Fabry (ed.), Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament, 15 vol. (1974–), xii (2003) 382–85.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

The Spirit in the Old Testament

101

Prophecy in the Bible is an instrument in the hand of God for the instruction of his people.29 The historical summaries of Zechariah 7:12 and Nehemiah 9:20, 30 describe prophecy as warning, prompted by the spirit of God. If earlier texts are not quite so straightforward, this remains a repeated and important theme. Roughly speaking, there are two forms of prophecy in the Bible.30 In both, the relationship of the prophet to the spirit is generally implied to be essential. We have already come across two examples of the ֶ ‫ר‬ ׂ : e. g. first ‘archaic’ form, possibly associated with the term ‘seer’ (‫אה‬ 1 Sam 9:8–9), as it was encountered by the seventy elders and Saul.31 An ecstatic state, possibly associated with music (1 Sam 19:20–23), was caused by the spirit (1 Sam 10:10). Ecstasy often occurs within prophetic groups (1 Kings 18:22; 2 Kings 2:3) and is not recorded as always resulting in a divine message. The instances of Balaam (23:2–9), Elijah and Elisha are associated with these traditions although their roles in the narratives and interaction with God are more developed so that Elijah is even transported by the ‘spirit of the Lord’ (1 Kings 18:12) and caught up into heaven in a whirlwind (2 Kings 2:1, 11). In the written prophets there is a diverse response to other prophets. In Amos for instance, he is reluctant to describe himself as a prophet and there is no reference to the spirit.32 Although in Hosea 4:4–5 priest and prophet are accused, in 9:7 it is still the case that the ‘man of the spirit’ is equated with a prophet.33 Similarly in Micah 3:5–8, false prophets are condemned in the same breath as an affirmation that Micah himself has the ‘spirit of the Lord’. Neither Isaiah not Jeremiah make reference to the spirit with respect to their own vocation. The latter contains a searing indictment of his contemporaries (5:13) who ‘have/will become ‫ח‬ ַ ‫ ;רוּ‬the word is not in them’. The ַ ‫ רוּ‬is used in a non-psychological sense only for the wind of judgeword ‫ח‬ ment (4:11–13). Within Ezekiel there is a renewed confidence in the relationship between the prophet and the spirit.34 We have already discussed the intensity of ‘spirit’ language in the first and thirty-seventh chapters and this is closely connected with Ezekiel’s vocation. Within the account of his call, the spirit enters him and sets him on his feet (2:2). In nine other passages the

29 Klaus Koch, The Prophets: Volume Two, The Babylonian and Persian Periods (London: SCM, 1983), 171–72. 30 Klaus Koch, The Prophets: Volume One, The Assyrian Period (London: SCM, 1982), 15–35; note, however, Wilson’s argument that ecstatic elements are found in the written prophets (Robert R. Wilson, Prophecy and Society in Ancient Israel (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1980), 5– 8; Robert R. Wilson, ‘Early Israelite Prophecy’, in James Luther Mays/Paul J. Achtemeier (ed.), Interpreting the Prophets (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1987) 1–13, 3–6). 31 On the distinction between ‫אח‬ ֶ ‫ר‬ ׂ and ‫ביא‬ ִ ָ ‫נ‬, Wilson, Prophecy and Society, 300–1; Koch, Prophets: Volume One, 19–35. 32 Montague, Holy Spirit, 33. 33 Ibid., 34. 34 Tengström, ‘‫ח‬ ַ ‫ רוּ‬Rûaḥ ’, 394.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

102

Spirit in the Biblical Tradition

spirit features as an essential and overwhelming element of his prophetic experience (3:12, 14, 24; 8:3; 11:1, 5, 24; 37:1; 43:5). Within the eschatological content of the prophetic writings hope is also expressed for a future role of the spirit within the world and amongst God’s people. Two different forms of hope are present. Firstly, there is the hope of a Davidic king. Isaiah 11:1–2 places hope in a ‘sprout from the stump of Jesse’ upon whom the ‘spirit of the Lord’ will rest. This spirit is characterized as bringing wisdom, understanding, counsel, might, knowledge and the fear of the Lord, that is the qualities necessary for righteous and judicious ruling. The servant of Isaiah is similarly described as the receiver of the Lord’s spirit (42:1) in order that he might bring judgement to the nations. So also the anointed figure of Isaiah 61:1–3 has the ‘spirit of the sovereign ׂ ‫א‬ ֳ ‫ח‬ ַ ‫ )רוּ‬upon him in order that he might provide freedom Lord’ (‫דנ ָי ְיהִוה‬ from oppression and the restoration of Zion. A second form of hope concerns the universalizing of the spirit of prophecy. This idea may find its source in the idea of renewed covenant between God and his people found in Jeremiah 31:31–34, although the spirit is not actually mentioned in this text.35 The productiveness of the new covenant is to be established by the writing of the law on the heart of each member of the covenant people. Isaiah 59:21 appears to draw on Jeremiah’s language while introducing alongside it the presence of the spirit.36 Similarly, the hope for the society formed by the presence of the spirit in every individual is found in Ezekiel 11:19–20; 37:14 and 39:29. Perhaps the most universal of texts is to be found at Joel 2:27–29 in which it is declared that the spirit will be poured out on all flesh. Prophecy, dreams and visions are to be experienced by the full range of Israelite (3:1–8) society.

6.2.5 The Spirit of Wisdom It is not usual in a survey of the spirit in the Old Testament to include a separate section on a spirit of wisdom. However, this study is attempting to treat the Old Testament from the perspective of Hellenistic Jewish readers. Such readers, including those who influenced Wisdom, were theological readers and therefore, to some degree, synthesizing readers. Once the point is assumed that the scriptures throughout refer to the same one God, it will inevitably follow that the spirit of God that is so closely associated with the divine in different places will have a singular nature too. This study therefore has to look back from the position of Wisdom and seek the material that has proved influential. In Wisdom, Sophia is identified with the spirit of God (Wis 1:5–7). 35 Ibid., 395. 36 Ibid., 395; Montague, Holy Spirit, 59.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

The Spirit in the Old Testament

103

The phrase ‘spirit of wisdom’ (‫מה‬ ָ ‫כ‬ ְ ‫ח‬ ָ ‫ח‬ ַ ‫ )רוּ‬occurs three times in the Hebrew Bible.37 The first occurs in Exodus 28:3 (cf. 31:3; 35:31) with the sense of artisanship. The second is found in Deuteronomy 34:9 where Joshua is commissioned for leadership in Moses’ stead. Joshua is described as being full of the spirit of wisdom because Moses had laid his hands on him. The passage therefore potentially carries both royal and prophetic connotations. The third passage is Isaiah 11:2 and is the most significant given the eschatological interpretation of Isaiah that forms part of the background to Wisdom38: the eschatological ideal that all sages may enjoy involves being endowed with ‘the spirit of the Lord, the spirit of wisdom and understanding’. In the account of Joseph’s life in Pharaoh’s court (Genesis 41:38–39) Pharaoh commends Joseph as being indwelt by the spirit of God.39 We then read in the following verse that Joseph’s knowledge – his wisdom – is a gift from God and that therefore he is uniquely wise. In Proverbs 1:23 the promise is made by Wisdom herself that those who ִ ‫כמ רוּ‬ ֶ ‫ל‬ ָ ‫עה‬ ָ ‫בּי‬ ִ ‫א‬ ַ ). While the respond to her words will receive her spirit (‫חי‬ original sense of the phrase may be explained by the parallel clause which talks about ‘making my thoughts known to you’, from the perspective of the Book of Wisdom this verse allows a connection to be made between the female figure of Wisdom who speaks in Chapter 8 (vv. 4–31) and the concept of spirit, although not directly to a concept of the spirit of God. Further, in an imaginative leap, Wisdom’s description of herself (8:22–31) as being present beside God during the creation could be understood as a declaration of identity with the spirit of God who hovered over the waters before the creation (Gen 1:2).40 Expectations should be tempered however, given that the ִ ‫ רוּ‬as ἐμῆς πνοῆς and that although ‫ח‬ ַ ‫ רוּ‬occurs often Septuagint translates ‫חי‬ in Proverbs, it is always with an anthropological sense. Solomon is a key figure In the wisdom tradition. In 1 Kings 3:9, the Lord appears to him in a dream during which Solomon requests a ‘listening heart’ ַ ‫מ‬ ֵ ‫שׁ‬ ׂ ‫לב‬ ֵ ) to aid him in his rule. The verb ‫מע‬ ַ ‫שׁ‬ ָ is elsewhere associated in the (‫ע‬ wisdom material with preparedness to accept sapiential instruction.41 The noun ‫לב‬ ֵ (and also ‫בב‬ ָ ‫ל‬ ֵ ), as discussed above42, is frequently used to refer to the interior self. In this case, ‘mind’ may be an apt translation although one that loses the particular anatomical reference. In 1 Kings 3:12, God offers 37 Solomon Mandelkern, Veteris testamenti concordantiae: hebraicae atque chaldicae (1937; repr. Graz, 1975). 38 Cf. below, 7.5.2 Isaiah. 39 Some translations suggest a true plural here rather than a reference to the God of Joseph’s ancestors. While it is not beyond the capabilities of our readers to make such distinctions – after all Pharaoh did not know Joseph’s God – note the following verse. 40 It may be significant that the words ‫ח‬ ַ ‫ רוּ‬and ‫מה‬ ָ ‫כ‬ ְ ‫ח‬ ָ and personified wisdom share the female gender. 41 It occurs thirty times in Proverbs with this sense. 42 p. 97.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

104

Spirit in the Biblical Tradition

Solomon a ‘wise and discerning heart’ (‫כמ‬ ָ ‫ח‬ ָ ‫לב‬ ֵ ‫)ְונ ָבוֹן‬. He will be uniquely gifted. Both Ecclesiastes and Proverbs draw upon and reinforce Solomon’s status as the ideal royal sage. Ecclesiastes does this by describing Qoheleth as the ‘son of David, king in Jerusalem’ (Eccl 1:1). Proverbs opens with an ascription to ‘Solomon, son of David, king of Israel’ (Prov 1:1; cf. 10:1; 25:1). Returning to 1 Kings 3, the text moves on to recount the judgement of Solomon between the two mothers (3:16–28) and concludes that all Israel heard of his judgement and were in awe of the king, because they perceived ְ ‫ק‬ ִ ‫בּ‬ ְ ‫ה ים‬ ִ ‫ל‬ ׂ ‫א‬ ֶ ‫מת‬ ַ ‫כ‬ ְ ‫ה‬ ָ ‫כּ ִי־‬, v. 28). ‘that the wisdom of God was within him’ (‫רבוֹ‬ This idea of the wisdom of God being something that can reside within one is consistent with Solomon’s request that he be given a wise and discerning heart. We encounter a similar phrase in 1 Kings 10:24 / 2 Chronicles 9:23 where ‘the whole earth’ / ‘all the kings of the earth’ sought the presence of Solomon to hear the wisdom that God had ‘put into his heart’ (‫הים‬ ִ ‫ל‬ ׂ ‫א‬ ֱ ‫תן‬ ַ ָ‫נ‬ ‫לב וֹ‬ ִ ‫בּ‬ ְ ). All of this language could be understood idiomatically with no sense of the ‘wisdom of God’ or the ‘heart’ as metaphysical realities. However, this language could provide the basis for something more theologically significant, particularly if Lady Wisdom is understood in a more realistic sense. Finally, it should also be noted that the language of ‘spirit’ is not present here.43 Although this passage is saturated with the use of ‫מה‬ ַ ‫כ‬ ְ ‫ח‬ ָ there is no textual connection to be made between the language of wisdom and spirit. In conclusion, the figure of Solomon is central for the biblical wisdom tradition, and although the language of spirit is not present, the wisdom of God is described as something which could reside within the sage. If personified wisdom in Proverbs was understood as something more than a poetical figure, as Wisdom 7 indicates, then the resources of 1 Kings may have provided supplementary theological resources.

6.2.6 Angelic Spirits ַ ‫ רוּ‬is used to describe human dispositions in texts As discussed above44, ‫ח‬ such as Isaiah 26:9. Closely related to these texts, and at times indistinguishable from them, are verses in which the human disposition is modified by an external spirit that is not identifiable with the spirit of God. An example of this is 2 Kings 19:7. Here, God is speaking through Isaiah: Behold, I will put a spirit in him (‫ח‬ ַ ‫תן בּוֹ רוּ‬ ֵ ‫הנ ְנ ׅי ׂנ‬ ִ ), so that he shall hear a rumour and return to his own land; I will cause him to fall by the sword in his own land. [RSV]

This type of language, speaking of the placing of a spirit ‘in him’, could be understood as the divine manipulation of the mind of the king of Assyria. 43 The exception is 1 Kings 10:5 / 2 Chron 9:4. 44 p. 97.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

The Spirit in the Old Testament

105

However, it could also be taken to refer to a spiritual being, distinct from the spirit of the Lord. That some may have thought this, is made more likely by the story of Micaiah and the lying spirit (1 Kings 22:19–24 / 2 Chron 18:18– 23). Here, Micaiah describes a vision of the Lord sitting on a throne surrounded by all the host of heaven (‫מׅים‬ ַ ‫שּׁ‬ ָ ‫ה‬ ַ ‫בא‬ ָ ְ‫כ ל ־ צ‬ ָ ). A request is made that someone should entice Ahab to his fall at Ramoth-gilead. A spirit45 volunteers to be ‘a lying spirit in the mouth of all his prophets’. This vision could be classified as a picture of the divine counsel (e. g. Deut 32:8–9, 43; Ps 82:1). These visions, however, are not uniform in their descriptions of the gods and their relations to the Lord. It is possible that the heavenly host, with its subservient beings, more likely would be linked by a synthesizing reader, who had little sense of the development of biblical literature, with the vision of the Lord in Isaiah 6. While it is difficult to derive from the Bible a consistent categorization of heavenly beings, it certainly seems possible to identify the angelic with ‘spirits’, and the ‘immoral’ behaviour of this spirit discourages close connection with the spirit of the Lord. A further set of texts that envisages spirits in distinction from the spirit of the Lord can be found at 1 Samuel 16:14–16, 23; 18:10; 19:9. In these, the transference of the spirit of the Lord from Saul to David, as the chosen king, is replaced by an evil spirit who torments Saul. All of this appears to depict heavenly beings who may be identified with angels and who also can be called spirits.46 6.2.7 The Unity of Rûaḥ The potential for poetic and theological interplay between the different meanings of ‫ח‬ ַ ‫ רוּ‬has been apparent in the above study. One final example, the first chapter of Ezekiel, may help to clarify our observations. Here, a ָ ‫ע‬ ָ ‫ס‬ ְ ‫ח‬ ַ ‫)רוּ‬. In great cloud approaches from the north with a stormy wind (‫רה‬ the cloud are the living creatures (identified as cherubim in 10:15, 20) and the throne. The symbolism of the four living creatures represents the four winds and thus the divine omnipresence. The close theological connection between the ‫ח‬ ַ ‫רוּ‬, the living creatures and the wheels is made plain by the statement ַ ‫ ]רוּ‬would go, they [the living creatures] went’ that ‘wherever the spirit [‫ח‬ (NRSV 1:12) and also by the statement that the wheels moved similarly ַ ‫ ]רוּ‬of the living creatures was in the wheels’ (NRSV ‘because the spirit [‫ח‬ 1:20, 21). In this passage, the concepts of wind, life (the cherubim are ‘living

45 ‘Spirit’ has the definite article here, although the LXX does not. 46 Within the DSS the usage of ‫ח‬ ַ ‫ רוּ‬to refer to angels has developed. This is particularly marked in the sectarian writings by the use of the masculine plural in a construct phrase (for texts and discussion: Sekki, The Meaning of Rûaḥ , 145–71, 188–89; Fabry, ‘‫ח‬ ַ ‫ רוּ‬Rûaḥ ’, 396, 398–99). This later language is used to distinguish between the angelic and human dispositions (Sekki, The Meaning of Rûaḥ , 215–16, 216 fn. 94).

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

106

Spirit in the Biblical Tradition

beings’) and divine spirit inter-penetrate one another.47 The effect of language such as this, is a fostering of the possibilities of synthetic theological readings. It is not the case that ‫ח‬ ַ ‫ רוּ‬can never function with the plain sense of wind, but rather that the separate senses of the word inform and nuance the development of each other.

6.2.8 Conclusion ַ ‫ רוּ‬finds use in the Hebrew Bible for wind, breath, life, personal The word ‫ח‬ disposition, spiritual beings and the divine presence in, and empowerment of, humans. The inherent richness of the term is that the achievement of anthropological and metaphysical precision can prove taxing. However, it is also the case that theological possibilities are created. An imaginative reader of the Hebrew Bible would find ample resources to conclude that human life, individuality and spiritual or religious potential were all dependent on a ַ ‫רוּ‬. While the relation of ‫ח‬ ַ ‫ רוּ‬to the creation of the world is single divine ‫ח‬ not a matter of lengthy discussion Genesis 1 and while that text does not ַ ‫רוּ‬, nonetheless, when this passtate that the order of the world is related to ‫ח‬ sage is understood to refer to the female figure of Wisdom in Proverbs 8, new interpretative possibilities arise regarding the nature of cosmos. These ideas are not major themes of the Old Testament, but the passages where they do occur are, for a piqued eye, some of the most noteworthy in the whole corpus.

6.3 Spirit in the LXX 6.3.1 Introduction This section will ask whether the translation of the Hebrew Bible in the Septuagint introduced new theological possibilities with regard to the concept of Spirit. Once again, such a summary is a mammoth undertaking, worthy of much greater space than can be afforded here. Further, Septuagintal study is still a developing field within which a greater appreciation is forming for the differing characters of various parts of the whole translation so that, for instance, in Isaiah we might be able to recognize both a translation of the original text but also a particular theological or philosophical interpretation of that text. However, for this study we shall have to limit our expectations, focussing on those texts that were of theological significance for Hellenistic Jews, attempting to note where theological preferences occur within the translation at the same time as setting down some more mundane facts with 47 Cf. Ps 18:8–16; Zech 6:5.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

Spirit in the LXX

107

regard to the choices of words. The section will begin by examining the semantic ranges of the individual terms used to translate ‫ח‬ ַ ‫ רוּ‬before attempting to assess what significance there might be in individual translations. 6.3.2 The Semantic Ranges of the Greek Words Used to Translate Rûaḥ ַ ‫ רוּ‬and related words in the SepThe primary word that is used to translate ‫ח‬ ַ ‫רוּ‬.48 The tuagint is πνεῦμα. This is used for 277 of 389 occurrences of ‫ח‬ 49 word is a verbal noun, derived from πνέω (usually πνείω in Homer50) meaning ‘to blow’ or ‘to breathe’. The meaning varies substantially from author to author, particularly when it is used within different philosophical schemes. However, a primary definition in terms of the movement of air, whether within the human as breath or outside of the human as wind, will provide an adequate basis for understanding its realistic and metaphorical senses. A basic usage of πνεῦμα is meteorological (‘blast’ or ‘wind’) and this lies behind much of the application of the term in philosophical language.51 It can be used for the movement of air in the wind (‘blast’ or ‘gust’: Aesch. Prom. 1086: ἀνέμων πνεύματα πάντων; ‘blasts of all the winds’), and the wind itself (Soph. Aj. 674 δεινῶν τ᾽ ἄημα πνευμάτων; ‘the blasts of dreadful winds’). In Plato’s Phaedo 112b πνεῦμα and ἀήρ are first used interchangeably before animal breathing is compared to the oscillation of the wind in sympathy with the movements of liquid through the subteranean channels of the earth. It is less likely to be used simply for air as it is associated with movement and power. In time it becomes the most comprehensive term, assimilating the meanings of πνοή, ἄημα, ἀήτη, ἄνεμος and αὔρα and so is able to refer to anything from a light breath to a gale.52 The notion of force and therefore influence is also present in the term’s use by the Hippocratic school.53 In On Breaths all disease is attributed to φῦσα (‘breath’), which is πνεῦμα within the body in contrast to that outside, which is called ἀήρ (‘air’). Illness is attributed to the πνεῦμα which is taken in with food and water (ch. 6–7). However, when a disease occurs within all 48 Baumgärtel gives the figure of 277 (F. Baumgärtel, ‘Spirit in the OT’ and other sections, in Geoffrey W. Bromiley [ed.], Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, 9 vol. [Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1933–73], vi [1968] 359–68, on p. 367). For occurrences of ‫ח‬ ַ ‫רוּ‬ Bible, cf. above, 6.2.1 Summary of the Usage of Rûaḥ . 49 H. Kleinknecht, ‘πνεῦμα in the Greek World’, in Geoffrey W. Bromiley (ed.), Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, 9 vol. (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1933–73), vi (1968), 334–59, on. pp. 334–35. 50 Liddell and others, Greek-English Lexicon, 1424–25. 51 Kleinknecht, ‘πνεῦμα’, 352–57. 52 Kleinknecht, ‘πνεῦμα’, 335. 53 Geoffrey Lloyd, ‘Pneuma between Body and Soul’, Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute, vol. 13, no. s1 (2007) S135-S146, on S138.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

108

Spirit in the Biblical Tradition

portions of society, this has to be attributed to the winds of the place which influence the φῦσα of everyone in a place (On Airs, Waters, Places; Aphorisms III.5). In other words, what is present here is not simply an analogy between breath and wind but rather a direct physical connection between them. The persistence of this idea is illustrated by the use of pneumatic theory in medicine (Galen, Intr. 14.726, 7–11 SVF 2.716 LS 47N) and artilery.54 The usage of πνεῦμα extends beyond the sense of breath to that of life and soul. With regard to breath, and with poetic reference to the animation of humans, the term is used in a musical context where the breath of the player creates the musical voice of the instrument (Euripedes, Ba. 128 κέρασαν ἁδυβόα φρυγίων αὐλων πνεύματι: ‘they mingled it with the sweetvoiced breath of Phrygian pipes’). Quite naturally, πνεῦμα as breath is associated with life (Aesch. Per. 507 πνεῦμα βίου: ‘breath of life’) and even can take the sense of a living creature (Phoen. I. 16 ἐγω Νίνος πάλαι ποτ᾽ ἐγενόμην πμεῦμα: ‘I Ninos long ago became a living creature’55). Although particular philosophical teachings might define words more specifically, it was possible for πνεῦμα simply to take the sense more commonly given by ψυχή or ‘soul’.56 Most of the above has fostered a physical and material understanding of pneuma which is consistent with Stoic views. The relationship between wind, breath and life has been taken to be quite straightforward. When one dwells, however, on the nature of life and mind it becomes more difficult simply to assert a direct physical connection between these things. The problem all such systems face is in explaining the nature of the soul which brings life and leaves the body at death. Soul was usually identified with whatever was understood to be the most basic, ordering and vital element of the cosmos.57 This led to the problem of why the majority of the cosmos is inanimate.58 One answer was to assert that life was caused by a blend of elements, the proportion of each to each could grant different qualities. This is seen in the Stoic understanding of pneuma as a mixture of the two active elements of fire and air59 but also the Hippocratic work On Airs, Waters, Places (I.6–7) where soul is described as a blend of fire and water.60 A non-materialistic viewpoint is found in Plato, where the soul is incorporeal and thus the distinctiveness of life could be ascribed to it.61 Unlike a materialist, however, Plato faces the different problem of the soul’s interac-

54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61

Fraser, Ptolemaic Alexandria i, 427–31. Liddell and others, Greek-English Lexicon, s. v. πνεῦμα. Suidas, s. v. πνεῦμα: πνεῦμα ἡ ψυχὴ τοῦ ἀνθρώπου: ‘spirit or soul of the human’. On the Presocratic philosophers and Hippocratic writers, Lloyd, ‘Pneuma’, S139. Ibid., S138–39. Cf. above, p. 64. Long/Sedley, Hellenistic Philosophers i, 287. Lloyd, ‘Pneuma’, S140.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

Spirit in the LXX

109

tion with the body and the physical world. One way of attempting to deal with this problem, and which is drawn upon in Wisdom 7:22–23, is to describe the soul or spirit as ‘the finest and purest of things’ (Anaxagoras fr. 12), able to touch or penetrate all things while yet remaining distinct by its particular quality. Pneuma is thus still material while having a superior quality which enables it, at least in some sense, to transcend the limitations of most physicality. Aristotle rejects an ontological body-soul dualism and instead views the soul as the activity of the body.62 He himself faces the same problem as the materialists, however, in that he must explain why animal bodies exhibit life only at particular moments. Pneuma is posited as something which contains vital heat (G. A. 762a18 ff.: θερμότης ψυχική), which is present throughout the universe in different concentrations in everything from stars to semen.63 It is necessary for the animal reproduction life and also for the spontaneous generation of life which was understood to occur in, for instance, decaying matter.64 Pneuma therefore acts, in the words of Lloyd, as a ‘mediating term’ between animate and inanimate, while yet retaining a materialist standpoint.65 In a less technical sense, πνεῦμα can refer to mental, spiritual or relational forces. The meteorological and anthropological senses still stand in the background and allow one to speak of an influence or mood which may come upon an individual or a group (Sophocles, O. C. 612: καὶ πνεῦμα ταὐτὸν οὔποτ᾽ οὔτ᾽ ἐν ἀνδράσιν φίλοις βέβηκεν οὔτε πρὸς πόλιν πόλει: ‘and the same spirit is never steadfast among friends, or between city and city’). This influence or disposition may be associated with the powerful effect of rhetoric and poetry.66 Socrates ironically ascribes his inspiration (ἐπιπεπνευκότες) with rhetorical gifts to the ‘gods of the place’ or the cicadas, ‘the prophets of the Muses’ singing above his head (Plato, Phdr. 262d). The divine may also inspire, cause madness or a religious ecstatic state (Aeschylus, Prom. 883–84: ἔξω δὲ δρόμου φέρομαι λύσσης πνεύματι μάργι, γλώσσης ἀκρατής: ‘I am carried out of my course by a furious spirit of madness; I’ve lost all mastery over my tongue’). Plato’s understanding of the mantic experience67 proved definitive for many who followed him: the inspired individual speaks as a ‘ministering organ’, offering helpful words but oblivious in his trance (Plato, Ion 534c-d).68 The words which result from this trance must be judged by someone of sound mind (Tim. 71e–72b).

62 63 64 65 66 67 68

Ibid., S140. Ibid., S141. Ibid. Ibid. Kleinknecht, ‘πνεῦμα’, 344–45. An actual example is the Pythia at Dephi (Plutarch, Def. orac. 437C-D). Kleinknecht, ‘πνεῦμα’, 345–52.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

110

Spirit in the Biblical Tradition

Other significant words used with the Greek translation of ‫ח‬ ַ ‫ רוּ‬and related terms are ἄνεμος and πνοή. The former primarily carries a meteorological sense although it can be used for ‘winds’ within the body.69 The latter seems to have been reserved in the LXX for referring to human and animal breath (with the possible exception of Ezekiel 13:13), even when used anthropomorphically to describe divinely ordained storms (e. g. 2 Sam 22:16). Other words were available which cover at least part of the semantic range ַ ‫ רוּ‬but which either do not occur at all or are largely absent within the of ‫ח‬ Septuagint: ἀήρ70, αἰθήρ71 and φῦσα72. In summary, πνεῦμα played an important, if shifting, role within the history of the Greek language. While no single philosophically-defined definition gained an ascendancy, the word gained a poetical and intellectual resonance which none of its meteorological and anthropological synonyms managed to do. The philosophical definitions which occurred wavered between the material and the transcendent. Lloyd succinctly sets out the intellectual dynamic which resulted. Once someone (Plato) had suggested that soul, or mind, and body are fundamentally different, then saying how the one influenced the other was extremely difficult. If you treat them as different kinds of entity, as Plato did, then the problem became how to explain how there could be any interaction between them. But if you treated them as two aspects of the same entity – the living creature – as Aristotle did, you still had to give an account of why some bodies are alive, others not. If, thirdly, you treated all bodies as in some sense alive, as the Stoics did, the problem was relocated and became one of saying how different entities differ.73

6.3.3 Hebrew Rûaḥ and Greek Pneuma The translation of a single term in one language is not always achieved by the same word in every case. In the Septuagint, the meanings of verses can diverge so significantly that it is not always possible to identify the translation of a one noun by one other. Words rarely stand alone, but exist in a language’s web of idiom and metaphor which is not necessarily shared with other languages. The semantic range of πνεῦμα, however, renders it a ַ ‫רוּ‬.74 The poetic overremarkably appropriate term with which to translate ‫ח‬ 69 Lloyd, ‘Pneuma’, S136. 70 Used for the space or air immediately above the earth, generally a passive element as in Stoicism (Lloyd, ‘Pneuma’, S137). 71 Absent from the LXX and used for the space or air of the upper regions of the sky. In Aristotle it becomes the fifth element, eternally unchanging in its circular motion (Lloyd, ‘Pneuma’, S137–38). 72 Meaning ‘bellows’ and a ‘gust’ of wind (Liddell and others, Greek-English Lexicon). 73 Lloyd, ‘Pneuma’, S144. 74 Isaacs, Concept of Spirit, 10.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

Spirit in the LXX

111

lapping of the senses of wind and breath are common. The relation of πνεῦμα to life and the soul is also highly similar. The mantic notion of the inspiring divine spirit conceptually matches the role of the conceptions of the prophetic spirit of God in the Hebrew. The particular Greek history of πνεῦμα does not override the content of the LXX. The spirit of God in the Hebrew Bible is made particular by its association with a particular divinity. The Delphic vapours were not the prophetic wind of Ezekiel. However, the use of this one word in the majority of translations does create the possibility of new conceptual possibilities for the Jewish mind. Further, there was no necessity to use πνεῦμα. The different senses of ַ ‫ רוּ‬could have been translated by distinct terms for wind, breath, life and ‫ח‬ the spirit of God. It is possible that the Hebrew term was already interpreted as referring to a nebulous but still discernibly singular subject. It is also posַ ‫ רוּ‬and πνεῦμα were understood as multivalent terms whose sible that both ‫ח‬ individual meanings were understood as discrete. The choice of the single primary translation term may have resulted from a combination of limited vocabulary and popular usage. Whichever, the possibilities for a synthetic, theological reading which were seen to be present in the Hebrew have been preserved in the Greek. Further, because of the distinctive history of the Greek term, new conceptual possibilities arise. Spirit could become transcendent and incorporeal, or it could become immanent and material. The questions of Greek philosophy would not allow this to remain undefined. 6.3.4 The Translation of Related Hebrew Terms ַ ‫ רוּ‬lies in part in its multiple overlapping semantic fields The significance of ‫ח‬ which encourages the conceptual relation and nascent unification of the ideas of wind, breath, human life and spirit. The preference that the LXX shows ַ ‫ רוּ‬to πνεῦμα, which has its own compatible semantic for the translation of ‫ח‬ history, provides further encouragement for the task of systematization. Before moving on, however, the possible exceptions to this translational habit should be considered. It has already been noted75 that both ‫פשׁ‬ ֶ ֶ ‫ נ‬and ‫מה‬ ָ ‫שׁ‬ ָ ְ ‫ נ‬can be, in certain contexts, synonyms for ‫ח‬ ַ ‫רוּ‬. The former is repeatedly translated by ψυχή, and is far more often used for the ‘person’ than ַ ‫רוּ‬.76 Isaiah 26:9 in the LXX, although showing a distinctive character, is ‫ח‬ ֶ ֶ ‫ נ‬and ‫ח‬ ַ ‫ר וּ‬. probably typical in its translation choices for ‫פשׁ‬ ָ‫ר ך‬ ָ ‫תי‬ ֶ ‫ח‬ ֲ ‫שׁ‬ ַ ‫א‬ ֲ ‫בּי‬ ִ ‫ר‬ ְ ‫ק‬ ִ ‫ב‬ ְ ‫חי‬ ִ ‫אף־רוּ‬ ַ ‫לה‬ ָ ‫לְּי‬ ַ ‫בּ‬ ַ ‫ך‬ ִ ‫א ׅוּי‬ ‫שׁי ׅ‬ ִ ‫פ‬ ְ ַ ‫נ‬: (‘My soul yearns for you in the night,

my spirit within me earnestly seeks you.’)

75 Cf. above, 6.2.3 Breath, Life and the Centre of Personality. 76 Hatch/Redpath, Concordance, s. v. ψυχή.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

112

Spirit in the Biblical Tradition

ᾗ ἐπιθυμεῖ ἡ ψυχὴ ἡμῶν ἐκ νυκτὸς ὀρθρίζει τὸ πνεῦμά μου πρὸς σέ ὁ θεός (‘[…] that our soul desires. Out from the night my spirit comes to you early in the morning, O God.’)

The latter term, ‫מה‬ ָ ‫שׁ‬ ָ ְ ‫נ‬, appears just twenty-four times in the Hebrew Bible.77 The word’s semantic range carries much the same range as ‫ח‬ ַ ‫רוּ‬, including breath (e. g. 2 Sam 22:16) and God-given life (e. g. Gen 2:7; 7:22; Job 27:3) ָ ‫שׁ‬ ָ ְ ‫ נ‬appears and, metaphorically, wind (Job 37:10). The translation of ‫מה‬ unexceptionable. With the sense of breath it can be translated by πνεῦμα (1 Kings 17:17; Dan 10:17). Particularly in Job, it appears in phrases parallel to ‫ח‬ ַ ‫( רוּ‬i. e. 27:3; 32:8; 33:4) and in these verses in the LXX is translated by πνοή and ‫ח‬ ַ ‫ רוּ‬by πνεῦμα. ָ ‫שׁ‬ ָ ְ ‫ נ‬is found in GenProbably the most theologically significant use of ‫מה‬ esis 2:7 (cf. Gen 7:22; Job 33:4 and possibly Prov 20:27), where the man is ָ ‫שׁ‬ ָ ְ ‫ נ‬is translated by brought to life by the breath of the Lord.78 Here, ‫מה‬ πνοή, as it is generally elsewhere. In the subsequent verses in the Hebrew of ָ ‫שׁ‬ ָ ְ ‫ נ‬and ‫ח‬ ַ ‫ רוּ‬are used interchangeably in the pattern of Genesis, in which ‫מה‬ 2:7 (6:3, 6:17; 7:15, 22), the Greek follows the expected word choice and selects πνεῦμα for ‫ח‬ ַ ‫ רוּ‬and πνοή, for ‫מה‬ ָ ‫שׁ‬ ָ ְ ‫נ‬. In 7:22, we even find the expresַ ‫ח‬ ַ ‫מת־רוּ‬ ַ ‫שׁ‬ ְ ‫‘( נ ׅ‬breath of the spirit of life’) translated as πνοή ζωῆς sion ‫ח ׅיּים‬ (‘breath of life’). In both texts, it is possible a clarification of this ambiguity may exist in a distinction between metaphor and reality. The reality which ַ ‫ רוּ‬/ πνεῦμα). sustains human life could be understood as the spirit of God (‫ח‬ The metaphor used to describe the bestowing of that reality could be underָ ‫שׁ‬ ָ ְ ‫ נ‬/ πνοή): God breathes his life into humans. Constood as ‘breathing’ (‫מה‬ sequently, it is only in the verses that contain language explicitly related to breathing (both 2:7 and 7:22 contain ‫פיו‬ ָ ‫א‬ ַ ‫בּ‬ ְ ‘in his nostrils’) that ‫מה‬ ָ ‫שׁ‬ ָ ְ ‫ נ‬and πνοή are used. 6.3.5 Exodus, Isaiah, Solomon, Proverbs, Daniel and Sirach The LXX preserves many of the theological possibilities which are latent in the Hebrew Bible’s use of ‫ח‬ ַ ‫ רוּ‬and related terms. It has also been argued that ַ ‫ רוּ‬to πνεῦμα in the majority of cases fosters new concepthe translation of ‫ח‬ tualizations of the traditional Jewish ideas. In addition to the word studies above, it is also worth reflecting on the passages that Wisdom is particularly indebted to: the Exodus narratives, Isaiah, Daniel and Proverbs. Is there anything distinctive in the use of πνεῦμα in these passages which may lie in the background of Wisdom’s theology? 77 H. Lamberty-Zielinski, ‘‫מה‬ ָ ‫שׁ‬ ָ ְ ‫ נ‬nešāmâ’, in G. Johannes Botterweck/Helmer Ringgren/ Heinz-Josef Fabry (ed.), Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament, 15 vol. (1974–), x (1999) 65–70, on p. 66. 78 Cf. Westermann, Genesis 1–11, 203–7; Marguerite Harl, La Bible D’Alexandrie. La Genèse (Paris: Les Èditions du Cerf, 1986), 100–01.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

Spirit in the LXX

113

Beginning with Exodus, there are no instances of the occurrence of πνεῦμα that are not a translation of ‫ח‬ ַ ‫רוּ‬. This means that any theological ַ ‫ רוּ‬remains limited by influence which may be at work in the translation of ‫ח‬ ַ ‫ רוּ‬is translated the phenomena of the original text. In 10:13, 19 and 14:21 ‫ח‬ ַ ‫ רוּ‬as by ἄνεμος. In Chapter 15, however, are found two translations of ‫ח‬ πνεῦμα. Both instances (vv. 8, 10) metaphorically use the imagery of breath-

ing. According to the pattern that was discovered for Genesis79, we would ַ ‫ רוּ‬to be translated with πνοή, because of its metaphorical references expect ‫ח‬ to the nostrils of God. However, given that it is apparent from Wisdom 10:18–20 that Sophia was believed to have taken Israel through the Red Sea, it is noteworthy that πνεῦμα occurs in both these verses. Eyes that were directed by theology could here discover that the spirit of God was responsible for the salvation of the Israelites, just as Wisdom understands the work to have been achieved by spirit-Sophia.80 The likelihood that such a reading is taking place is strengthened by two further things: the mention in Wisdom 10:20 of the singing of hymns – an indication that the Song of the Sea is in view here – and also the relatively rare occurrence in Exodus 15:7 of καλάμη (‘straw’, ‘stubble’) which also occurs in a context of judgement in Wisdom 3:7. It is hard to be definitive with regard to the nature of the engagement of Isaiah LXX with the concept of pneuma. The fourth servant song is important for the description of the persecuted righteous individual in the early chapters of Wisdom81, but Isaiah 53 itself does not contain the term πνεῦμα.82 More positively, the idea of the spirit-sophia endowed kingly sage is at the heart of Wisdom’s hope83 and it is possible that the kingly figures and language of LXX Isaiah 11:2 and 61–62:9 (note particularly vv. 2–3) were important texts for this. It is also worth commenting that there is no dramatic change to be discerned between the Hebrew and the Greek here. The spirit-endowed kingly figure in the LXX is identifiable as the end-point of the prophetic and kingly traditions within the Hebrew. Proverbs is an important text for a study such as this for the obvious reasons outlined in the discussion of the Hebrew text. Its significance, however, may in part be negative. It is not at all clear that the LXX version of the book contains even the seeds of the fruit seen in Wisdom. The first noteworthy characteristic is the relative absence of πνεῦμα.84 It has already been men79 80 81 82 83

Cf. above, 6.3.4 The Translation of Related Hebrew Terms. Cf. above, 3.4 Sophia and Pneuma. Cf. below, 7.5.2 Isaiah. On messianism in Wisdom, see below, 7.6.3.2 A Messianic Figure?. Consider the identification of the spirit of the Lord with Sophia (Wis 1:5–7; cf. above, 3.4 Sophia and Pneuma) and Solomon’s pursuit of Sophia (Wis 8:16–18). 84 On the character of the translation of Proverbs LXX, James K. Aitken, ‘Poet and Critic: Royal Ideology and the Greek Translator of Proverbs’, in Tessa Rajak/Sarah Pearce/James Aitken/Jennifer Dines (ed.), Jewish Perspectives on Hellenistic Rulers (Berkley: University of California Press, 2007) 190–204.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

114

Spirit in the Biblical Tradition

tioned that πνεῦμα is used to translate ‫ח‬ ַ ‫ רוּ‬in the LXX in over eighty percent of the cases. In Proverbs, ‫ח‬ ַ ‫ רוּ‬occurs twenty times and πνεῦμα just once.85 Only in 15:4 do the words appear in the same verse. ַ ‫בּרוּ‬ ‫ח‬ ְ ‫בר‬ ֶ ֶ‫בּהּ שׁ‬ ָ ‫לף‬ ֶ ‫ס‬ ֶ ‫ח ִיּים ְו‬ ַ ‫עץ‬ ֵ ‫לשׁוֹן‬ ָ ‫פּא‬ ֵ ‫ר‬ ְ ‫מ‬ ַ (‘Healing of a tongue is a tree of life; crook-

edness in it is a breaking of spirit.’) ἴασις γλώσσης δένδρον ζωῆς ὁ δὲ συντηρῶν αὐτὴν πλησθήσεται πνεύματος

(‘Healing of a tongue is a tree of life; the one keeping it will be filled with spirit.’)

The second half of the LXX translation carries a similar sense to the Hebrew but with the elements inverted. This is the only verse in Proverbs LXX to use πνεῦμα. It is interesting that it refers to pneuma as divine endowment, a concept absent from Proverbs in the Hebrew.86 The one possible exception ‫כמ רוּ ׅ‬ ֶ ‫ל‬ ָ ‫עה‬ ָ ‫בּי‬ ִ ‫א‬ ַ ; ‘I will pour out my breath/spirit to to this is Prov 1:23 (‫חי‬ ַ ‫ רוּ‬here as πνοή. In summary, Proverbs 15:4 you’), but the LXX translates ‫ח‬ may be an indication of the theology of the translator finding expression in the translation but if it is, it is not developed any further. In Proverbs ‫ח‬ ַ ‫ רוּ‬is translated by πνοή on one other occasion (11:13) with much the same sense as in 1:23. On two other occasions πνοή translates ‫מה‬ ָ ‫שׁ‬ ָ ְ ‫ נ‬and ‫פשׁ‬ ֶ ֶ ‫( נ‬Prov 20:27; 24:12). In the first, a potential allusion to Genesis 2:7 is preserved.87 ‫טן‬ ֶ ‫ב‬ ָ ‫רי־‬ ֵ ‫ד‬ ְ ‫ח‬ ַ ‫כּל־‬ ָ ‫פשׂ‬ ֵ ‫ח‬ ׂ ‫דמ‬ ָ ‫ח‬ ָ ‫מת‬ ַ ‫שׁ‬ ְ ‫‘( ְיהָוה ֵנר ְיהָוה נ ׅ‬The lamp of the Lord is a human

spirit/breath, searching every chamber of the body.’) φῶς κυρίου πνοὴ ἀνθρώπων ὃς ἐρευνᾷ ταμίεια κοιλίας (‘A light of the lord is the

breath of a man, he searches the hidden parts of the belly.’)

The Hebrew implies that, at least if taken with Genesis 2:7, the human life has a divine origin and purpose. It goes beyond Genesis in asserting that the ‘breath of man’ has an ongoing role, possibly as the critical faculty of the human psyche although this is clearly only one interpretation. The Greek, however, shies away from any understanding of the spirit of God as a separate agency: the subject of the second clause is determined to be the masculine κύριος, rather than the neuter φῶς or the feminine πνοή. The verse is reminiscent of Wisdom 1:4–8 where the spirit of God who is capable of dwelling within souls (v. 4) and who fills the world and holds all things together, knows what is said (v. 7). There too, the spirit does not operate independently of God because he is ‘witness of their inmost feelings’ (v. 6). There is, however, no evidence of direct textual dependence; Wisdom 1 contains no allusion to Genesis 2:7 and there is no occurrence of πνεῦμα in the verse. This verse could be a rich source of theological reflection, but is not the basis for Wisdom’s pneumatology which blurs the boundaries of soul, life, cosmological artisan, eschatological endowment and Sophia. LXX Pro85 Mandelkern, Concordantiae; Hatch/Redpath, Concordance. 86 See above, 6.2.5 The Spirit of Wisdom. 87 Hatch/Redpath, Concordance, 1153.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

Spirit in the LXX

115

verbs 24:12 confirms this conclusion in that here too, using the language of breath, it is God who is ascribed the role of witness and judge: […] ‫דע‬ ָ ‫שׁך הוּא ֵי‬ ְ ‫פ‬ ְ ‫צר ֵנ‬ ֵ ‫ ‘( ]…[ ְוׂנ‬Does not he who watches over your soul know it?’88) […] ὁ πλάσας πνοὴν πᾶσιν αὐτὸς οἶδεν πάντα […] (‘The one who formed breath, he knows everything.’)

Within Proverbs ‫ח‬ ַ ‫ רוּ‬is used most commonly for the disposition of a human and so can be translated as in 15:13 by καρδία (15:13: ‘heart’), or as in 16:18 ַ ‫בּחׅ רוּ‬ ַ ‫ ׂגּ‬: ‘haughtiness of spirit’) by κακοφροσύνη (‘folly’). The translation (‫ח‬ of Proverbs can vary in its literalism (see for instance 18:14)89 but there is no strong case to be made that its divergences demonstrate the greater interest in the cosmic order which is seen in Wisdom. Cook explains the additions of Proverbs 8 (i. e. v. 21a) as due to the stylistic desire to have twenty-two lines in each of the three sections of the chapter; the middle section of the MT contains only twenty-one lines.90 There is no clear philosophical re-conceptualization of Sophia in this chapter, indeed Cook argues that, if anything, Sophia has a less instrumental and creative role in the Septuagint than in the Hebrew. Instead, it is the creative role of God that is underscored.91 The appearance of ἁρμόζω (Prov 8:30) is not indicative of a wider philosophical concern within LXX Proverbs92, although the verse that contains it engendered deep reflection in the later tradition and it may therefore have provided a key encouragement in the attempt to relate Stoic cosmology with the Wisdom tradition. The order of the world, which Proverbs relies upon in its continual appeal to cause and effect, is at least partly consistent with Wisdom’s understanding of the creation as the instrument for the execution of divine judgement, but Proverbs itself engages significantly neither with eschatology nor with Stoicism. A further translational modification, unrelated to the concept of spirit, can be noted in the tendency of the first two chapters of LXX Proverbs to move from what might be termed sapiential contrasts between the wise and the foolish, to moralizing contrasts where wisdom is more explicitly associated with righteousness (e. g. 1:7, 22).93 This is a characteristic present in the Book of Wisdom (e. g. Wis 1:5).

88 The interrogative particle is present in the previous clause. 89 Johann Cook, The Septuagint of Proverbs: Jewish and/or Hellenistic Proverbs?, VTSup 69 (Leiden: Brill, 1997), 316–21. 90 Ibid., 201–02. 91 Ibid., 232. 92 ‘Join’, ‘prepare’, ‘harmonize’; Cook translates this as ‘fitting together’ in his NETS translation. The word can carry organizational and musical connotations in much the same way as can the language of Stoic cosmic order. See Wisdom 8:1 (διοικέω) and the potential musical resonances of the Stoic concept of ‘tension’ (τόνος) See Wisdom 16:24 (ἐπιτείνω and ἀνίημι), 19:18 and above, 3.3 The Exodus and The Elements. 93 Cook, The Septuagint of Proverbs’, 57–63, 110, 317.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

116

Spirit in the Biblical Tradition

A final comment needs to be offered with regard to the role of Sophia in LXX Proverbs. The Greek passes on from the Hebrew text the personification of wisdom (e. g. 3:20–33; 8–9:6). That Sophia appears in Proverbs as a literary personification of the revelation of God through creation94 is implied by the parallel personification of folly (e. g. 9:13–18)95 and the preponderance of occasions when σοφία is used with the more conventional sense of personal skill, insight and knowledge and its close association with παιδεία (‘discipline’, ‘instruction’, ‘training’; e. g. Prov 1:2, 7). The Book of Wisdom itself also understands the sage’s life as one of discipline (e. g. 1:5; 2:12; 3:11; 6:17; 7:14). Wisdom differs from Proverbs in its description of Sophia as both eschatological and cosmic pneuma.96 Since Proverbs does not know eschatological or Stoic categories, it is not surprising that these developments can only be read back into the text. It is hard to be conclusive about the date of the text of LXX Ecclesiastes, if one date is appropriate. The text is characterized by such an ‘extreme formal equivalence’97 that the hand of Aquila has been posited to be at work.98 In this case, the Greek text would be later than Wisdom. Irrespective of this, a brief overview of the content of the book reveals little overlap between the two with regard to the concept of spirit. Of the twenty-four occurrences of ַ ‫רוּ‬99, all but three are translated by πνεῦμα. The exceptions are 5:15, 11:4 ‫ח‬ ַ ‫רךְ־רוּ‬ ֶ ‫א‬ ֶ ; μακρόθυμος). The negative spirit of the book (ἄνεμος) and 7:8 (‫ח‬ is not an obvious source for the origins of Wisdom’s doctrine of pneuma, indeed the apparent nihilism of the preacher (e. g. Eccl 9:5, 7) has been suggested to be influential for the depiction of the persecutors in Wisdom 2.100 In Ecclesiastes 3:19–21, both humans and cattle have one ‫ח‬ ַ ‫ רוּ‬/ πνεῦμα. The Hebrew term, as we have seen, can carry the sense of breath or life, but the question remains open as to how this might be read in relation to the creative ַ ‫ רוּ‬/ πνεῦμα in a way that and empowering spirit of God. The verse uses ‫ח‬ potentially identifies the presence of life with the presence of the divine spirit. This is something that Genesis 2:7 in both versions did not. It is clear, however, that Genesis 2:7 signals that the breath given to the first human 94 The conclusion of Murphy (The Tree of Life, 137–39) and (similarly James L. Crenshaw, Old Testament Wisdom (Atlanta: Westminster John Knox, 1981), 96–99) with regard to the Hebrew text, despite the possibility of Wisdom having more mythological antecedents (Gilbert, ‘Wisdom Literature’, 288). 95 Crenshaw, Old Testament Wisdom, 96, 98. 96 Larcher, Études, 349: ‘une réalité éminemment dynamique ou … la grande puissance supracosmique’. 97 Peter J. Gentry, ‘Ecclesiast: to the Reader’, in Albert Pietersma/Benjamin G. Wright (ed.), A New English Translation of the Septuagint (Oxford, OUP, 2007) 648–50, on p. 648. 98 John Jarick, ‘Aquila’s Koheleth’, Textus, vol. 15 (1990) 131–39. 99 Mandelkern, Concordantiae. 100 For instance, Grimm (Das Buch der Weisheit, 30) argued that the persecutors of Wisdom 2 misused Ecclesiastes in order to support their stance. Skehan argues against even casual allusion to Ecclesiastes in Wisdom (Patrick Skehan, Studies in Israelite Poetry and Wisdom, CBQMS (Washington: Catholic Biblical Association of America, 1971), 213–36).

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

Spirit in the LXX

117

marks him as unique. This uniqueness is also present in Wisdom: any identification of a human spirit with an animal breath would appear to be in stark contrast with Wisdom’s understanding of the irrationality of animals (e. g. Wis 11:15; 15:18). Given the above, it is hard to see how the connection between the spirit of God and the life of humans could be comfortably extended to the life of animals. Despite the Solomonic motif which Ecclesiastes and Wisdom share, Ecclesiastes did not provide a significant resource for the development of Wisdom’s understanding of spirit. The Old Greek version of Daniel is generally thought to have been produced in Alexandria at the end of the second century BCE101 and so is an important work for comparison to Wisdom. The figure of Daniel, as a sage offering the wisdom of God to pagan rulers, is an important link in the chain which stretches from Proverbs and Solomon to Wisdom. The royal fate of the Son of Man was also a source of reflection within Wisdom. Most of the manuscripts of the Old Greek that we have follow the form of the later translation which is usually denoted as Theodotion-Daniel.102 In addition to the translated material, the Greek contains additions: the Prayer of Azariah (3:24–45), some extra narrative details with regard to the angel’s intervention (3:46–50) and the Song of the Three Jews (3:51–90); the story of Susanna (which comes after Daniel 12 in the OG and before Daniel 1 in Theodotion103) and the stories of Bel and the Dragon (usually after Susanna in the OG). The Old Greek is either a relatively free rendering of the MT text, or represents a translation from an intermediate Semitic Vorlage.104 It is hardly surprising that there is no pneumatological cosmological speculation in Daniel. The apocalyptic view understands history by reference to divine determination and heavenly angelic struggle and not by a Stoic inspired understanding of the judging agency of creation.105 The use of πνεῦμα in Daniel is largely unrelated to the presence of ‫ח‬ ַ ‫ רוּ‬in the MT106; direct translation only occurs at 2:3; 5:12 and 6:3.107 The first of ַ ‫ רוּ‬to refer to the self: the king’s spirit was shaken after having these uses ‫ח‬ ָ ‫תַּי‬ ִ ‫ח ַי‬ ַ ‫רוּ‬ seen a dream. The second and third are translations of the phrase ‫רה‬ (‘an excellent spirit’ RSV). In the OG this is translated by the phrase πνεῦμα ἅγιον (‘holy spirit’), whereas Theodotion offers πνεῦμα περισσὸν (a ‘large’ or ‘excellent spirit’). The occurrence of this phrase with regard to Daniel is provocative. We have already discussed how the idea of a ‘spirit of wisdom’ 101 Alexander A. Di Lella, ‘The Textual History of Septuagint-Daniel and Theodotion-Daniel’, in John J. Collins/Peter W. Flint (ed.), The Book of Daniel: Composition and Reception, VTSup vol. 83.2, Formation and Interpretation of Old Testament Literature vol. 2.2 (Leiden: Brill, 2001) 586–607, on pp. 590–91. 102 Ibid., 593–97. 103 J. J. Collins, Daniel, Hermeneia 27 (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1993), 7. 104 Di Lella, ‘The Textual History’, 588–89. 105 Cf. below, 7.5.5 Apocalypticism. 106 Mandelkern, Concordantiae. 107 Hatch/Redpath, Concordance.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

118

Spirit in the Biblical Tradition

either occurs or is implied in a handful of places in the MT (Gen 41:38–39; Exod 28:3; Deut 34:9; Isa 11:2). It is interesting to see here the notion of a holy spirit brought into connection with this idea by its use in relation to the wise Daniel. This connection is present in Wisdom (e. g. Wis 1:5; 7:22; 9:17) and there involves a unification of the prophetic and kingly endowment of the spirit of God with the later wisdom tradition. The Wisdom of Joshua Ben Sira (or Sirach in its Greek translation) was written in the first quarter of the second century BCE. The earliest point of its composition is likely after the death of Simeon II who was High Priest from 219 until his death in 196 BCE and the latest date for its publication is determined by the absence in the book of the characteristic anxieties that developed during the reign of Antiochus IV Ephiphanes (175–164). The Greek translation was published soon after the death of Ptolemy VII Euergetes II in 117 BCE.108 This date of the translation makes it a closer sibling to Wisdom than is often assumed if the earlier date for Wisdom is taken. The translation is, however, ‘executed in a generally isomorphic manner’109, closely following the Hebrew in a word-by-word approach and therefore not a likely candidate for the creative reinterpretation of an older text. There are eight occurrences of πνεῦμα in Sirach.110 In two cases (39:28; 43:17) wind is referred to. In both available manuscripts, the Hebrew is not extant at this point.111 The wind in question, with fire, hail, famine and death (v. 29), has been created for the punishment of the wicked either within this life, or by bringing this life to an end. This idea is reminiscent of Wisdom 5:17–23. There is no hint, however, of cosmological philosophical speculation here.112 The second case (43:17) can be found with a section (43:13– 26) that describes the workings of the creation as the direct result of God’s will. There is less of a focus on judgement here, although verse thirteen (‘the lightnings of his judgement’) should be noted. In both instances, creation is the instrument of God’s judgement and glory. This role of creation forms the more traditional Jewish complement to the Stoic ideas with which parts of Wisdom are concerned. It is not clear that πνεῦμα is a central word or concept in these passages, even though the winds are listed first in 39:28.

108 Patrick W. Skehan/Alexander A. Di Lella, The Wisdom of Ben Sira, The Anchor Bible 39 (New York: Doubleday, 1987), 8–9; Greek edition: Sapientia Iesu Filii Sirach, Septuaginta: Vetus Testamentum Graecum / Auctoritate Acad. Scientiarum Gottingensis vol. 12.2, ed. by Joseph Ziegler (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1980). 109 Benjamin G. Wright, ‘Sirach: to the Reader’, in Albert Pietersma/Benjamin G. Wright (ed.), A New English Translation of the Septuagint (Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2007) 715– 19, on pp. 716–18. 110 Hatch/Redpath, Concordance. 111 In this case and for all further references to the Hebrew of the book, see Pancratius C. Beentjes, The Book of Ben Sira in Hebrew: A Text Edition of All Extant Hebrew Manuscripts and a Synopsis of All Parallel Hebrew Ben Sira Texts, VTSup 68 (Leiden: Brill, 1997). 112 On the absence of Stoic influence in the book, cf. Sharon Lea Mattila, ‘Ben Sira and the Stoics: A Reexamination of the Evidence’, JBL, vol. 119, no. 3. (2000) 473–501.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

Spirit in the LXX

119

Rather, the word operates as one of a number of exceptional or violent instrumental aspects of the creation. The presence of the word, amongst language similar to these cases and as one word amongst others, in Wisdom 5:23 encourages a connection to be made between that which orders the cosmos to do God’s bidding and the creation as a direct instrument of God. Two further instances of πνεῦμα are used as shorthand for the self.113 In Sir 34:14 is found πνεῦμα φοβουμένων κύριον ζήσεται (‘[the] spirit of those who fear the Lord will live’). The Hebrew for this verse is not extant, ֶ ֶ ‫נ‬. although in a similar context at 38:23, πνεῦμα is used to translate ‫פשׁ‬ Although 34:14 does facilitate some reflection on body-soul dualism, it is evident from elsewhere in the text that Ben Sira’s hope for divine recompense is in events that occur before death (11:26–28). The final three occurrences of πνεῦμα to be considered are found at Sirach 39:6; 48:12, 24. In 38:24–39:11, the profession of the scribe-sage is differentiated from all others. The one who devotes himself to the study of the law (38:34) and seeks out the wisdom of the ancients (39:1) will, if the Lord wants, ‘be filled with a spirit of understanding’ (39:6; πνεύματι συνέσεως ἐμπλησθήσεται). The Hebrew for this is, once again, not extant, but in 48:12 we read of how Elisha was filled with Elijah’s spirit (ἐνεπλήσθη πνεύματος αὐτοῦ). The combination of πνεῦμα and ἐμπίπλημι in both verses, when this verb is not present in 2 Kings 2:9–10, 15, is an indication that a single type of experience is in view. The prophetic experience of the spirit implicitly has been unified with the life of the scribe-sage114, as our earlier investigations into the ‘spirit of Wisdom’ indicated might happen. Finally, Di Lella describes the reference to Isaiah’s ‘great spirit’ in 48:24 as an adaptation of Isaiah 11:2.115 It is there that the eschatological spirit receives the title ‘spirit of wisdom’. The Wisdom of Ben Sira has a different place and time of origin from the Book of Wisdom. The isomorphic nature of its translation has also meant that there was little scope for a semantic development. However, despite the lack of eschatological language or any hope of immortality, it is apparent that there are significant similarities. Firstly, Ben Sira retains a hope for the reception of justice by humans within their lifetime and he develops this hope by turning to descriptions of the creation as the instrument of God. One might term this language eschatological, although one should not assume that this refers to the end of a current world order. Instead, Ben Sira’s hope is that God is able to punish and reward each individual before death. This hope and the use of the creation language, of which πνεῦμα is part, also occurs in Wisdom. There, however, punishment and reward have ceased to be mirror 113 Note also ‫ח‬ ַ ‫ רוּ‬with the sense of self in the final clause of 48:12. 114 James K. Aitken, ‘Apocalyptic, Revelation and Early Jewish Wisdom Literature’, in P. J. Harland/C. T. R. Hayward (ed.), New Heaven and New Earth: Essays in Honour of Anthony Gelston (Leiden: Brill, 1999) 181–93, on pp. 189–90. 115 Skehan/Di Lella, Wisdom of Ben Sira, 539.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

120

Spirit in the Biblical Tradition

images. The righteous receive recompense after death, although still within the cosmos, but the wicked are threatened with death and judgement by an instrumental creation (5:17–23). The creation therefore, including pneuma, continues to play a role in God’s judging purposes. A second important facet of the Wisdom of Ben Sira is the clarity with which the prophetic spirit of God is brought together with the piety of the sage. The spirit is not identified with Sophia, being understood as the Law (24:23), but Ben Sira brings all the material concerning spirit from the scriptures into constructive conversation with the Wisdom tradition.

6.4 Spirit in Philo Philo is an important source of comparison for any work on Wisdom. His close proximity to Wisdom geographically and temporally throws the distinctiveness of Wisdom into stark relief. With regard to pneuma, Philo shares some distinctive biblical and non-biblical characteristics with Wisdom and some assessment of these phenomena is necessary. An important element of Philo’s understanding of pneuma is his Platonism. In his treatment of the creation116, the incorporeal world was created on day one (Opif. 29–35) and the corporeal world on the subsequent days (36– 88), reaching its climax with the creation of humanity (69). Although the division between the corporeal and incorporeal is established by the distinction between the first and subsequent days, Philo makes a further division between the ideal, incorporeal, invisible, sexless and incorruptible man of Genesis 1 and the composite creature of Genesis 2:7 (134–39).117 It is not necessary to resolve the question of the relationship between these three creations in order to recognize the presence of a Platonic dualism where the Jewish God exists beyond both but establishes the incorporeal world in the divine reason (36: ἐν θείῳ λόγῳ) as the ideal pattern for the corporeal. Humanity thus becomes ‘the borderland between mortal and immortal nature’ (135). More specifically, the point of closest connection between these two realms is the human soul which is equated with the divine breath of Genesis 2:7 (135). The matter of the human soul is, however, not quite so simple. In Leg. I 31–32 the above picture is first confirmed: the earthly man, moulded by the divine craftsman118 in Gen 2:7, is corruptible in body and mind. The latter, however, becomes a soul, ‘intellectual and really alive’ (γίνεται […] 116 Cf. David T. Runia, On the Creation of the Cosmos according to Moses, Philo of Alexandria Commentary Series (Leiden: Brill, 2001). 117 Cf. Thomas H. Tobin, The Creation of Man: Philo and the History of Interpretation, Catholic Biblical Quarterly, Monograph Series, 14 vol. (Washington, DC: Catholic Biblical Association of America, 1983). 118 Here, τεχνίτης and δημιουργός are used of God: Opif. 10, 13, 16, 20; Leg. I 18.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

Spirit in Philo

121

εἰς ψυχήν […] εἰς νοερὰν119 καὶ ζῶσαν ὄντως), when God breaths (ἐμπνέω) into it ‘a power of real life’. Later (36), while still discussing the same

passage, Philo distinguishes between the one who breathes, the breath and that which receives the breath. The first is God, the second is the spirit (τὸ πνεῦμα) and the third is the mind. From this two points are worth noting. Firstly, Philo identifies a relationship and a distinction between the divine πνεῦμα of Genesis 1:2 and the πνοή of Genesis 2:7.120 The relationship is set out in the first question of Leg. I 33 which asks, in the context of discussing Genesis 2:7, why the ‘body-loving’ (φιλοσώματος) mind of the second man is deemed worthy of divine pneuma (πνεῦμα θεῖον). The fourth question makes this even clearer and asks why, given that the author knew of the pneuma of God in Genesis 1:2, he yet chose to use πνοή here. For Philo, these passages plainly spoke of similar things. Elsewhere, in referring to this passage we even find the phrase ‘pneuma of life’ (πνεῦμα ζωῆς: Leg. III 161; Det. 80121; note also Opif. 135, πνεῦμα θεῖον, ‘divine pneuma’, and Special Laws 4:217, πνεῦμα ζῳοφυτοῦν, ‘life-causing pneuma’). His explanation (42) returns to the schema of his dual creation, claiming a distinction between that which the first and second men ‘might be said to participate in’. The mind of the former may be connected to pneuma which is associated with ‘strength and vigour and power’, but that of the latter is made from matter and may only be connected to a ‘light and less substantial breeze’. In summary, it was only fitting or possible for the material mind to receive a less significant ‘breath’. This distinction between two forms of pneuma is not an important recurring insight of Philo’s. Secondly, returning to the issue of pneuma and the mind in Leg. I 36, the difference between the two is difficult to clarify because Philo has already said that the divine act of Genesis 2:7 was the giving of a soul (Opif. 135) endowed with mind (32). If the mind is given or enabled by the divine breathing, what is it that receives the breath? The answer appears to lie in Philo’s Platonic dualism, which forms a pattern which is repeated as one moves down the order of being. Consequently, the soul of the second man is itself divided into two parts, the rational (the mind) and the non-rational (Leg. I 40) and the former is ensouled by God, and the latter in turn by the mind. Just as Moses was to be ‘a God for Pharaoh’ (Exod 7:1), so the dominant part of the soul is to rule and so disseminate the divine reason. In a number of places (Det. 83–84; Her. 55–57; Spec. Leg. IV 123; note also Leg. I 91) Philo bases this view of the soul in the combination of his interpretation of LXX Genesis 2:7 and Leviticus 17:11, 14 (ἡ ψυχὴ πάσης σαρκὸς

119 Note Wis 7:22: Ἔστιν γὰρ ἐν αὐτῇ πνεῦμα νοερόν. 120 Note also De gigantibus 22 where the pneuma of Genesis 1:2 is understood as physical air. 121 Whether these texts are genuine, a Philonic slip, or represent a period where Philo had a different text before him, is a topic beyond the scope of this work. The issue does not affect the larger point.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

122

Spirit in the Biblical Tradition

αἷμα ἐστιν: ‘the soul of every flesh is the blood’.122 Although Philo can use the term ψυχὴ for the soul as a single entity (Her. 55), he prefers to speak of

two souls, where each soul, or half of a soul, has its own essence or substance (οὐσία). The essence of the irrational, animal part of the soul, which is held in common with other animals (Spec. Leg. IV 123) is blood (Lev 17:11, 14) and the essence of the other, dominant part (τὸ ἡγεμονικόν: Her. 55) is divine breath (πνοή: Her. 56; πνεῦμα θεῖον: Spec. IV 123). It was stated above that in Philo the point of connection between the corporeal and incorporeal was the human soul. It appears now that this point can be resolved still further: the connection lies within the soul, between its two warring parts (Gig. 29–31). The discussion of Philo’s understanding of soul has so far been quite abstract, related to man at creation, even if allegorically understood. In his treatment of Moses, the discussion becomes directly related to the life and piety of the sage.123 In De gigantibus 19–27, Philo uses Genesis 6:3 allegorically. εἶπεν κύριος ὁ θεός οὐ μὴ καταμείνη τὸ πνεῦμά μου ἐν τοις ἀνθρώποις τούτοις εἰς τὸν αἰωνα διὰ τὸ εἶναι αὐτοὺς σάρκας (‘The Lord God said, “my spirit will not

remain in these humans forever because they are flesh” […]’)

In Philo’s explanation of this passage, souls and daemons (which he reads as ‘angels’ rather than sons of God in Gen 6:2) are essentially the same thing (16).124 Heaven is filled with such creatures, he asserts (7). Some of these become the souls of humans and some remain angels or stars (12–13, 7).125 Those that become humans have diverse fates, some being overwhelmed by bodily pleasures (13, 15) but others striving for their higher state through philosophical study (14). It is this dynamic of the ‘fall’ of souls and their differing choices and fates, portrayed in the shortening of physical life, which Philo takes from the the initial verses of Genesis 6126, where (Gen 6:2) the sons of God take as wives the daughters of men. This represents the soul of a

122 Philo appears not to know the slightly awkward reading preferred by Rahlfs (Septuaginta, ed. by Alfred Rahlfs (Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 1935)) and Wevers (Leviticus, ed. by John William Wevers, Septuaginta: Vetus Testamentum Graecum / Auctoritate Acad. Scientiarum Gottingensis vol. 2.2 (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1986)): ἡ γὰρ ψυχὴ πάσης σαρκὸς αἷμα αὐτοῦ ἐστιν [my bold]. Both soul and flesh are feminine; the personal pronoun is neuter or masculine. It is not known in any variants in Cohn and Wendland (Philo, Philonis Alexandrini: Opera quae supersunt, ed. by Leopold Cohn/Paul Wendland, 7 vol. [Berlin: Georgii Reimeri/Walter de Gruyter, 1896–1930]). 123 The following summary follows closely the excellent and more detailed path laid out by Levison (Spirit, 137–58, 225–29). 124 A brief discussion of the angelic without significant philosophical treatment can be found in Christina Termini, “Philo’s Thought within the Context of Middle Judaism”, in Adam Kamesar (ed.), The Cambridge Companion to Philo (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2009) 95–123, on pp. 101–03. 125 Levison, Spirit, 139. 126 Ibid., 140.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

Spirit in Philo

123

human as it is overcome by the pleasures of life (18). The response of God to such as these is to take his away his spirit (Gen 6:3). The initial state of a human, then, would appear to be one of innocence, of having the divine aid of the spirit. Genesis 2:7 depicts this original state. The irrationality of a soul, the rejection of one’s innate conception of ‘the best’ (ὁ ἄριστος) and the preference for the passions of the animal nature lead to the withdrawal of this aid.127 The effect of this interpretation is to qualify the connections between Philo’s system and Stoicism. In a typical Stoic system everything is matter, including the soul. While in certain circumstances, such as at Delphi (Def. orac. 432D-E), a pneuma may be said to inspire a soul, the pneuma and the soul are fundamentally of the same nature.128 Seneca even conceives of the ‘holy spirit’ (Ep. Mor. 41:2: sacer intra nos spiritus sedet), who is the divine aid of souls, as in fact the upper nature of soul itself (Ep. Mor. 41:5).129 For Philo, however, the divine pneuma is to be firmly kept in close connection to the transcendent God and the human soul, even of the first man, is its image. In Plant. 18–20, the human mind, the upper aspect of the soul, the rational (λογική) soul, is not a portion of the æthereal nature (æther sometimes being considered the fifth element and therefore akin to pneuma), of a kind with the upper air of the cosmos.130 Instead, the breathing of God (Gen 2:7) into the man is taken to guarantee that the man is made in his likeness (Gen 1:27).131 This image is of no created thing. Instead, it is a ‘genuine coinage of that divine and invisible pneuma’ (Plant. 18: [Μωυσῆς] εἶπεν αὐτὴν τοῦ θείου καὶ ἀοράτου πνεύματος ἐκείνου δόκιμον εἶναι νόμισμα), stamped by the eternal Word. The upper element of the soul is rational and intelligent and in this sense made after the likeness of God. It is therefore able to receive the aid of the incorporeal divine pneuma (19).132 Returning now to the discussion of De gigantibus, it can be seen that the human soul requires inspiration – divine pneuma – in order for the upper element of the soul to instruct the lower and for the human to attain a higher, immortal and incorporeal existence (14). Moses is the perfect example of the role of this divine pneuma, uniquely retaining the pneuma at his side to the end of his life (55).133 This experience of Moses is to be distinguished from pneuma-inspired prophetic ecstasy, where ‘the mind is evicted at the arrival of the divine pneuma’ (Her. 258–65).134 In contrast, Philo points to the case

127 Ibid., 141. 128 Ibid., 146–47. 129 Isaacs, Concept of Spirit, 10 15. 130 Levison, Spirit, 139 149. 131 Ibid., 150. 132 Ibid. 133 Ibid., 157–58. 134 Ibid., 146.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

124

Spirit in the Biblical Tradition

of Bezalel (Gig. 23; Plant. 26; Exod 31:3) to further explicate the philosophical life. This individual, as has been noted above, is called by God to ornament the tabernacle and its contents. To this end he is filled with ‘a divine pneuma of wisdom, understanding and knowledge in every work’ (Exod 31:3: πνεῦμα θεῖον σοφίας καὶ συνέσεως καὶ ἐπιστήμης ἐν παντὶ ἔργῳ). While the prophetic experience of the divine pneuma temporarily supplants the human mind, the sapiential or philosophical experience elevates and enlivens the upper element of the soul in order that it might rise above mere physical pleasures and might contemplate and seek after divine things.135 One final exegetical move of Philo’s in this treatise remains to be considered. From Exodus 31, he considers the giving of the pneuma to the seventy elders in Numbers 11:17 (24–27). This is not understood prophetically, but in terms of the teaching of knowledge and wisdom to disciples.136 The sharing of this pneuma involves no lessening of Moses’ own inspiration: divine pneuma and knowledge are likened and, indeed, related to one another. Neither suffers diminution through its spread, just as fire is not divided in the lighting of torches (25–27). Philo’s use of Stoic pneuma language is evident in the prominence of the Stoic active and passive principles in De opificio mundi 8.137 Further, in De fuga et inventione 182 a Stoic picture of the soul’s extension through the body as pneuma is given, with the face as dominant part (ἡγεμονικόν)138, acting like a spring and extending pneumas to the eyes and nostrils.139 In Quod deus immutabilis sit 35140 the four-fold Stoic division of things in nature is reproduced in which coherence (ἕξις), growth (φύσις) and animal life (ψυχή) form a hierarchy of being which finds its pinnacle in the rational mind of the human (45).141 Philo describes cohesion alone as a pneuma, rather than all of them being pneuma of different tensions. In this case there is no confusion between this idea and divine pneuma, but the presence of the Stoic understanding of pneuma which penetrates throughout a body, granting quality, is clear. This pattern is, in the Stoic schema, repeated on a cosmic scale142 – indeed there, these cosmic, anthropological and other pneumas are essentially one.143 What has already been said with regard to Philo’s Platonic dualism still stands, however, and while God through his pneuma may fill all 135 Ibid., 146. 136 Ibid., 141. 137 On the principles, cf. Diogenes Laertius 7.134=LS 44B; Sellars, Stoicism, 86–90. 138 A matter of Stoic dispute: Sellars, Stoicism, 105–6; Long, ‘Stoic Psychology’, 567–71. 139 Long, Hellenistic Philosophy, 172; Long, ‘Stoic Psychology’, 571; Aetius 4.21.1– 4=SVF 2.836. 140 Cf. the similar Leg. II 22–23, but with no mention of pneuma. 141 Sellars, Stoicism, 104–5; Diogenes Laertius 7.139 (English translation, Inwood/Gerson, Hellenistic Philosophy); Radice, ‘Philo’s Theology’, 141. 142 Diogenes Laertius 7.138–39. 143 Cicero N. D. 2.29–30.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

Conclusion

125

things (Gig. 27144, 47), the divine pneuma does not order the cosmos.145 Corporeal pneumas may order the cosmos, or at least parts of it as seen above, but this is not the role of the divine, incorporeal pneuma. The order of the cosmos is established by its creation in accordance with the divine pattern. In summary, Philo shows familiarity with many of the Stoic ideas that are alluded to in Wisdom. Significant, however, is the addition of his engagement with Platonism. Philo can be said to be part of Middle Platonism, in a way Wisdom cannot and this may be an indication of the later date of his work. The distinction between the corporeal and incorporeal clarifies numerous questions which are raised in common with Wisdom. Because God lies above both worlds and all piety must seek the divinely ordered ideal, divine pneuma cannot be associated with the physical as it is in Wisdom. Consequently, the contact point between the corporeal and incorporeal is resolved first to the soul, and then to the two parts of the soul. The mind, the upper part of the soul, sits between the two worlds as the true intermediary, although one might question the degree to which true contact has been explained.

6.5 Conclusion This discussion of the concept of Spirit has shown how distinct Hebrew and Greek conceptual histories came together in Jewish literature in the Hellenistic era. In the Hebrew text, the metaphor of wind and breath is used to describe the human individual and her life, the power and presence of God working within and on behalf of his chosen people to grant life and endow leaders in particular with skills, motivations and words. For the Jewish Hellenistic reader of these scriptures, the creative power of the God of Genesis 1:2 would underpin all further theological reflection on the pneuma.146 In the Greek, remarkably similar metaphors of breath and wind, make the term πνεῦμα especially suited for the translation of ‫ח‬ ַ ‫רוּ‬. The concept of pneuma in the LXX shows little theological development within the translation itself. Perhaps the most that can be said, although this is not insignificant, is that the translation, even when literal, allowed the Hebrew texts, including their semantic inter-penetration, to be reconceptualized using the 144 Note Drummond (Philo Judaeus ii, 216–17) who would prefer the Loeb edition’s alternative translation (Philo, trans. by F. H. Colson/G. H. Whitaker/Ralph Marcus, 10 vol. & 2 suppl., The Loeb Classical Library [Cambridge, Mass./London: Harvard University Press/William Heinemann, 1929–62]). It should be pointed out as well that the second reference above is to “God’s fullness” being everywhere; the spirit is not mentioned. This point strengthens the case that the divine pneuma is not understood cosmically. 145 Radice, ‘Philo’s Theology’, 132–33. 146 Cf. above, 4.3 Creation from Pre-existent Matter.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

126

Spirit in the Biblical Tradition

different thought-worlds associated with the Greek πνεῦμα. Two small developments were noted in the later texts of LXX Daniel and Ben Sira. It had already been noted how in the Hebrew scriptures there was the potential for an understanding of an enabling spirit of wisdom. In Daniel, in the context of great eschatological visions, the term ‘holy pneuma’ gives this idea new emphasis and we see here a unification of the prophetic and kingly endowment of pneuma with the blessing of Wisdom. In Ben Sira, the prophetic experience of the spirit has been unified with the life of the scribesage. In addition, Ben Sira’s concern for justice within the present worldorder and life of each individual, is depicted in a classic prophetic manner with the winds (πνεύματα) at the head of the created instruments of the vengeance of God. This concern for present justice could be understood as an extension of the sapiential confidence in cause-and-effect mixed with the prophetic language of judgement, although Ben Sira’s hope is not so much placed in the order of things as in divine intervention. In Philo, many of these issues have developed substantially. Once again, pneuma operates as the presence and power of God in the world and Philo has drawn together the different depictions of pneuma in the Bible into a synthesis. Divine pneuma, is a single concept whether experienced creatively, prophetically or sapientially. His Platonic dualism enables and encourages him to distinguish, although occasionally with some ambiguity, this divine pneuma from any anthropological understanding of pneuma as a soul. Stoic conceptions of the pneuma are attractive for him, but their influence is ultimately limited because Philo cannot accept any corporeal association with the divine pneuma. The absence of eschatological concern should also be noted here. The entirety of the Jewish hope is to be found in the philosophical life. Philo proves an especially useful foil for consideration of the Book of Wisdom, because he removes ambiguities and interprets the biblical text with metaphysical precision. His Platonism proves especially helpful in identifying relationships between God, pneuma and the physical world.147 Viewing Wisdom from this perspective, it is apparent both how much reflection the reader is called upon to do but also how much reflection is possible within the constraints of the biblical tradition. Philo’s concern to anchor the divine pneuma in the eternal realm is absent from Wisdom and pneuma-Sophia is described there in Stoic physical language (7:22–24), particularly in the explication of the Exodus miracles. Unlike Philo, Wisdom’s pneuma explicitly fills, holds together and orders the cosmos (1:7; 8:1). Like the human soul, it is an image or reflection itself of the divine, distinct in quality but not nature from the rest of the cosmos. God remains transcendent; pneuma does not. The language of wisdom, understood as knowledge or technique, might be

147 Such observations should qualify Winston’s (The Wisdom of Solomon, 3, 26, 28–29, 33–34, 39–40, 64) placement of Wisdom within Middle Platonism.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

Conclusion

127

understood to stand in tension with this. However, if pneuma can rationally order the creation, then all Sophia-inspired knowledge involves the ordering of the mind according to that pneuma. This concern for the ordering of the cosmos is consonant with Ben Sira’s hope for this-worldly recompense. In Wisdom, as will be shown shortly, such language is not used of a distant future judgement but of the rise and fall of the Hellenistic rulers of the Jews. Wisdom’s physical understanding of pneuma and therefore of souls, leads to the conclusion that life after death should not be conceived as incorporeal existence, but as a continuing existence as part of the cosmos in which the individual persists in a concern for and connection to the sensible world. In both the judgement of kings and the recompense of souls, Wisdom’s interest is in the present cosmic order.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

Part Four – The Realized Eschatology of Wisdom

In Chapter Seven, the eschatological language of Wisdom is set in the context of its biblical and Greek usage. The depiction of the personal fate of the righteous after death in Wisdom is shown to have the same cosmic orientation as the concept of pneuma in Wisdom. Chapter Eight is an attempt to assess the degree to which Wisdom’s royal, realized, eschatological hope can be drawn into connection with the historical and political reality of Hellenistic kingship. Chapter Nine further addresses the question of the boundaries of Wisdom’s engagement with Stoicism by discussing fate and providence. These are ideas that bear some similarity to the concept of realized eschatology.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

7. Personal Eschatology and Immortality in Wisdom 7.1 Introduction Personal eschatology and immortality are central to the theology of Wisdom.1 It is through a correct understanding of these concerns that the reader is encouraged to rededicate his or her allegiance to the Jewish God and seek immortal kingship through Sophia. This chapter will evaluate Wisdom’s theology of eschatology and immortality against the background of contemporary Hellenism and Judaism. It will be found that Wisdom is indebted to Greek and Jewish cultures and traditions, but that it repeatedly uses ideas and language from both spheres only to subordinate these ideas to an overarching hope in a royal salvation granted by the Jewish God. In the Greek world, a variety of ideas existed concerning the after-life. These will first be surveyed in order then to assess the nature of Wisdom’s relationship to them. Following this will be an assessment of the understanding of death in the different sections of Wisdom. This in turn will lead to the further evaluation of nature and cosmology in the book, and the re-evaluation of traditionally understood eschatology. This section on death will be concluded by a brief analysis of the witness of the Jewish burial inscriptions. Next, the use of and allusions to biblical material within Wisdom will be investigated, particularly in Wisdom 1–5. It will also prove valuable to compare the similar language and differing theological stances of Wisdom and the apocalypses of 1 Enoch and Daniel. The chapter will conclude by setting out of the pieces of the jigsaw of eschatology and immortality in Wisdom.

7.2 Greek Conceptions of the After-Life 7.2.1 Introduction This section discusses the language in Wisdom which alludes to Greek anthropology and doctrines of the immortality of the soul. This subject is treated first in order to retain Wisdom’s outward focus and engagement with the Hellenistic world. Inevitably, references will have to be made forward to 1

Kolarcik, Ambiguity of Death; Winston, The Wisdom of Solomon, 25–32; Larcher, Études, 237–327; Richard J. Taylor, ‘The Eschatological Meaning of Life and Death in the Book of Wisdom I–V’, Ephemerides Theologicae Lovanienses, vol. 42 (1966) 72–137.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

132

Personal Eschatology and Immortality in Wisdom

the section on eschatology, and both sections should be read as in conversation with each other. The Greek doctrine of the soul was not uniformly understood in the Hellenistic period. Plato’s texts themselves offer a variety of competing, or perhaps complementary, perspectives. They contain both philosophical proofs and mythical depictions which draw on religious ideas. During the Hellenistic period, old ideas and new were all available. The increased emphasis on ‘scientific’ cosmologies in turn influenced discussion on the nature of soul and what it could mean, if it was possible, for it to persist after death.

7.2.2 The Homeric Soul The commonly held modern understanding of the soul in many respects derives from Plato, particularly in the sense in which the soul causes life, consciousness and individuality: this might be termed a unitary concept of the soul.2 In contrast, in the Archaic period, at least as represented by Homer, the word soul (ψυχή) is associated primarily only with the individual, not with a person’s psychological attributes, and is only mentioned at times of crisis, such as when it leaves the body during a swoon (Il. 5.696) or at death (Il. 22.362).3 The ψυχή is likely to be etymologically derived from the breath of the body which leaves at the point of death4, but this is not in Homer a conscious enduring being, but more an ethereal ghost5: that which survived after the death of a human, as much as it could be said to survive, was a forgetful, senseless and pitiful shadow of the former person.6 The major psychological attributes of the personality7, which are considered part of the ψυχή in a unitary conception of the soul, function independently in Homer and are largely associated with bodily life, being absent in the postmortem existence of the ψυχή.8 In the Homeric world, then, humans are 2

3

4 5 6

7 8

Following Jan Bremner (The Early Greek Concept of the Soul (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1983)), who himself uses the categories of E. Arbman (‘Untersuchungen zur primitiven Seelenvorstellungen mit besonderer Rücksicht auf Indien’, pts. 1–2, Le Monde Oriental 20–21, [1926] 85–222, [1927] 1–185). Bremner, Concept of the Soul, 14–16; Jan Bremner, The Rise and Fall of the Afterlife (London: Routledge, 2002), 1; Walter Burkert, Greek Religion (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1985), 195. Caution should be used in assuming the significance of the etymology at any particular point of Greek literature (Bremner, Concept of the Soul, 5). The terms σκιά (shadow: Od. 10.495) and εἴδωλον (phantom, image: Od. 11.83) are used metaphorically to refer to the soul (Bremner, Concept of the Soul, 76–80). During Odysseus’ visit to the underworld, sacrifices of gore must be consumed by the ghouls in order for them to recognize him (Od. 10.496–574). When he attempts to embrace the ghost of his mother, his arms can find nothing to hold (Od. 11.206–08). θυμός: the source of emotions; μένος: might, force, battle-rage; νόος: the mind (Bremner, Concept of the Soul, 54–60). Ibid., 54–62, 74–76, 82–89.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

Greek Conceptions of the After-Life

133

mortal and gods immortal. They stand in defining contrast to one another. There is little hope of an after-life here.

7.2.3 Immortality and the Community The form of immortality, in contrast, that was available was in fame and the preservation of one’s name.9 In Homer this hope particularly belongs to the great warriors who achieve magnificent feats of valour (Il. 22.305–4; Od. 3.199–204).10 Their deeds are remembered by the bards, the ἀοιδοί, alongside the acts of the gods.11 As Greek life increasingly become centred around the city, the polis becomes the guarantor of the memory of its protectors.12 A further natural development from this was for the city to acknowledge a broader range of individuals – the lawgiver, writer, scientist and philosopher – who achieved great things for the community (Sym. 209A). A public burial and tomb, a civic statue, ensured the preservation of the individual in the consciousness of the community.13 Wisdom was produced from within and for a Jewish community – although not necessarily the entirety of it – which now views Hellenistic civic life from the outside. Kings and rulers are to be warned (1:1; 6:1). The oppressors of Wisdom 2 are visualized as a group; a point easily passed over. The significant Greek education which Wisdom shows suggests that this was not always the case. Whatever the reason was for the community arriving at this position, it is hard to imagine the author of such a work identifying with Hellenistic civic life or being encouraged to take part in it by the established participants in it. The consequence of this is that such a person would have been effectively excluded from the forms of immortality which civic life could bestow. While it may have been a simple intellectual step to demythologize the immortality which was bestowed14, the emotional and social pressure of such an exclusion should not be underestimated. It is not surprising, then, to find within Wisdom attempts to redefine such a hope in to one in which the sages of Sophia could participate and from which, in a reversal of fates, those outside of the community were excluded. In Wisdom 4:1 we read that ‘better is childlessness with virtue, for in the memory of it is immortal9 10

11 12 13 14

Werner Jaeger, ‘The Greek Ideas of Immortality’, HTR, vol. 52, no. 3 (1959) 135–47, on pp. 137–39. Bremner discusses the way in which the values of communities influenced the funeral rites for an individual and the depiction of their post-mortem existence (Bremner, Concept of the Soul, 83, 89–108). The consequence of this is that the funeral-rites and status in the after-life of children and warriors are markedly contrasting. Jaeger, ‘Greek Ideas of Immortality’, 137. Ibid., 138. Ibid., 139. Euhemeristic arguments were widely known; Wisdom 14:15–21 shows a similar sceptic bent (Winston, Wisdom of Solomon, 273–77).

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

134

Personal Eschatology and Immortality in Wisdom

ity’ (κρείσσων ἀτεκνία μετὰ ἀρετῆς· ἀθανασία γάρ ἐστιν ἐν μνήμη αυτῆς). The immediate context is the fate of the righteous but barren woman

(3:13). Hope is placed in ‘virtue’, which is recognized by God and human beings. Virtue is understood in standard Platonic four-fold division in Wisdom 8:7, but the means of achieving it is through Sophia: her labours are virtues. Through Sophia, Solomon will have ‘glory among the multitudes and honour in the presence of the elders’ (NRSV 8:10). In Wisdom 4, it can be seen that a civic, athletic illustration is used of the glory promised in virtue (4:2). The implication is that virtue – presumably synonymous with righteousness – will bring acclamation from God and the wider population. But how will the members of the Jewish community, effectively excluded from full engagement with the polis, find such praise? The hope of an immortal kingship in Wisdom should not be understood as a spiritualized state. This cosmic kingship is not separated from the future of those remaining on the earth but rather determines it.

7.2.4 The Platonic Soul Plato provides a variety of theories about the nature of the soul (ψυχή) and its relation to the body (σῶμα). Scholars in the field recognize the complexity of producing a composite, single theory.15 However, clear and repeated lines of argument do appear. Firstly, the person should be identified with the soul (Plato, Phd. 67bc).16 This soul is by nature similar to the divine and therefore immortal and eternal, its nature not being the gift of any higher divinity.17 Nonetheless, in Phaedo souls have undergone a kind of fall from a divine state and now exist in the body, trapped, as though in a tomb (Gorg., 493a; Crat., 400b; Phd., 62b). The purpose of the philosophical life is to free the soul from the polluting effects of the bodily life by aiding the contemplation of eternal ideas (Phd. 64). A freed soul will be able to return to its immortal home at death, which is the separation of the soul from the body (Phd. 67bc). A soul which has not been freed will either be reincarnated into a higher or lower form of physical life or be confined to eternal torment (Let. 335a. Tim., 42b-c).18 At death there is a form of judgement in which the injustices committed in the bodily life are laid bare and it is discovered to what extent they have tainted the soul (Gorg. 523a–526c).19 In Phaedo four proofs are offered of the immortality of the soul, and a slightly more extended consideration will prove worthwhile. Firstly, it is 15 See, for instance, Armstrong (Ancient Philosophy, 40–43). 16 Armstrong, Ancient Philosophy, 40. 17 Ibid.; in the Phaedrus (245c–46a) the soul’s immortality lies in its perpetual self-generated motion. 18 Ibid. 19 Justice also operates as the basis for another proof in Republic X.604c–14a.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

Greek Conceptions of the After-Life

135

argued, all opposites are generated from their opposite. Just as the dead must come from the living, so the living must come from the dead (Phd. 70d–71). The pre-existence of the soul and a form of reincarnation, and therefore preexistence, is thereby affirmed and this is later given mythological illustration (Phd. 110b–14c). Secondly, the doctrine of recollection is also used to supplement this position. This argues that the knowledge of absolute essences cannot be derived from sensory perception because in order to recognize something one requires already to know it. This knowledge must derive from a previous existence. Hence, the pre-existence of the soul is tied in argument in Plato to the doctrine of Ideas.20 Thirdly, that the soul does not dissolve and dissipate at death is further argued against from some analogies. Essence and true existence are unchanging. In contrast, bodily existence is mutable. The soul, being invisible, is closer to the unseen and unchangeable. It is the philosopher’s aim, and the purpose of the virtues, to strengthen the analogy between the soul and that which she contemplates, true existence and essence, by lessening the influence of the physical world (Phd. 78d–79). A further analogy begins with the understanding that the soul is the ruler of the body. The soul is therefore akin to the divine and the body to the mortal (Phd. 80a). Given these analogies, the fact that the visible body does not decompose immediately after death, and indeed parts of it do not rot at all, suggests that the soul that is noble, pure, invisible and untainted by the body in life will go away into the immortal realm to which it is akin (Phd. 80c– 81a). The soul therefore is associated in Plato with the thinking person. The body is a mere external hindrance. The clarity with which this position is held is well illustrated by Socrates’ response to Crito’s inquiries into the manner in which he, Socrates, should be buried (Phd. 115c): “However you please,” he replied, “if you can catch me and I do not get away from you.” […] “I cannot persuade Crito, my friends, that the Socrates who is now conversing and arranging the details of his argument is really I; he thinks I am the one whom he will presently see as a corpse, and he asks how to bury me.”21

The priority of the soul over the body, its independence and role as the source of all motion (Phdr. 245c–46a), leads Plato to the idea of a world-soul and this is found in the mythical Timaeus. It is from the world-soul, mixed with less proper material, that individual souls are formed in equal number to the stars (Tim. 41d). During embodied life the soul experiences conflicting sources of motivation. Reason, spirit and desire are illustrated by the famous two-winged chariot of the Phaedrus. However, the soul, considered independently of the body, is in fact simple; that which is composite is liable to dissolution. 20 Armstrong, Ancient Philosophy, 41. 21 Translation, Plato in Twelve Volumes, trans. by H. N. Fowler and others, The Loeb Classical Library (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1914–35).

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

136

Personal Eschatology and Immortality in Wisdom

7.2.5 Religious Conceptions of the Soul Behind Plato’s innovation of metempsychosis lies the Orphic religion, Pythagorean life and the mystery religions.22 The details of these cults are not well known. Part of the mystique by which they worked involved a strict level of secrecy concerning the mysteries to which the initiate was introduced.23 Both Pythagorean and Orphic religion encouraged hope in forms of reincarnation. Orphism sought a state of purity by ritual24 and abstinence from certain foods25 through the duration of three lifetimes in order then to return to a divine home.26 Pythagoreanism, which enjoyed a resurgence towards the end of the Ptolemaic period27, discarded cultic acts.28 For them, the air was full of souls, waiting to be reincarnated, and they reinterpreted the divine goals of souls in the light of new astronomical insights.29 In both, the ego has become more clearly identified with the soul and the post-mortem life a matter of hope, rather than resignation.30 In Hellenistic and Roman Egypt, the most prominent mystery cults were those of Dionysus, Osiris-Serapis and Isis.31 Larcher was unable to find any clear evidence that these were believed to confer immortality, although more recent scholarship and archaeology has identified the Bacchic with the Orphic mysteries while accepting potential variety.32 Nonetheless, the Dionysian mystery does not envisage a concentration on mystic hope at the expense of present delight.33

7.2.6 Hellenistic Souls The philosophy of Epicurus and his followers sought a ‘trouble-free consciousness’34 and the nature of their soul is coherent with this concern.35 Death brought the end of consciousness and therefore of pain and so was not to be feared.36 The soul for them was atomic in construction, its struc22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34

Bremner, Afterlife, 11–26; Burkert, Greek Religion, 199, 296–301. Burkert, Greek Religion, 199; Jaeger, ‘The Greek Ideas of Immortality’, 140. Burkert, Greek Religion, 297. Ibid., 301–02. Ibid., 299. Larcher, Études, 218. Burkert, Greek Religion, 302. Larcher, Études, 248. Jaeger, ‘The Greek Ideas of Immortality’, 140. Larcher, Études, 248–58. Bremner, Afterlife, 18–19; Burkert, Greek Religion, 293–95. Larcher, Études, 256. A. A. Long, From Epicurus to Epictetus : Studies in Hellenistic and Roman Philosophy (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006), 202. 35 Long, Hellenistic Philosophy, 21. 36 James Warren, Epicurus and His Critics (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004), 13–14.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

Greek Conceptions of the After-Life

137

ture interwoven through the rest of the body.37 The indestructible atoms survive death, but their arrangement in the body no longer persists and the soul dissipates (Epicurus, Ep. Hdt. 63 LS 14A) leading to insensibility (ἀναισθησία). There was to be no return of the soul to this life. Neither body nor soul could survive without the other and no self-recollection would result should the same atoms be reassembled in the same pattern (Lucretius, Rer. 3.830–911 LS 24E). The Stoic understanding of body and soul mirrors their understanding of the universe in microcosm.38 The soul is pneuma (πνεῦμα) a fiery, physical fragment of the divine reason which itself pervades the whole cosmos, granting order. Similarly, the soul pervades the body, holding it together, and making it sensible. Opinion about the fate of the soul after death varied. One important opinion was that of Chrysippus, who argued that the souls of the wise persisted longer after death than the souls of the foolish, which would dissipate.39 Ultimately all persisting existence would be consumed in the conflagration at the end of each cosmic cycle (Eusebius, Praep. ev. 15.20.6 LS 53W).40 Although there is some evidence of a belief in a gathering of souls in the region of the moon (Sextus Empiricus, Ad. mat. 9.71–74) this is not in Stoicism the basis for a doctrine of immortality: the souls would eventually dissipate and their post-mortem existence would be independent of the body and therefore of all ability to perceive and affect the cosmos.41 Virtue was sufficient for happiness and duration irrelevant.42 The Stoic hope, if it could be called that, of the after-life was ultimately little more optimistic than the Epicurean.

7.2.7 Astral Immortality The history of the belief that the nature of the soul was akin to the stars, stretches at least back to the Pythagoreans and Orphics if not the early philosophy of nature.43 The hope appears to have been one which sought to bridge the gap between mortal and immortal depicted in Homer.44 Plato’s 37 Sharples, Stoics, Epicureans and Sceptics, 59. 38 Sellars, Stoicism, 104–6; Cf. above, 5.3 The Stoic Human. 39 Diogenes Laertius 7.157; for English translation, Inwood/Gerson, Hellenistic Philosophy; here also, Cleanthes is reported to say that all souls last until the conflagration; Annas, Hellenistic Philosophy of Mind, 68. 40 Long, ‘Stoic Psychology’, 561. 41 Annas, Hellenistic Philosophy of Mind, 68. 42 Sellars, Stoicism, 246. 43 Burkert, Greek Religion, 199; on the Pythagoreans, Alan Scott, Origen and the Life of the Stars. A History of an Idea, Oxford Early Christian Studies (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1991), 3–5. 44 N. T. Wright, The Resurrection of the Son of God, Christian Origins and the Question of God, vol. 3 (London: SPCK, 2003), 55.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

138

Personal Eschatology and Immortality in Wisdom

Timaeus envisages the origin of souls in close relationship to the stars, and their post-mortem fate again amongst them (Tim., 41d, 42b).45 Cicero and Seneca are witnesses to hopes in astral immortality: in Cicero’s Dream of Scipio we find an expectation, particularly for good politicians, once they have fulfilled their earthly duty, of a return to the ‘eternal fires called stars’ from which they came (De Rep. 6.13–16). Seneca combines his astral hope with Stoicism. For him, the stars are the most divine things in the universe and the Stoic soul must be related to them, consisting of the same fiery matter.46 Hope which associated the post-mortem life with the stars was also found in Judaism (Dan 12:3; 1 Enoch 104:2; Wis 3:7; Philo, Gig. 6–16; 4Q418 69).47 In Philo the distinction between souls, angels and angels is perhaps one of function rather substance.48 7.2.8 Conclusion We have reached the end of our brief overview of some of the philosophical and religious understandings of the soul which were available to an interested party at the end of the Hellenistic period. Although the terminology may appear similar, it is important to note the distinct philosophical character of much Hellenistic thought: a conception of the soul had to be understood in physical terms, consistent with a wider understanding of the nature and workings of the cosmos. Caution should therefore be used in reading statements about the immortality of the soul within Wisdom: they do not necessarily refer to a Platonic dualism of body and soul. Not everyone was a Stoic or Epicurean of course. Other philosophical options were available, as indeed was the option to be uninterested in such matters, as the witness of Egyptian burial inscriptions from the likely area and period of Wisdom’s composition may suggest. We must now turn to address the question of the relation of Wisdom’s understanding of the afterlife to these matters.

45 Burkert, Greek Religion, 199; on other works of Plato, Scott, Origen and the Life of the Stars, 6–23. 46 Larcher, Études, 250–52. 47 Hengel, Judaism and Hellenism, 197; Lester L. Grabbe, Judaic Religion in the Second Temple Period: Belief and Practice from the Exile to Yavneh (London: Routledge, 2000), 63, 88, 264, 269; van der Horst’s sole relevant inscription is not from Egypt, although the burial inscriptions from there show a marked reticence to express any positive hope in the afterlife (Pieter W. van der Horst, Ancient Jewish Epitaphs [Kampen: Kok Pharos, 1991], 123–24): cf. below, 7.4.5 The Witness of Egyptian Jewish Burial Inscriptions. On the angelic eternal life in 4QInstruction, J. J. Collins, ‘The Mysteries of God: Creation and Eschatology in 4QInstruction and the Wisdom of Solomon’, in F. García Martínez (ed.), Wisdom and Apocalypticism in the Dead Sea Scrolls and in the Biblical Tradition, BETL 168 (Leuven: Leuven University Press/Peeters, 2003) 287–305, on p. 296. 48 Cf. above, 6.4 Spirit in Philo.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

Immortality, Incorruptibility and the Soul in Wisdom

139

7.3 Immortality, Incorruptibility and the Soul in Wisdom 7.3.1 Introduction Within the first part of Wisdom, in particular, the hope of the righteous individual is located in the ongoing existence of his soul after the death of his body. This existence can be understood against the backdrop of Greek and Egyptian philosophical and religious study of Wisdom, but in addition distinctively Jewish eschatological ideas were also influential, and these must also be discussed. The key areas for the study of the soul and immortality are three-fold. First and secondly, there is the question of the language of immortality and incorruption. Thirdly, there is the question of the soul, its relationship to the body, its nature and its pre-existence. It is difficult to settle these questions simply on the basis of the controversial texts (particularly 1:4, 15; 2:23; 3:4; 8:19–20; 9:15). Given the setting of Wisdom49, allusions and references to both Jewish and non-Jewish texts must be paid attention to. The persuasive nature of the work, to inculcate allegiance to the Jewish God, can fully be appreciated only when the way in which the philosophical and cultural positions of those outside the community is seen to be referred to and subordinated to Jewish concerns. In participating in this scheme, however, traditional Jewish beliefs may yet be unwittingly transformed, even in the process of comparison. In addition, of course, not all Hellenistic philosophical positions were seen as threatening and Hellenistic philosophy could also be used to reconceptualize a traditional faith without any qualms concerning syncretism.

7.3.2 Immortality and Incorruptibility The word for immortality (ἀθανασία) occurs five times (3:4; 4:1; 8:13, 17; 15:3) in Wisdom, and the adjective once (1:15). It refers to a life which is not subject to death. As has already been discussed, 4:1 and 8:13 refer to an immortality of memory in which the sage achieves renown through virtue and through elevation to the most esteemed position under God, that of cosmic kingship.50 Wisdom 3:4 also associates immortality with kingship and makes this a future hope for the dead.51 We will argue below that Wisdom does not envi49 See above, 1.4.1 Date and Place of Origin, 1.4.5 Addressees of Wisdom. 50 Note also Reese’s (Hellenistic Influence, 64) comment that the term is never applied to a human or soul. It always designates something that happens to humans rather than a quality of their nature. 51 Larcher (Le Livre de la Sagesse i, 287–89) offers detailed discussion of the royal language of Wis 3:8. On the nature of judging role of the righteous, cf. below, 7.6.4 The Visitation of God.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

140

Personal Eschatology and Immortality in Wisdom

sage the righteous dead who have not yet experienced the divine visitation (3:7) as in Sheol or Hades. They are rather ‘at peace’ (3:3); they cannot be said to have died (3:2). They retain, however, a future hope which is associated with immortality (3:4). This is their elevation to a ruling function in the cosmos in parallel with the destruction of their oppressors (5:1–23). Two verses (1:15 and 15:3) associate righteousness closely with immortality, the latter also with divine power (see 16:13).52 There is then, at least, a two-fold process in the attainment by the individual of the most blessed state – that of cosmic kingship. Firstly, the acquisition or attainment of righteousness. This is not a simple idea in Wisdom. It is sufficient to say that it cannot be separated from the practice of virtues (4:1; 8:753), single-hearted devotion to God (1:1) and kinship with Sophia (8:17).54 Secondly, kingship, and therefore immortality, is a divine gift made possible through divine power (16:13).55 Incorruptibility (ἀφθαρσία) is found in 2:23; 6:18, 19 and its cognate adjective in 12:1; 18:4. It designates all that which escapes from the conditions of matter and of change.56 Consequently, in Wisdom, it is piously applied to the ‘light of the law’ (18:4) and to Sophia (‘your spirit’) herself (12:1). In 2:23 we read: ὅτι ὁ θεὸς ἔκτισεν τὸν ἄνθρωπον ἐπ᾽ ἀφθαρσία καὶ εἰκόνα τῆς ἰδίας ἰδιότητος ἐποίησεν αὐτόν·

For God created human beings for incorruption, and made them the image of his own nature. [NETS]

This allusion to Genesis 1:27 raises questions about the nature of the image of God in Genesis. For instance, Philo interprets the likeness of the image of God with regard to the mind.57 There is also the textual-critical question as to whether ‘of his own eternity’ (τῆς ἰδίας ἀιδιότητος) or ‘of his own nature’ (τῆς ἰδίας ἰδιότητος) should be read. For this study, however, these issues are less important, as will be shown. The context of the verse is the response to the foolish reasoning about the death of the wicked oppressors (2:21). While the entrance of death through the jealousy of the devil is a reference to a past event, the conviction to be found in Wisdom is that the divine plan (1:14–15) has not been destroyed, but is fully realizable through Sophia.58 This is why the reasoning of the oppressors is so wrong. The likeness of humanity to God is to be found in God’s own freedom from death and corruption. Reese argues that ἐπί in 52 Richard J. Taylor (‘Eschatological Meaning’, 118) follows R. E. Murphy (‘To Know Your Might is the Root of Immortality (Wisdom 15, 3)’, CBQ, vol. 25 (1963) 88–93). 53 Reider, Book of Wisdom, 120; Winston, The Wisdom of Solomon, 194. 54 On kinship, Winston, The Wisdom of Solomon, 197–98. 55 Cf. Reese, Hellenistic Influence, 64. 56 Larcher, Études, 282. 57 Opif. 69–71; Her. 231. 58 Collins, Jewish Wisdom, 187–88.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

Immortality, Incorruptibility and the Soul in Wisdom

141

2:23 should be taken as ‘in’ or ‘with’ to indicate the created state, rather than a purpose or goal.59 Contextually this agrees with the two succeeding clauses which speak of past events. This should probably then be taken as an innate nature, but it is evidently not one which, in itself, is sufficient for humanity to gain its cosmic lordship. The other uses of this word in 6:18–19 imply a quality which must be striven for in the keeping of the divine law. Larcher, then, is only partially correct to argue that incorruptibility is not an innate quality, that it is a gift from God and, ‘the wages of holiness’ and ‘the prize for blameless souls’ (2:22).60 To be precise it should be said that incorruption was given as an innate quality, that it was lost, but that it is now held out through Sophia as the hope for a renewed humanity. Incorruption (ἀφθαρσία) has other important connotations as a technical Epicurean term which is used of the gods (Epicurus, Ep. Men. 123 LS 23B61). For the Epicureans, much like the Stoics, everything was material, but, distinctively for them, consisted of atoms. For mortal beings, existence was a question of pure chance – the random result of the atomic swerve that also served to preserve the workings of the cosmos from determinism (Lucretius, Rer. 2.216–24 LS 11H).62 Further, because atoms were inevitably lost over time from the body and the soul, there was no hope for personal immortality.63 The gods were enabled to persevere through something of a technicality. Unlike any other beings, Epicurean gods had the capability of not losing any atoms (Cicero, N. D. 1.49 LS 23E).64 They were thus enabled to enjoy their perfect pleasure for an infinite duration.65 The granting of incorruption to humanity is, then, a usurping of that which Epicureans had reserved for their gods.66 That this is a strategy contained within the book is further indicated by Reese’s analysis of the Epicurean language used of the manna in Wis 19:18–21.67 It is described as ‘ambrosial’ (ἀμβρόσιος), that is, like the food of the gods.68 Wisdom offers sages that which is reserved for

59 Reese, Hellenistic Influence, 66. 60 Larcher, Études, 283. 61 Reese (Hellenistic Influence, 66), Winston (Wisdom of Solomon, 121) and Long (Hellenistic Philosophy, 48) all refer to Philodemus, On the Gods, Book 3, on this point, although the present author had no access to this text during the preparation of this work; Gigante, in discussing the ‘fundamental tenets’ of the Epicurean concept of divinity found in Philodemus, emphasizes his role in shaping Cicero’s understanding of the matter in N. D. i.43–56 (Marcello Gigante, Philodemus in Italy (Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press, 1995), 40–41). 62 Long, Hellenistic Philosophy, 56–61. 63 Long, Hellenistic Philosophy, 39: ‘the constant loss of atoms was fundamental to the explanation of sensation’. 64 Long, Hellenistic Philosophy, 46–49; Long/Sedley, Hellenistic Philosophers i, 145. 65 Reese, Hellenistic Influence, 65–66. 66 Reese, Hellenistic Influence, 70–71. 67 Reese, Hellenistic Influence, 69–70. 68 Note Wis 16:20, ‘food of angels’: a Jewish tradition of interpretation also lies behind these verses and Wisdom likely contributes here to that (Tobias Nicklas, ‘Food of Angels (Wis

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

142

Personal Eschatology and Immortality in Wisdom

the gods. The use of ἀφθαρσία in the context of Wisdom 2 may give some support to the idea that the depiction of the oppressors of the righteous individual is a caricature of Epicureans69, although the larger point is not lost if this is not the case. Stoic conceptions of the soul may also be relevant at this point.70 The soul had no substantial existence apart from the body and the general Stoic conclusion, much like the Epicurean, was that the human soul and with it all individuality dissipated at death. Particularly rational souls, perhaps those that had been philosophically active in life, might survive temporally because the unifying quality of their pneuma had been strengthened71, but this was not the basis of any post-mortem hope. It may therefore be significant that the lack of hope of the oppressors in Wisdom 2:3 (echoed in 5:14) is expressed in terms of the dissipation of their pneuma (τὸ πνεῦμα διαχυθήσεται ὡς χαῦνος ἀήρ), here acting as a synonym for the soul. The hope of Wisdom, then, with regard to ἀφθαρσία would involve the preservation of the soul intact, presumably through connection with the source of cosmic order – Sophia.72 Salvation in Wisdom, therefore, would not involve escape from the cosmos, but rather an establishing of one’s place within it. In conclusion, the conditionality of immortality and incorruption is an indicator of their relation to a single reality – Sophia. Neither of these terms occur in the LXX. This is not an insignificant fact and is an indication of the innovative and contemporary concerns with which Wisdom grapples in defence of the justice of the God described in the Jewish scriptures.

69

70 71 72

16:20)’, in Géza G. Xeravits/József Zsengellér (ed.), Studies in the Book of Wisdom, SJSJ, vol. 142 (Leiden: Brill, 2010) 83–100; József Zsengellér, ‘“The Taste of Paradise”: Interpretation of Exodus and Manna in the Book of Wisdom’, in Géza G. Xeravits/József Zsengellér (ed.), Studies in the Book of Wisdom, SJSJ, vol. 142 (Leiden: Brill, 2010) 197–216). The two realms of reference are not mutually exclusive, although Wisdom itself provides scant resources to describe their relation in this case. Winston’s (The Wisdom of Solomon, 114) comment that the oppressors ‘do not represent any political philosophical group or political faction’ and that only a ‘grossly distorted’ understanding of Epicureanism could identify the aggressors in this chapter with it, is not connected to his recognition of the Epicurean use of ἀφθαρσία (121). It seems unlikely that Wisdom offers a serious critique of Epicureanism, for the reasons Winston gives. Nonetheless, this discussion of this section indicates that Wisdom is familiar with elements of that philosophy, if only second hand, and the scope of the book’s attack on the oppressors for their lack of immortal hope could be seen to include all such philosophies which lacked that hope. Cf. above, 7.2.6 Hellenistic Souls. Diogenes Laertius 7.157; Annas, Hellenistic Philosophy of Mind, 51. Cf. above, p. 91.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

Immortality, Incorruptibility and the Soul in Wisdom

143

7.3.3 The Platonic Soul in Wisdom? At the heart of the argument of the first section of Wisdom is a belief that the person, as a soul, can exist separately from the physical body (2:21–3:4). Life persists beyond physical death: ‘in the eyes of the foolish they seemed to have died’ (ἔδοξαν ἐν ὀφθαλμοῖς ἀφρόνων τεθνάναι; 3:2). To describe this life of the soul, Wisdom states that, ‘the souls of the righteous are in the hand of God’ (δικαίων δὲ ψυχαὶ ἐν χειρὶ θεοῦ; 3:1). However, the author brings no overtly Platonic arguments to bear on the topic. Indeed, there are statements in Wisdom made with regard to the soul that are simply not Platonic.73 Wisdom advocates its view using apocalyptic Jewish texts and a belief in the faithfulness of God towards his righteous people (19:22). Larcher is correct to argue that all of this implies an emphasis on the soul as the centre of the ego, which is distinct from an older Hebraic mentality74, but there is no indication in Wisdom that this is conceived as an innovation, and we will see that the apocalyptic tradition upon which Wisdom draws had already made this step intuitive. Does Wisdom contain a belief that this soul is innately immortal? We argued above that immortality (ἀθανασία) is used in Wisdom particularly to refer to the royal life granted at the visitation of God.75 Incorruption (ἀφθαρσία) is used of the nature of the human soul, but that the entrance of death has the potential to damage this nature. That this nature is lost, or damaged, is the logical consequence of Wisdom’s understanding that the sage must seek immortality through Sophia. Immortality must either be attained or sustained. However, the matter is not entirely clear. In our analysis of Plato we outlined the structure of the life of the immortal soul, where a soul’s actions in this present life can affect his or her eternal destiny.76 The soul undergoes repeated reincarnations, seeking to attain a perfect separation from the physical. In contrast, as we shall see, Wisdom’s scheme differs in that it speaks of the ongoing relationship of the soul to creation and views the attainment of cosmic kingship as conclusive. In Wisdom. In 8:19–20 we read: παῖς δὲ ἤμην εὐφυὴς ψυχῆς τε ἔλαχον ἀγαθῆς, μᾶλλον δὲ ἀγαθὸς ὢν ἦλθον εἰς σωμα ἀμίαντον.

I was a naturally clever child, and I obtained a good soul as my lot, or rather, being good, I entered an undefiled body.

73 See Wisdom 1:4, 11; 17:8 and the arguments in Frank Chamberlin Porter, ‘The Pre-Existence of the Soul in the Book of Wisdom and in the Rabbinical Writings’, The American Journal of Theology, vol. 12, no. 1 (1908) 53–115. 74 Larcher, Études, 270–78. 75 Cf. above, 7.3.2 Immortality and Incorruptibility. 76 Cf. above, 7.2.4 The Platonic Soul.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

144

Personal Eschatology and Immortality in Wisdom

This text is often cited as evidence for belief in the preexistence of the soul in Wisdom.77 The two stichs appear to stand in tension, and the tendency has been for commentators either to argue that the second stich, with its implications for preexistence, corrects the first, or to insist that the author could have removed the first stich if it was truly unacceptable.78 It is true that the second stich identifies the ego with the soul which enters the body from without. However, this verse refers to the decidedly non-Platonic ‘undefiled body’.79 The verse may well indicate belief in a store of pre-existent souls that are created by God and distributed to humans, as in Philo, although there is no other supporting evidence for this in the book.80 It would appear that the issue cannot finally be resolved. Given Wisdom’s belief in a post-mortem existence separate from the body, it would be more consistent for Solomon to identify himself with the soul. However, we should be wary of over-systematizing a variety of expression. Further, in discussing life outside of the animal body in Wisdom, care must be taken not to assume that this life is incorporeal, unrelated to the cosmos. If it is the case, as has been argued, that soul in Wisdom is pneuma and therefore physical, this immortal life is experienced fully within the cosmos. There is no indication in Wisdom of a doctrine of reincarnation. One might ask, however, whether the comment in 4:1 that ‘in the memory of virtue is immortality’ is a reference to a doctrine of ideas, closely connected in Plato’s arguments to his doctrine of the pre-existence of the soul.81 However, 2:4 and 4:19 indicate that what is in view really is the position of an individual in posterity. It is also the case that the verb used in 4:1 – μνήμη – is also not the technical Platonic term – ἀνάμνησις. Consequently, it may well be that only a modified derivation of Platonism, such as in Philo where souls pre-exist only once at their creation, is found here.82 Given the above, immortality would appear to be a gift and an attainment rather than an innate quality of the soul. A further issue can be raised, however: in Plato the soul does not find its home in the body83 and from this a particular set of ethics flow that involves the soul dissociating itself from temporal and physical matters. To what extent, if at all, does Wisdom share this negative view of physicality? Firstly, it can be stressed again that none of

77 For example, Winston, The Wisdom of Solomon, 25 ff, 198. For a summary of alternative views, Larcher, Études, 270–79. 78 See Porter (‘The Pre-Existence of the Soul’, 70 f.) for an argument that Wisdom does not entirely distance itself from verse nineteen. 79 Larcher (Le Livre de la Sagesse ii, 556–57) notes that the perspective of the passage is more ethical than metaphysical before concluding that the the pre-existent soul of the second statement finds its true meaning in bodily existence. 80 Collins, Jewish Wisdom, 185. For Philo, see Somn. 1.133–43; Gig. 6–9; Plant. 11–14. 81 Phaedo, 77A. 82 Cf. above, fn. 80. 83 Cf. above, p. 134.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

Immortality, Incorruptibility and the Soul in Wisdom

145

the arguments for Platonic dualism are present in Wisdom.84 In fact, Wisdom has a number of explicit statements and themes which appear to directly contradict negative views of the created physical world. So, for instance, in Wisdom 1:13–14, there is nothing positive to be said about death: the cosmos is created to exist and creatures to live. Further, Wisdom does not have an explicit ascetic ethic. The eunuch in 3:14 is an exception that proves the rule in that he is promised great delight in the temple. Physical, temporal blessing is seen as a good thing and the physical oppression of the wicked an injustice which must be righted (5:1). In Wisdom 6:17–20 obedience to the Mosaic law is advocated as the path of Wisdom rather than the contemplation of eternal truths, at least as conceived abstractly from the Mosaic law. Even if we were to ask whether Mosaic law operated in Wisdom as mediator of ideal divine reality, in a manner akin to Philo, we would still have to stress that Wisdom’s emphasis falls much more strongly on Sophia as mediator of the divine than on the Mosaic law itself.85 A further important theme in Wisdom is the role of the created cosmos as a tool of judgement and blessing for God.86 The world plays a positive role in God’s hands. What is likely present here is another theme of Plato’s, found in the Timaeus and Laws and developed through Stoicism, that the world as a whole has a soul. Wisdom herself ‘pervades and penetrates all things’ (7:24) and so is used by God to bless his people and judge their enemies. If it is also clear that the spiritual existence of the soul, separated from the body, and its blessed communion with God is the ultimate end of human existence87, it is still the case that this spiritual state should be understood as a cosmic existence. Wisdom 9:14–15 is a passage that has been cited as Platonic88, although equally there has been no shortage of attempts to point out the ‘Hebraic’89 emphasis of human limitation in the verses.90 It speaks of the ‘weighing 84 Cf. above, 7.2.4 The Platonic Soul. 85 The law is certainly an important part of Wisdom’s ethics (e. g. 2:12; 6:4; 15:17; 17:2), but Wisdom does not provide clear guidance as to the details of obedience to the Mosaic law (David Winston, ‘A Century of Research on the Book of Wisdom’, in The Book of Wisdom in Modern Research, Angelo Passaro/Giuseppe Bellia [ed.], Deuterocanonical and Cognate Literature Yearbook [Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 2005] 1–18, on p. 11). A new centrality of the Mosaic law is not the solution to the problems of the day. 86 See Wisdom 5:20–23 and, amongst other passages, 16:24–29. 87 The nameless example of Enoch is given in 4:10–12. He is taken away from earthly existence so that the possibility of corruption by ‘roving desire’ should not exist. Life in the physical realm is a life of temptation in a way that life as the soul, separated from the body and with God, is not. 88 See, for instance, Winston, The Wisdom of Solomon, 26; Grimm, Das Buch der Weisheit, 19. 89 Kolarcik, ‘Book of Wisdom’, 518; Richard J. Taylor, ‘Eschatological Meaning’, 92–95; Porter, ‘The Pre-Existence of the Soul’. 90 Note that care does need to be taken when considering Hellenistic Judaism not to fall into simplistic oppositions between the ‘Greek’ and the ‘Hebraic’. While this work argues

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

146

Personal Eschatology and Immortality in Wisdom

down’ of a soul by a ‘perishable body’ (φθαρτὸν γὰρ σῶμα βαρύνει ψυχήν). There are verbal parallels with Phaedo 66B in particular.91 Closer attention to the context of the two passages reveals ambiguity, however. Plato discusses the consequences after death for a soul defiled by the body during an earthly life. In contrast, Wisdom speaks of the epistemological limitations of being mortal, and the need for Sophia to reveal the counsel of God (9:17). These two thoughts are not absolutely opposed because it is by the knowledge of eternal things that the soul is freed in Plato. Likewise, it is through revelation that immortality is gained in Wisdom. However, while the structure of thought may be similar, the reality which is being thought of is different. In Plato, Ideas are eternal and must be apprehended but in Wisdom it is rather the ‘counsel of God’ which is to be sought and it is not clear that in Wisdom this should be associated with a Platonically-conceived divine Word. Although Platonic language and allusions are present in Wisdom in close proximity to discussions of the soul, it is not sufficient to take such language as indicating an acceptance of Platonic doctrine. None of the standard Platonic arguments are presented. Instead, Wisdom’s understanding of the soul as pneuma, as well the framing of eschatological hope as an experience conceived within and by the workings of the cosmos, suggests a different understanding. In addition, the Platonic cycle of reincarnation is not compatible with Wisdom’s hope in cosmic kingship. Finally, there is some indication that the author could conceive of the soul as existing before birth although the idea is not developed further. In conclusion, there is a partially common structure to Wisdom and Plato’s thought, as found in Phaedo. This involves an identification of the individual with the soul, and a recognition that the physical life is determinative for future existence. Would the author of Wisdom have believed that he was speaking of the same realities as Plato was speaking of, or was he expressing his particular faith using a universal language? If Wisdom was conceived as a piece of philosophy92, then alternative philosophies that reach different conclusions can be viewed as inadequate pieces of reasoning.

7.3.4 Conclusion This study has assessed the nature of Wisdom’s use of Greek ideas of the after-life. The depth of Wisdom’s oft-cited links with the Platonic soul have against any significant presence of Platonic philosophy in Wisdom, it is argued instead that Wisdom’s biblical allegiance and interpretation has a Stoic character. 91 Porter, ‘The Pre-Existence of the Soul’, 73. 92 Cf. above, 1.4.5 Addressees of Wisdom; consider also the engagement with Stoicism discussed above (especially 3.3 The Exodus and The Elements, 4.3 Creation from Pre-existent Matter, 5.5 Stoicism, Wisdom and Rationality).

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

The Question of Death and Mortality throughout Wisdom

147

been questioned, and a tentative argument made that the conditionality of the immortality of the soul that Sophia remedies in Wisdom makes sense as a response to Hellenistic assumptions about the dissipation of the soul at death.

7.4 The Question of Death and Mortality throughout Wisdom 7.4.1 Introduction The traditional wisdom teaching that is found in the book of Proverbs offers the sage the opportunity to live in conformity with the created order and so gain health and prosperity. Wisdom was present at creation and so the whole of creation is marked by her character (Prov 8:22 ff). Consequently, life within creation is enhanced and lengthened through Wisdom, and death hastened by her rejection (9:11, 18). The tension which must always exist between such a teaching and the contingencies of life was not ignored by the biblical writers. Ecclesiastes dwells on the finality and potential unfairness of death: For there is no enduring remembrance of the wise or of fools, seeing that in the days to come all will have been long forgotten. How can the wise die just like fools? So I hated life, because what is done under the sun was grievous to me; for all is vanity and a chasing after wind. (NRSV Eccl 2:16–17)

Job, similarly, examines the suffering of a righteous person. Sirach contains a stalwart defence of God’s retributive justice by emphasizing a qualitative sense of life and death which one can know during life, and even during one’s final hour:93 For it is easy for the Lord on the day of death to reward individuals according to their conduct. An hour’s misery makes one forget past delights, and at the close of one’s life one’s deeds are revealed. Call no one happy before his death; by how he ends, a person becomes known. (NRSV Sirach 11:26–28)

In all that precedes, however, there is a recognition and acceptance that death is a part of God’s creation and one over which God himself is sovereign. In contradistinction to this, the understanding of death in Wisdom contains within it a ‘shocking novelty’94: God did not make death (1:13). Understanding the nature of this death is an essential foundation for evaluating in turn the nature of eschatology and immortality in Wisdom.

93 J. J. Collins, ‘The Root of Immortality: Death in the Context of Jewish Wisdom’, HTR 71 (1978) 177–92, on pp. 179–80. 94 Collins, Jewish Wisdom, 188.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

148

Personal Eschatology and Immortality in Wisdom

7.4.2 Wisdom 1–6: ‘Evil-Doing Will Overturn the Thrones of Rulers’ The opening chapters of Wisdom contain within them a paradigmatic trial scene.95 A righteous individual is unjustly killed (2:1–20) but, at a subsequent moment of visitation by God, will be vindicated in front of his oppressors and revealed to be amongst the sons of God (5:1–13). We learn that the souls of the righteous are ‘in the hand of God’ (3:1; ἐν χειρὶ θεοῦ), that they are ‘at peace’ (3:3; ἐν εἰρήνη) and that their hope is ‘full of immortality’ (3:4; ἀθανασίας πλήρης). It is only in the eyes of the foolish that they seemed to have died (3:2; ἔδοξαν ἐν ὀφθαλμοῖς ἀφρόνων τεθνάναι). To describe what is happening here as a redefinition of death as spiritual would not be entirely wrong, but it would risk, in particular, implying a disavowal of the physical world in the vein of Platonic philosophy which would not at all do justice to Wisdom’s view of the cosmos as creation, as good and as an instrument in the hand of God.96 Wisdom’s response to the persecution of the innocent, the righteous but barren woman (3:13), the righteous eunuch who was excluded from the priesthood and the assembly of the Lord (3:14) and the righteous young man who dies before his time (4:7), is not to argue that these injustices are merely a passing physical and therefore insignificant moment. The assembling of these injustices is an indication that they do matter. Wisdom is rather concerned to see a continuity between the life of the soul in the body, lived in relationship to creation, and the life of the soul out of it, also lived in relationship to creation. What then is the nature of death, if the righteous do not undergo it even when they are put to the sword? The two most prominent passages which have been used to answer this question are 1:12–16; 2:21–24. Michael Kolarcik has argued helpfully that the confusion over the spiritual or physical nature of death that the two passages cause, is an intentional rhetorical device, by which the reader is drawn to the problem, and then encouraged to reas-

95 Kolarcik, Ambiguity of Death, 64 ff. 96 Richard J. Taylor (‘Eschatological Meaning’, 106–16) argues that death has a two-fold aspect, a physical punishment for sin in this life which continues into the next: Wisdom gives ‘no precision on whether this death was physical or spiritual, but in the context it must involve both’ (113). The assumed necessity of a distinction between the physical and spiritual ultimately impairs Taylor’s nuanced analysis. The position is shared by Larcher (Le Livre de la Sagesse, i,271). The best development of Taylor’s position is to be found in Kolarcik (Ambiguity of Death): see below. Not all take such a stance. Engel (Das Buch der Weisheit, 57–58) argues that death in 1:13 can only refer to untimely, violent death. The problem with this is that while Wis 1:12; 2:1–20 all speak to the problem of the apostate persecutor, 1:13 appeals to the original created state and does not offer qualification. The alternative position is taken by Nickelsburg, who argues that the reality of death and immortality in the life of humans implies that ‘“death” is not the event of physical death’ but rather ‘a persistent state present in the ungodly’ (George W. E. Nickelsburg, Resurrection, Immortality, and Eternal Life in Intertestamental Judaism and Early Christianity, Expanded Edition, Harvard Theological Studies 56 (Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 2006), 113–14).

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

The Question of Death and Mortality throughout Wisdom

149

sess initial presumptions about physical death upon the presentation of new arguments.97 In 2:24 death enters the world through the ‘envy of the Devil’. It is those who ‘belong to his party’ (οἱ τῆς ἐκείνου μερίδος ὄντες) who experience death. In Wisdom 1:16 death is personified.98 The ‘godless’ are described as seeking Death and making a covenant or treaty with him: ‘they are worthy to belong to his party’ (ἄξιοί εἰσιν τῆς ἐκείνου μερίδος εἶναι). The common phrase in these two verses (τῆς ἐκείνου μερίδος) invites the reader to compare them. Together, they lead the reader away from interpreting the entrance of death into the world as an imposition by a ‘superhuman power’ which subjects humans to ‘an inevitable fate’.99 Instead, it encourages a view of death as something which is enthroned by a human choice.100 Death is revealed as the lordly partner in a covenant with the wicked. If then Death can be ‘summoned’ by ‘deeds and words’ (1:12, 16), is an early physical death being envisaged? If this was the case, why would the righteous still die when the wicked continue to live? One could perhaps speculate over a universal sinfulness, but this would not make adequate sense of the unflinching distinction which exists throughout Wisdom between the righteous and wicked and upon which their respective fates are based (5:14–15). As with the fate of the persecuted righteous individual (3:2), one is led to conclude that death in Wisdom cannot simply be equated with physical death. The subtlety of the text is particularly apparent in 1:11–15.101 A warning about the soul-destroying effects of falsehood (1:11) is followed by an injunction not to bring death upon oneself by one’s actions (1:12). Then, in 1:13–14, we learn that God did not make death, that he takes no delight in it, and that ‘he created all things that they might exist’ (ἔκτισεν γὰρ εἰς τὸ εἶναι τὰ πάντα). It might be assumed that, because Genesis is in view, physical death must be under consideration. However, it is evident from Philo that it was possible to read Genesis as describing the spiritual death of humanity.102 The purpose of v. 14ab is clarified by 13 and 14cd: death – that of humans is particularly in view – is not an inherent element of creation or part of God’s will for humanity. The created world does not situate humans in the context

97 Kolarcik, Ambiguity of Death. 98 Yehoshua Amir, ‘The Figure of Death in the Book of Wisdom’, Journal of Jewish Studies 30 (1979) 154–78. 99 Ibid., 161. 100 John J. Weisengoff, ‘Death and Immortality in the Book of Wisdom’, CBQ, vol. 3 (1941) 104–33, on p. 115. 101 For an historical overview of these verses, see Richard J. Taylor (‘Eschatological Meaning’, 108–16). 102 Philo, Leg. 105–08. It should also be noted though, that Philo’s clear distinction between spiritual and physical death is notable by its absence in Wisdom. His understanding of creation as tending toward the immortal might also seem a plausible interpretation of the positive role ascribed to creation in 1:14 (Aet. 35; Collins, Jewish Wisdom, 187), but the idea of reproduction leading towards eternal duration also seems foreign to Wisdom.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

150

Personal Eschatology and Immortality in Wisdom

of death by virtue of their birth: it is good and encourages life. It is hard to read these verses without 13:1–9 springing to mind, where creation should lead humans to recognize their creator and yet humans are culpable for their misuse of what has been presented to them. This emphasis on the subjective and culpable failure of humans leading to death is present in the passage which connects these two. The oppressors of the righteous individual, in 2:1, ‘did not reason rightly’ (λογισάμενοι οὐκ ὀρθῶς). In 2:21 we find an inclusio: ‘thus they reasoned and they were led astray’ (ταῦτα ἐλογίσαντο καὶ ἐπλανήθησαν). It is by the incorrect reasoning of the individual that he or she makes a covenant with Death.103 In 2:1–5 the godless reason that physical death is annihilation for the person. The strong reverse implication is that this either is not, or need not be, the case. In the parallel passage in 5:1–13 the ironic conclusion made is that the prediction of the unrighteous of the post-mortem dissolution of their soul (2:3) comes true. In the judgement scene of 5:1–23, the language of Isaiah is drawn upon in the reversal of fortune of the wicked and the righteous (Isa 52:13 ff) and with the use of the divine warrior motif (Isa 59:16–17 / Wis 5:16–20).104 In Wisdom, however, there is a distinct new emphasis on the positive role that creation has to play in the judgement of God on the godless (ἀσηβεῖς e. g. Wis 5:14; 16:16; 19:1). There is a long history of confusion over this passage in which interpreters’ presuppositions have been misinformed, it would seem, by dogmatic Christian concerns.105 The emphasis on creation as the tool of God, however, as well as the specific reference to the overthrowing of the thrones of rulers (v. 23) makes it implausible that this scene be read as metaphorical or utterly fancifully. Further, the repeated use of royal language in 5:16, 23 in apparent connection with 3:7–8 indicates that the future of the righteous should be understood (as in 5:1–14) in a contrasting pair with that of their oppressors (and those who allowed the oppression to occur).106 The dethronement and death of the enemies of God is depicted in 5:17–23. The passage is probably best understood as a description of a particular global judgement and illustrative of God’s ongoing action.107 The death of God’s enemies leads to the confrontation of 5:1–14. It is not necessary to understand only rulers as being warned here (4:18–19 should be taken as a complementary description of the death of the wicked), nor is it necessary to be overly literal in one’s understanding of how – with thunder-

103 Amir, ‘The Figure of Death’. 104 Cf. below, 7.5.2 Isaiah. 105 Cf. below. 7.6.3 The Righteous in Wisdom 1–6. 106 This insight lies behind Fichtner’s (Weisheit Salomos, 5) and Mack’s (Logos und Sophia, 78– 107) recognition of singular pattern of salvation throughout the book. Cf. below, 7.6.5 The Transference of Eschatological Hope to Every Age and 7.6.6 The Shape of Salvation. 107 Cf. below, 7.6.4.4 Creation as the Instrument of God in the Downfall of the Wicked (5:17– 23).

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

The Question of Death and Mortality throughout Wisdom

151

bolts and hailstones – the creation works to bring the wicked to death. The important point to realize is that creation can hardly affect the souls of the dead. What is in view here is the death of the wicked and the overturning of ‘the thrones of rulers’. Death here does not appear so independent from the body. In conclusion to this section, it is helpful to reiterate Kolarcik’s point, that Wisdom contains an intentional ambiguity over the nature of death.108 The key verse is Wisdom 3:2 in which the righteous ‘only seem to have died in the eyes of the foolish’ (Wis 3:2 ἔδοξαν ἐν ὀφθαλμοῖς ἀφρόνων τεθνάναι). Although the physical death of the righteous has occurred, they remain safe in the hand of God with a hope of immortality (3:4) in stark contrast to the expectation of the wicked (2:1–5). The fate of the unrighteous is different. Although it would be possible to read 2:24 as referring to a spiritual death that can be experienced during physical life109, it is simpler to understand the death referred to as a physical death, but one without immortal hope. The unrighteous summon this ‘true’ death by their attitudes, actions and reasoning. It is such a death that the unrighteous of 5:1–14 have, presumably, experienced momentarily earlier, that the physical language of 4:19 describes, and that will result from the frenzied battle of 5:17–23. It could justifiably be asked at this point whether 5:1–14 indicates an on-going consciousness of the dead, and therefore a form of ongoing life. This passage, however, does not itself set out a divine judgement. Rather, its primary purpose seems to be the depiction of the recognition of a judgement that has already taken place (5:5).110 The wicked realize that ‘the unexpected salvation of the righteous’ (5:2) has passed them by. The righteous already knew immortality before death; they made no pact with the devil. The wicked, however, discover the true significance of death only when they realize the hope of the righteous. This dual view of death, in which the righteous and the wicked experience it differently, does not imply a radical negation of physicality. While it is undoubtedly the case that one is able to create relationships in the physical world which will determine the nature of life outside the body, to describe the mortal life as merely a preparatory arena for a heavenly existence is not sufficient. Firstly, the positive life-giving role of creation in Wisdom 1 was noted. Secondly, the instrumental role of creation as a tool of God in Wisdom 5 was also discussed. Thirdly, the hope of the righteous, although not

108 Kolarcik, Ambiguity of Death. 109 This is the implication of Amir’s position (‘The Figure of Death’, 159–65), when he emphasizes the alliance that the human makes with Death, and also of the stance of Nickelsburg (Resurrection, 114–14). 110 Kolarcik argues that this is a trial scene in which the wicked acknowledge the truth of the accusation brought against them (‘The Book of Wisdom’, 484). However, judgement has already been at work in bringing the wicked to this confrontation.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

152

Personal Eschatology and Immortality in Wisdom

described in terms of bodily resurrection111, is conceived in close ongoing relationship to the physical world: they will govern nations (3:8) and their vindication occurs in apparent close connection to the downfall of rulers (5:23). This survey of death in Wisdom 1–6 has shown that the cosmos remains central to the future of the people of God. 7.4.3 Wisdom 7–9: The Mortal Sage The nameless kingly sage of Wisdom 6:21–29 is intended to allude to Solomon. The anonymity of the sage, however, encourages the reader to recognize that Solomon stands as a paradigmatic character. In fact, every character and situation in the book depicts the same pattern of the righteous life and salvation.112 The king is a ‘mortal like everyone’ and a descendent of Adam (7:1). His birth was as earthly as anyone’s (7:1–2), and as a child he was as feeble as any other (7:3–5). Whatever the kingly goal of his life may be, it will be sought for and grasped in his common mortality (7:6). In 9:14–15 the king recognizes the epistemological limitations of the mortal life.113 The verse follows 9:5, which speaks similarly of the feebleness of the king and the limitations of the mortal life in the apprehension of the divine. The corollary of this weakness in 9:4, 10, 17 and 18 is the gift of Sophia. The positive stance of the book towards creation is continued here.114 Knowledge of the constitution of the world is an activity closely connected to the possession of Sophia (7:15–22). She herself is described using physical attributes (7:22)115 and is responsible for the constitution of the cosmos investigated (8:1).116 In addition, the royal role of humanity over creation (9:1–3; 10:1–2) is an affirmation that the creation is worth managing. This section of Wisdom does not deal directly with death (θάνατος). Solomon is depicted as a paradigmatic figure, although not therefore an unhistorical one. Mortality and death are depicted as the natural and unremarkable state and end of all humans (7:1) that results in the universal need for Sophia, who offers immortal kingship. There is no statement about the death of the wicked because the chapters describe the ideal sage.117 The ‘death’ of Wisdom 1–5 is here a subordinate concept. One could conclude that these chapters stand in tension with the earlier section, but this would

111 Cf. below, 7.5.5.5 Resurrection. 112 Mack, Logos und Sophia, 78–107. On anonymity, see above p. 48 fn. 64. 113 Cf. above, 7.3.3 The Platonic Soul in Wisdom?. 114 This can be taken as a further warning of assuming simple dualisms between body and soul and spiritualizations of death. 115 Winston, The Wisdom of Solomon, 178–83; above, 3.4 Sophia and Pneuma. 116 For discussion of Stoic allusions here, Winston, The Wisdom of Solomon, 189–90. 117 Fichtner, Weisheit Salomos, 25–39.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

The Question of Death and Mortality throughout Wisdom

153

involve a failure to appreciate their paradigmatic nature. Kingship begins in mortality, but by the aid of Sophia eventually transcends it. 7.4.4 Wisdom 11–19: An Incredible Journey and a Strange Death A reading of Wisdom that sought a unified theology and that began with the preceding analysis might, at first, be challenged when faced with the Exodus-Numbers narrative of 11:1–14, 16:1–19:22. In this narrative the just are preserved from harm and the wicked receive physical death at the hands of God through the instruments of creation. This motif, of a clear distinction between the two groups, is also found in Wisdom 1–6 as also is the role of creation in meting out punishment to the wicked.118 God’s people are apparently promised this-worldly blessing ‘at all times and in all places’ (19:22). The preservation of the just from death is consistent with Wisdom 1–6, but only if we understand death in the Exodus-Numbers narrative either multivalently or symbolically.119 In Wisdom 1–6, the righteous die, but this is revealed to be merely an illusion (3:2). In the Exodus-Numbers narrative the righteous are preserved from death at all points, even in apparent contradiction to the narrative’s Pentateuchal source. In order to assess what is occurring in these chapters, the primary points of divergence from the Pentateuch will be identified. We can begin with the use of Numbers 21:4–9 in Wisdom 16:5–14. In the Pentateuch, the people grumble in the wilderness about their lack of food. The Lord sends deadly serpents amongst them, and when they repent he instructs Moses to construct a bronze serpent, the sight of which brings healing.120 In Wisdom 16:5–14, the negative theme of judgement in Numbers is given a positive theme of education (v. 6).121 A similar idea is present in 11:10 and perhaps also in 3:5. Unlike the effect of the ‘deadly serpents’, which killed many of the Sons of Israel in LXX Num 21:6, in Wisdom the people are saved by the word of the Lord (16:13). The children were ‘not conquered even by the fangs of venomous serpents’ (16:10) and the Lord leads mortals only ‘to the gates of Hades and back again’ (16:13). The warning is emphasized by the psychological terror of the ‘rage of wild animals’ and ‘the bites of writhing serpents’.122 A similar tendency can be seen in the treatment of the quails

118 Mack, Logos und Sophia, 78–107; Fichtner, Weisheit Salomos, 5. 119 The apparent contradiction between the treatment of death in Wis 1–6 and 10–19 has not, to my knowledge, been treated in the secondary literature. 120 Philo (Agr. 97–98) interprets the serpent allegorically, as a symbol of endurance (καρτερία) as opposed to the serpent of Eden; cf. Winston, The Wisdom of Solomon, 295. 121 Samuel Cheon, The Exodus Story in the Wisdom of Solomon: A Study in Biblical Interpretation, JSPSup 23 (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1997), 50–52. 122 Cheon (Exodus Story) also notes that Philo’s interpretation similarly avoids death (Philo Leg. II 77–78).

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

154

Personal Eschatology and Immortality in Wisdom

(16:1–4) which are presented as a delightful gift, with none of the nausea and deadly connotations present in Numbers 11:20, 33. These interpretative transformations need to be understood in the context of Wisdom’s larger stylistic technique. Within the Exodus-Numbers narrative the unnamed Israelites become characterized as ‘your people’ (19:22) and ‘the righteous’ (10:20; 18:20) and ‘your holy ones’ (18:1), while the unnamed Egyptians are characterized as ‘enemies’ (11:3) and ‘the ungodly’ (19:1). At each stage of the narrative, the fate of one is compared to that of the other using the literary and rhetorical technique of σύγκρισις.123 The use of comparison serves to relate the contrasting fates of the parties in a way which resonates with 2:1–20, 3:10–4:9 and 5:1–23. The repeated demonstration in the comparisons that ‘through the very things by which their enemies were punished, they themselves were benefited in their need’ (11:5) encourages connections to be made with the dethronement of the wicked and the concomitant exaltation of the righteous in 5:15–23. One final indication that this schema is in place is noted by Watson124, who comments on the displacement technique that is used in Wisdom’s description of the Korahite rebellion (Num 16:1–50). Here ‘the destroyer’, the angel of death, from the Passover narrative (Exod 12) is transferred to this later narrative in order that Aaron might do battle against him. In Wisdom, however, the figure who dispenses destruction on the first-born of the enemies of God’s holy ones (Wis 18:14–16) is called the ‘Word of God’ rather than ‘the destroyer’.125 This curious swap allows God to be distanced from the punishment of ‘the righteous’ and indeed to be seen to be operating through the agency of the high-priest126, upon whose robe was the whole cosmos (ἐπὶ γὰρ ποδήρους ἐνδύματος ἦν ὅλος ὁ κόσμος)127, much in the same way as stress was laid on God’s healing through Moses and the bronze-serpent in 16:12 rather than on the punishment of God.128 In contrast, the death of the wicked comes directly from the enthusiastic all-powerful Word of God who leaps from the royal throne carrying the sword of ‘your authentic command’ (18:14–16). 123 Reese, Hellenistic Influence, 98–99. 124 Watson, Paul and the Hermeneutics of Faith, 401–4. 125 In addition to Watson’s comments, note that the figure of the Word is described using language allusive of 1 Chron 21:15; Josh 5:13–14; Ps 23:8 and Isa 42:13. The distinction between heaven and earth and the traversal of this gap by the Word, however, appears to have been inspired by Isa 55:9–13. Here the activity of the ‘Word’ leads to the ‘going out with joy’ and the transformation of nature (Wis 19:6, 18–19; 65:17). 126 Note that the ‘majesty of God’ is depicted on the diadem upon Aaron’s head (18:24). 127 Winston (The Wisdom of Solomon, 321–22) sees hear ‘a fleeting allusion’ to the Stoic/Cynic notion of the first century CE that the true temple is the universe itself. If it is difficult to be certain about his allusion, it is at least significant and consistent with Wisdom’s themes, that Aaron’s saving role on behalf of the divine should be both royal (his diadem shows the divine greatness) and associated with the cosmos. 128 For more on how the salvation depicted here is consistent with that depicted elsewhere in Wisdom, see Mack, Logos und Sophia, 85.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

The Question of Death and Mortality throughout Wisdom

155

In summary, Wisdom’s retelling of Exodus-Numbers seeks to show God’s power over death (16:13): the wicked die and the righteous are saved from the grave. On a first reading, this section of Wisdom has no direct interest in immortality. Instances of the death of the Israelites are removed or presented as educative experiences (16:6, 11cd). The exception of 18:20 only proves the rule as the experience of death only ‘touched’ the righteous and ‘did not long continue’. Without wishing to dispute that the narrative operates symbolically129, it is important not to conclude that the absence of death for the righteous, and any reference to post-mortem immortality, means that the narrative must have a purely symbolic role. The scientific nature of the description of the miraculous in 16:19, 22, 24 and 19:18–21 strongly suggests that the story be understood in a real manner.130 The events described are historical examples of God’s and Sophia’s consistent role in relation to creation and morality, which continues into the present (19:22). The death of the wicked which climaxes in 19:5 is real physical death. The preservation of the righteous from death, described above, read in the light of the Pentateuchal text, shows a negative attitude to death consistent with the first part of Wisdom. The sin of the Israelites is not so much removed as subordinated to the primacy of God’s mercy and election (15:1– 3). At the same time, death may simply be an educative form of discipline (16:11; 3:5 πειράζω; 18:20, 25 πεῖρα). 7.4.5 The Witness of Egyptian Jewish Burial Inscriptions This brief section offers some important contextualization of the above discussion by comparing the content of Jewish burial inscriptions from the likely period and place of Wisdom’s composition with Wisdom itself.131 What proves most noticeable about the former is the absence of any confident articulation of a hope in an after-life whether conceived in a physical or spiritual manner.132 While it is undoubtedly the case that burial inscriptions

129 Mack, Logos und Sophia, 85–87. Although it is fascinating that Mack is able to identify the anti-type of the persecuted righteous as Horus rather than the Jewish motif noticed in Isaiah, Daniel and 1 Enoch by Nickelsburg (Resurrection); cf. Reese, Hellenistic Influence, 144; Fichtner, Weisheit Salomos, 5. Fichtner describes 10:1–19:22 as concerning ‘the ruling of Wisdom in history as archetype and pledge of her saving and punishing work in the endtime’ (‘Vom Walten der Weisheit in der Geschichte als dem Urbild und Unterpfand ihres rettenden and strafenden Wirkens in der Endzeit’). 130 Cf. above, 3.3 The Exodus and The Elements. 131 William Horbury/David Noy (ed.), Jewish Inscriptions of Graeco-Roman Egypt, (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992). The dates of the material provided here ranges from the third century BCE to the sixth century CE. 132 For a recent and more detailed discussion of these issues, see Mareike Verena Blischke, Die Eschatologie in der Sapientia Salomonis (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2007), 223–63.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

156

Personal Eschatology and Immortality in Wisdom

are rarely the place for original thought133, and frequently use standard forms that are derived from the pagan world134, it is difficult to explain by such argumentation the near complete absence of any expression of comfort in the face of tragic loss in the Egyptian inscriptions. Two of the Jewish inscriptions possibly are exceptions to this rule. In Horbury and Noy’s thirty-third inscription, dated from the mid-second to the first century BCE, the dead Arsinoe states that ‘[my] soul has flown to the holy ones’ (ψυχὴ δ᾽ εἰς ὁσίους ἔπετε). The motif of the flight of the soul to a blessed state after death was common in the Greek world. The use of the term ‘holy ones’ is also, according to Horbury and Noy, entirely within Greek convention135, however it also could be used in Jewish circles to refer to the angels, or to the patriarchs in the divine presence, or to the latter and all the dead righteous understood as translated into the angelic (4 Macc 13:17; Wis 5:5; Luke 16:22; Gig. 6–16).136 In the thirty-sixth inscription, dated from the mid-second century BCE to the early second century CE, the deceased voice is recorded: ‘I look for a good hope of mercy’ (ἐλέους ἐλπίδα ἀγαθὴν ἐγὼ προσδέχομαι). The phrase ‘good hope’ with regard to the after-life is found in Plato (Phd. 67B) but the connection with ‘mercy’ recalls, amongst other things, Wisdom (3:4, 9). Horbury and Noy conclude that the outlook expressed here belongs to a pious circle with beliefs not unlike those found in Wisdom.137 These two inscriptions are, however, exceptions amongst those that have been found. Far more common are exhortations to weep that are presented with no accompanying comfort.138 All the more striking are those inscriptions that mourn the particularly poignant tragedies of childlessness139, or early death or unfulfilled life140, that Wisdom also addresses (Wis 3:13–15; 4:10–15). This Jewish hopelessness is relatively distinctive and cannot simply be ascribed to cultural borrowing. Although ‘being remembered’ was the most commonly held hope of an afterlife141, there were, of course, other positive beliefs142 in Greek and Egyptian philosophy and religion and the inscrip-

133 Bremner (Concept of the Soul, 72) speaks of an earlier period but applies a general anthropological principal noted by Robertson Smith, that rites are more likely to remain unchanged than beliefs (William Robertson Smith, Lectures on the Religion of the Semites (London: Adam and Charles Black, 1894), 16–17). 134 Van der Horst, Jewish Epitaphs, 40–64. 135 Horbury/Noy (ed.), Jewish Inscriptions, 74. 136 On this topic, see van der Horst, Jewish Epitaphs, 117, 123. 137 Horbury/Noy (ed.), Jewish Inscriptions, 85–86. 138 Ibid. e. g. inscriptions 30, 34, 35, 37, 64, 83, 97, 99, 101, 102. 139 Ibid. e. g. inscriptions 34, 38, 50, 65, 76, 101(?), 110. 140 Ibid. e. g. inscriptions 12, 35, 41, 42, 45, 49, 56, 57, 58, 59, 61, 63, 65, 70, 70, 71, 72, 76, 77, 80, 89, 94, 95, 97, 102, 103, 104, 107, 109, 110, 111, 130, 132. 141 Van der Horst, Jewish Epitaphs, 40. 142 Cf. above, 7.2 Greek Conceptions of the After-Life.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

The Question of Death and Mortality throughout Wisdom

157

tions are no more positive about these than the faith expressed in Wisdom. Further, the use of such terms as ψυχή and ᾅδης does not imply the acceptance or use of Greek mythology. These terms do have a particular series of associations in Greek culture but they also gained a potentially distinct set of ֶ ֶ‫נ‬ Jewish associations because of their use in the Septuagint to translate ‫פשׁ‬ (and related terms) and ‫שׁאוֹל‬ ְ respectively. In addition, we know that Jewish burial ritual could depart from the typical practice of their context in, for instance, the use of ossuaries.143 It therefore becomes all the more implausible to suggest that the inscriptions express no hope, merely because of convention. It therefore seems likely that, insofar as we are correct to believe it of Alexandrian provenance, Wisdom would have expressed the faith of a minority of Jewish believers, although this statement must remain open to qualification based on a better understanding of the nature of the sentiments expressed in the burial inscriptions. We know from Philo that a Jewish hope of immortality did survive but it may well have done so amongst a relatively well-educated elite. The popular faith, with regard to these matters, might be described as Sadducaic.144 Wisdom’s use of apocalyptic material and description of the hope of the soul after death must then have either been unpopular or not widely disseminated, or both.145

7.4.6 Conclusion In this section the ambiguous nature of death in Wisdom was discussed. It was shown that, for the wicked in Wisdom 5, physical death is real and final, in ironic confirmation of their speculation in Wisdom 2. For the righteous, the physical act of dying does not end their relationship to creation. They continue to truly live. The understanding of God’s attitude towards creation and life shown in Wisdom 7–19 is extended beyond physical death. The same view of death and the same pattern of salvation is therefore present throughout the book and this is a key to the explication of the unity of the work. An excursus to examine the evidence of Jewish burial inscriptions from Egypt gave reason to believe that Wisdom’s confidence about the transcendence of death was not widely shared by fellow Jews, as it was not in Hellenistic philosophy.146 Indeed, any positive belief in an afterlife (Platonic, Homeric or Egyptian) would have appeared distinctive and so an under143 Blischke, Die Eschatologie, 230–32, 262–63. 144 Horbury/Noy (ed.), Jewish Inscriptions, xxiv. 145 Cf. Winston’s (The Wisdom of Solomon, 32) similar conclusions that Wisdom represents a new emphasis, while yet being part of a continuous development of Jewish Hellenistic thought. 146 Cf. above, 7.2.6 Hellenistic Souls and 7.3.2 Immortality and Incorruptibility.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

158

Personal Eschatology and Immortality in Wisdom

standing of Wisdom’s personal eschatology can only be determined by a closer examination of its texts.

7.5 Jewish Texts and Theology in Wisdom 7.5.1 Introduction As our study of pneuma has indicated, Wisdom can be understood as an expression of Jewish faith in terms that would be comprehensible to a philosophically literate, if not expert, contemporary. Having examined Wisdom’s relationship to Hellenistic ideas of immortality, however, it is evident that though they play an influential role, they are not sufficient to provide a full explanation of the views of the after-life and the nature of the soul in the book. The question remains to be clarified, how the eschatology of Wisdom was felt to be related to the traditional, and less traditional, Jewish texts. The following pages will concentrate on Isaiah, Psalm 2, Enoch and Daniel. Wisdom has relationships to other texts, of course, such as Exodus, Numbers, the figure of personified Wisdom in Proverbs 8 and Sirach 24, but these texts are less directly related to the questions of eschatology that this work is concerned with and so for the sake of brevity will be set to one side. The textual connections and literary and theological allusions of Wisdom to Jewish religious texts have been well documented, and there is little point here simply repeating the work of others.147 We will attempt to summarize and focus particularly on the common motifs in the different texts and the points in which Wisdom appears to diverge significantly from its ‘sources’. We will concentrate on the opening section of Wisdom, particularly chapters one to five as these chapters still offer the clearest explanation of the nature of the post-mortem life.

7.5.2 Isaiah When it is noticed that the oppression of the righteous individual in Wisdom 2 appears to draw on the fourth Servant Song of Isaiah (52:13–53:12), that the examples of the barren woman made fruitful (Wis 3:13; Isa 54:1–8), the eunuch given a place in the temple of God (Wis 3:14; Isa 56:2–5) and the 147 Jane Schaberg, ‘Major Midrashic Traditions in Wisdom 1, 1–16, 25’, Journal for the Study of Judaism, vol. 13, no. 1–2 (1982) 75–101; Nickelsburg, Resurrection, 76–88, 211–12. On Enoch, see Larcher, Études, 103–112. On Isaiah, Patrick Skehan, ‘Isaias and the Teaching of the Book of Wisdom’, CBQ, vol. 2 (1940) 289–99; M. Jack Suggs, ‘Wisdom of Solomon 2:10–5: A Homily Based on the Fourth Servant Song’, Journal of Biblical Literature, vol. 76, no. 1 (1957) 26–33. A. G. Wright, ‘The Literary Genre Midrash (Part Two)’, CBQ, vol. 28 (1966) 417–57, on p. 446.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

Jewish Texts and Theology in Wisdom

159

young who die early (Wis 4:7–15; Isa 57:1–2) are also drawn from Isaiah, and that the section appears to draw to a close with a picture of God as a divine warrior (Wis 5:17–23; Isa 59:17–19), it might be assumed that the relationship between Wisdom and the latter parts of Isaiah is rather more straightforwardly sequential than it is. Suggs describes Wisdom 2:10–5 as a ‘homily’ based on the fourth Servant Song. While we may be justifiably reluctant to accept his term, his reasoning is important. The homily is not a mere paraphrase of Isaianic materials, for the verbal similarities to the older book are too slight for this to be the case. It is, rather, a sermon which always has Isaiah’s παις [sic] in view and makes use of that figure in the context of a persecution through which “Solomon” and his readers lived.148

The use of Isaiah in Wisdom is no mere repetition. The text is being engaged with theologically, one might say ‘interactively’, and it is the author who has set the sequence of questions to which Isaiah is looked to for answers. A. G. Wright concludes similarly that Wisdom cannot be thought of as midrash, as Wright himself defines it. The reason for this is that although the central section (ch. 3–4) may follow an Isaianic order, ‘the sequential dependency […] cuts across the structure which the author has given his material’, and ‘he is presenting a doctrine and citing Isaian [sic] material as a source of images for that presentation and by way of appeal to the authority of the earlier book’.149 A better approach is to examine how the Isaianic material relates to the literary structure of the work.150 The first six chapters are set out in a concentric structure. Part B (1:16–24) is to be juxtaposed with its alternate section B’ (5:1–23).151 The three elements of the first speech of the wicked are ironically reversed in the judgement scene of B’ as they recognize the true nature of immortality and the falseness of their reasoning. Firstly, in 2:1–5, the wicked reflect on the transience of life but in 5:9–13 they realize that it is their ‘lawlessness and destruction’ (5:7) that has led to the actual dissolution of their hope (5:14). Secondly, in 2:6–11 they determine to ‘enjoy the good things that exist’ and ‘let our strength be the standard of what righteousness is’ but in 5:6–8 they recognize that their straying from righteousness has not profited them. Thirdly, in 2:12–20 they decide to persecute the righteous one

148 Suggs, ‘Wisdom of Solomon 2:10–5’, 33. 149 A. G. Wright, ‘Numerical Patterns’, 446. To illustrate this point, Wright refers to the parallel between Wis 5:22 and Isa 55:19. This latter reference appears to be a mistake – the verse does not exist. Presumably the correct verse was 59:17. This would in fact preserve the sequence intact, but Wright’s point is still valid, as will become clear. 150 Cf. Kolarcik (Ambiguity of Death, 62). Cf. below, 7.6.2 The Literary Structure of Wisdom 1–6. 151 There may be some thematic reasons for linking verses fourteen to twenty-three with A’, despite the inclusion of στήσεται / ἀντιστήσεται (5:1, 23). These verses return to the language of creation that was used at the end of A and depict the death that was warned of at 1:12.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

160

Personal Eschatology and Immortality in Wisdom

and mock his claims to divine favour, only in 5:4–5 to be confronted by the reality of the righteous one’s claims. The pattern of events described in Wisdom 2 and 5 is present in Isaiah 52:13–53:12. The suffering and vindication of the Servant has thus been a determinative factor in the literary structure of this section of Wisdom. Isaiah has not simply been followed152, but rather the career of the παῖς κυρίου (Wis 2:13), understood here particularly as a child in relation to a father (2:16–18)153, follows that of ὁ παῖς μου in Isaiah 52:13. He experiences oppression and vindication, and the career of the oppressors follows Isaiah similarly, moving from derision and non-comprehension (Wis 2:14; Isa 52:14bc) to recognition (Wis 5:4; Isa 52:14a) and repentance (Wis 5:3, 6; Isa 53:6).154 Wright comments that the texts referring to Jerusalem in Isaiah are transferred to the individual order in Wisdom.155 By this he means that Jerusalem in Isaiah becomes a symbol for the individual sage. Whether it is fair to limit Wisdom’s hope entirely to the ‘individual order’ could certainly be disputed156, but nonetheless the hope of the restoration of Jerusalem is applied to various individuals in Wisdom 3–4157: the child of God, the barren woman, the eunuch and the youth robbed of life, are all examples of the general truth stated in 3:1–11. Wisdom turns from example to general truth at the use of the plural ‘righteous’ in 3:1. Even here, the influence of the text of Isaiah 53 can be detected. So, for example, Wisdom 3:2 contains ‘their departure was thought to be oppression’ (ἐλογίσθη κάκωσις ἡ ἔξοδος αὐτῶν), and Isaiah 53:4 ‘we considered him to be […] in oppression’ (ἡμεῖς ἐλογισάμεθα αὐτὸν εἶναι […] ἐν κακώσει). In addition, the language of acceptance, light and the judgement of nations is combined in both Wisdom 3:6b–7 and Isaiah 42:1, 4.158 Light, exaltation and an international orientation are also present in Isaiah 60:1–3, 17–22.

152 For example, the fourth Servant Song begins, unlike Wisdom, with an expectation of the exaltation of the Servant. 153 Below, p. 182, fn. 288. 154 Skehan (‘Isaias’, 296) and Nickelsburg (Resurrection, 91–93) suggest that this career of the wicked in Wisdom is expanded from the fourth Servant Song using material in Isaiah 13–14. The evidence is, however, somewhat tenuous: Isaiah 13:8 uses ταράσσω and ἐξίστημι. The latter is found in Isaiah 52:14. Both are present in Wisdom 5:2. 155 A. G. Wright, ‘Numerical Patterns’, 446. 156 Consider the transferral to the plural in Wis 3:1–7, the ‘sons of God’ / ‘holy ones’ at 5:5, and the preservation of a righteous people in the Exodus-Numbers narrative (19:22). 157 Nickelsburg (Resurrection, 40 fn. 77) notes how the servant of Second Isaiah is pluralized in Third Isaiah (56:6; 63:17; 65:9, 13, 14, 15; 66:14), although the LXX uses δοῦλος and cognates to translate ‫בד‬ ֶ ‫ע‬ ֶ rather than παῖς, obscuring the connection. 158 Note that the cultic metaphor of the verse in Wisdom is not present in Isaiah. The discussion of the practice of the religion described in Wisdom and the different question of Wisdom’s relationship to the cultic texts of the Jewish Scriptures have been underdeveloped in the secondary literature. On this theme in Philo, Leonhardt, Jewish Worship.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

Jewish Texts and Theology in Wisdom

161

Wisdom’s reading of Isaiah shows a flexible ability to recognize and use types. The individual Servant of Isaiah is recognized as a type of Wisdom’s general understanding of immortality and eschatology. The prophecies relating to the city of Jerusalem in Isaiah are also geographically generalized to apply to the case of the righteous individual in Wisdom.159 Wisdom’s ability to do this is both supported by a prior understanding of immortality and eschatology and supported and authorized by the text of Isaiah. Before concluding this section, a brief detour must be taken. Nickelsburg has argued that the use of Isaiah in Wisdom 2, 4–5 is supplemented by the model of the wisdom tale.160 Wisdom 2 contains a conspiracy, within a court setting, against the righteous one, and this is not present in the Servant Song.161 The righteous individual is condemned (2:20), but trusts in God (3:9) and is rescued by him (5:1), at which point the wicked are confronted and punished (5:9–14). Here too, Nickelsburg claims that the confrontation with the wicked is an addition to the Servant Song model. In Isaiah, the speakers are the ‘observers’ and they state that the righteous man has suffered on their behalf. In Wisdom, the speakers are the wicked. Naturally, it would be inappropriate for them to repeat the sentiment of the ‘observers’ of Isaiah and instead they ‘anticipate’162 their condemnation. Firstly, in response, there are important elements of the wisdom tale which Nickelsburg himself identifies which are not present in Wisdom. Although there is a conspiracy and a condemnation, the stress of the Wisdom ‘narrative’ is not on the trial of the righteous one’s faithfulness. There is no strong emphasis on, for instance, the righteous one’s allegiance to the Torah and on his laudable refusal to compromise (compare this with Daniel 3).163 In addition, Nickelsburg also points out that the traditional wisdom tale results in the hero being rescued from death. If Wisdom 2, 5 is to be identified as such a tale, the earthly court setting must be transposed to a heavenly court in order that the hero may be rescued from ‘spiritual’ death. The ability of Wisdom to identify the righteous individual, and thus the reading sage, with the figures of Isaiah grounds the character of the righteous individual as persecuted and oppressed, yet still righteous. This status brings with it protection or recompense from God. The problem that Wisdom seeks to solve is the apparent mismatch between divine promise and current suffering. Isaiah offers a type of a life which, in part, answers this problem. The suffering experienced is purposeful and temporary. God’s character

159 We will see below (7.6 The Identity of the Righteous One and Realized Eschatology in Wisdom 1–6) that the righteous one himself operates as example of the hope of all sages. 160 Nickelsburg, Resurrection, 76–88. 161 Ibid., 88. 162 This is Nickelsburg’s word and unnecessarily envisages a temporal succession of confrontation, condemnation, punishment. There is an important order to the post-mortem events of Wisdom, but only with regard to the pause between death and elevation to cosmic kingship. 163 Although note Wisdom 2:12, 19.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

162

Personal Eschatology and Immortality in Wisdom

remains unblemished because in Isaiah his dedication to his servant is expressed in his determination to elevate him to his rightful position, not to remove every discomfort.164 However, the combination of persecution to the point of death and the faithfulness of God demands that God’s care extend beyond the grave. In some sense, the current situation must either be reversed or reinterpreted. Wisdom does both, challenging conventional assumptions about death and insisting that present suffering can be educative (Wis 3:5).165 For the righteous, the future hope must be of peace.166 All of this is manifested with heavy warning for those who oppress and sanction oppression. Kings and rulers should take heed (Isa 52:15; Wis 5:16 and Isa 62:3); Jerusalem will be exalted amongst the nations (Isa 62:10–11). In Isaiah this warning threatens current political powers with the loss of their thrones and indeed lives. In Wisdom, the texts of Isaiah that speak of a hope for Jerusalem have been taken to speak of the righteous one and thus of the people of God with no local or national reference. This does not mean, however, that Wisdom has placed all eschatological realization in an afterlife unconnected with the cosmos. Thrones will be overturned and the righteous will be crowned (Wis 3:8–9; 5:16–23). The justice of the order of the cosmos will be vindicated. 7.5.3 Psalm 2 The use of Psalm 2 in Wisdom highlights the theme of kingship. Reese argues that the opening address of Wisdom to the judges of the earth, kings and princes (Wis 1:1; 6:1, 21) indicates ‘a Hellenistic literary convention’ in contrast to ‘the Semitic style of speaking to a “son”’.167 Schaberg, in discussing the importance of Psalm 2 in Wisdom, rightly notes the important biblical material which is drawn upon to form the challenge to the rulers of the earth.168 Both Wisdom 1–6 and Psalm 2, resonating with the language of Isaiah, challenge the kings of the earth with the establishment of God’s own son as king in Jerusalem.169 As Schaberg notes, any messianic content in the Psalm has been democratized in Wisdom so that the hope of kingship is available to all sages.170 Her further comment that the hope has been ‘demilitarized’171 should not be understood as spiritualized: the physical threat to

164 Note the use of δοξάζω in Wisdom 19:22 and Isaiah 52:13. 165 The suggestion of vicarious suffering in Isaiah 53:4–6 is not developed in Wisdom. 166 Wisdom 3:3; there are 29 uses of εἰρήνη in Isaiah including 53:5, 10. 167 Reese, Hellenistic Influence, 110–11. 168 Schaberg, ‘Major Midrashic Traditions’, 76. 169 The strongest allusions can be detected in Wis 2:18 and Ps 2:7; Wis 4:18–19 and Ps 2:4, 9; Wis 6:1 and Ps 2:10. 170 Schaberg, ‘Major Midrashic Traditions’, 76. 171 Ibid.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

Jewish Texts and Theology in Wisdom

163

the rulers of the earth is quite real, if not from an Israelite army. Both Reese’s and Schaberg’s observations need to be retained. In Wisdom, the Psalm is perceived to address those who rule over the Jewish diaspora.

7.5.4 Enoch, Daniel and the Son of Man The previous two sections have demonstrated the manner in which Isaiah and Psalm 2 have been read and brought into connection in Wisdom. Another set of texts, often referred to as apocalyptic, is also influential for Wisdom and we turn now to investigate how these too are incorporated into Wisdom’s theological reading of Isaiah and Psalm 2. It is important to clarify the limits of this task: it is highly likely that the historical origins of texts such as 1 Enoch and Daniel, as well no doubt as being the products of oppressed and disillusioned communities or individuals, are in part the result of intensive readings of such texts as Isaiah 24–27, 52–66, Ezekiel 40–48 and Zechariah 9–14, as well as Hellenistic, Persian and Babylonian influences.172 Although it is interesting that texts which were developed in response to one another continued to be understood as connected in later texts such as that of Wisdom, the historical nature of their origins was presumably not known by the author or first readers of Wisdom. For these sages, texts such as Isaiah, Daniel and Enoch were obviously referring to the same things, to the oppression of the righteous and God’s intervening judgement in their favour. For all the vast number of obvious differences between 1 Enoch (and Daniel) and Wisdom (there are no visions, detailed cosmologies, divisions of history, or terrifying beasts in Wisdom), there are also interesting similarities. Some of the theological differences will be outlined below.173 Here, some of the recurring literary motifs will be discussed before considering ‘the one like a son of man’. The pattern, noted by Nickelsburg, of the persecution of the righteous followed by their exaltation and the judgement of their oppressors forms the backbone for all of the allusive similarities between Wisdom and 1 Enoch.174 In the latter, the just are exhorted to love righteousness (1 En. 1:1). They are oppressed by those described particularly as wealthy (e. g. 1 En. 94:7–9; 97:8–10; Wis 5:8). A direct connection is made between the responsibilities of rulers and the actions of the oppressors (1 En. 103:14–15); in Wisdom such a connection is implied. Idolatry is a cause of concern (1 En. 99:6–9; Wis 13–15). Unlike Wisdom, the souls of the murdered explicitly descend to Sheol, even if they enjoy segregated quarters there (1 En. 22:9–13; 102:5–11). 172 Collins, The Apocalyptic Imagination, 23–37. 173 Cf. below, 7.5.5 Apocalypticism. 174 Nickelsburg (Resurrection, 87) understands this section of Wisdom as a reshaping of the materials of Isaiah 52–54 to the form of the wisdom tale, found for instance in Gen 37–45.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

164

Personal Eschatology and Immortality in Wisdom

They sleep in peace and security (1 En. 100:5; Wis 3:3). For the wicked, Sheol will be a place of torture (1 En. 103:7–8; possibly Wis 4:19). At the moment of judgement, the souls of the righteous will come to life (1 En. 102:4) and be radiant with light (1 En. 104:2; this is a recurring motif, e. g. 92:4; 96:3; 108:11–15; Wis 3:7). As in Wisdom, no bodily resurrection is envisaged.175 An association with the angels in heaven is made (1 En. 104:4, 6; possibly Wis 5:5). In Daniel, there is a period of affliction (7:25; 12:1) after which many will rise from the dust (Dan 12:2) and the insightful (συνιέντες 12:3; Isa 52:13; Wis 3:9) will shine like the stars of heaven (Dan OG 12:3; Wis 3:7). When judgement is given for the one like a son of man (Dan 7:13), he is given royal authority over the nations of the earth (Wis 3:8). The righteous will understand, but the wicked will not in this life (Dan 12:10; Wis 3:9; 5:6). The righteous will live forever (Dan 12:2; Wis 5:15). One of the most prominent aspects present in Daniel, which is only a minor element in 1 Enoch, is the language of kingship. All of Daniel’s apocalypses contain the pattern of a series of kingdoms176 and Daniel 7, in particular, is about the judgement on the arrogantly speaking beast (7:11), which represents a king (7:24), and the granting to the holy ones of the ‘seat of the kingdom’ (7:22, 27).177 It has been established, using Isaiah and Psalm 2178, that the vindication of the righteous is characterized by royal language in Wisdom, so it is not necessary for Wisdom to draw its kingly language from Daniel. However, the presence of a kingly motif in Wisdom 3:8, immediately after the language of illumination in 3:7, certainly encourages the conviction that kingship was recognized as a unifying motif in these texts. This in turn raises the question of whether ‘the one like a son of man’, a figure at first glance absent from Wisdom, is present after all. In the Hebrew of Daniel an interesting distinction is made in 7:27. Kingship is given ‘to the people, [or ‘to the people of’] the holy ones of the Most High’.179 In the version outside of the brackets, the people are identified as the ‘holy ones’180; in the version within the brackets, the people are distinguished from the holy ones who are likely understood as angels.181 In 7:18, 22 the kingdom is given to ‘the holy ones of the Most High’.182 The Old Greek blurs this distinction, reading in 7:27 something closer to the version without brackets above, ‘to the holy people of the Most High’ (λαῷ ἁγίῳ ὑψίστου). Theodotion also does not provide this interpretative option. If the 175 Cf. below, 7.5.5.5 Resurrection. 176 Collins, The Apocalyptic Imagination, 92–98. 177 Ibid., 98–107. 178 Cf. above, 7.5.2 Isaiah and 7.5.3 Psalm 2. 179 ‫ליׂונ ׅין‬ ְ ‫ע‬ ֶ ‫שׁי‬ ֵ ‫דּי‬ ִ ‫ק‬ ַ ‫עם‬ ַ ‫ל‬ ְ 180 P. M. Casey, Son of Man: The Interpretation and Influence of Daniel 7 (London: SPCK, 1979), 41. 181 Collins, The Apocalyptic Imagination, 104–07. 182 ‫ליׂונ ׅין‬ ְ ‫ע‬ ֶ ‫שׁי‬ ֵ ‫דּי‬ ִ ‫ק‬ ַ

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

Jewish Texts and Theology in Wisdom

165

distinction is important in encouraging readings in which the one like a son of man is understood as an actual heavenly being that is operating on behalf of the holy people183, then the loss of the distinction encourages readings in which the reader can more readily identify himself with the symbolic figure. The figure like a son of man is understood to directly represent the people of God, rather than to represent an angelic order with which the people of God are associated. In Wisdom 5:5, the wicked are astonished to discover that the righteous one has been ‘counted amongst the divine sons’, his ‘lot among the the holy ones’. Read within the context of Wisdom (2:18) it would be easy to assume that this refers simply to the manifestation of the relation of the righteous one to God, which the wicked had mocked in Chapter 2. Read in the light of Daniel, and of the association with angels found in 1 Enoch, the verse appears less clear.184 In order to treat this issue more fully, a broader review of the cosmology of Wisdom is needed, and this will be done in a section on apocalypticism below. Schaberg’s argument that ‘in Wisdom as in 1 Enoch 71, Enoch may have been recognized as “an original” of Daniel’s one like a son of man, and his individuality reasserted’, does not seem convincing with regard to Wisdom.185 Enoch is simply one example in Wisdom 1–6. Literary analysis does not even discover him to be at the centre of the section.186 The interaction with the Isaianic servant/son figure is far more explicit and lengthy.187 Further, the teaching emphasis of 4:10–15 is on the preservation of the righteous young man from the corrupting influence of wickedness, not on Enoch’s exaltation and confrontation with oppressors. It is possible to read 4:10–15 in the light of the broader examples of Wisdom, but the very act of doing this shows us that the section is an additional illustration and reflection and not a central structuring element of the theology. The ‘one like a son of man’ does not obviously play an important role in Wisdom.188 If Daniel was read by the author of Wisdom, which does seem likely given the close association with light, exaltation and kingship, it is probable that the son of man figure was understood symbolically, as an example of the fate of the righteous, much as the Servant and Enoch were. This interpretation appears more likely when the rest of Daniel 7 is considered. The more exotic, beastly imagery of this chapter is not obviously to the taste of the author of Wisdom.

183 Collins, The Apocalyptic Imagination, 105. 184 Larcher, Le Livre de la Sagesse ii, 362–64. 185 Schaberg, ‘Major Midrashic Traditions’, 88. 186 Kolarcik (Ambiguity of Death, 44) identifies Wisdom 4:7–20 as the fourth and last diptych in the middle section (3:1–4:20) of the concentric structure of 1:1–6:21. 187 Nickelsburg, Resurrection, 83–88, 289. 188 Cf. the discussion regarding a transcendent messiah figure below, 7.6.3.2 A Messianic Figure?

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

166

Personal Eschatology and Immortality in Wisdom

7.5.5 Apocalypticism 7.5.5.1 Introduction Having examined the indebtedness of Wisdom to apocalyptic texts, it is important to distinguish between the use and interpretation of a text. It cannot be presupposed that Wisdom’s theological stance was the same as that of the historical communities which produced the texts which Wisdom uses. Indeed, the more important question to be answered is how Wisdom is using these texts. To answer this it will be helpful then to turn to Wisdom’s relationship to apocalypticism, not simply with regard to textual use, but with an assessment of theological categories.

7.5.5.2 Genre, Community and Ideas As soon as the topic of apocalypticism is approached it becomes necessary to define what is meant by the term. J. J. Collins helpfully distils much debate by distinguishing between ‘apocalypse’ as a genre, ‘apocalypticism’ as an historical movement or social ideology ‘that shares the conceptual structure of the apocalypses’189 and ‘apocalyptic eschatology’ as a set of ideas or literary motifs which may be found in other genres or social settings.190 It should be clear that Wisdom is not an apocalypse. Collins’ definition of an apocalypse establishes, amongst other characteristics, that such a work is one in which ‘a revelation is mediated by an otherworldly being to a human recipient’ within a narrative framework.191 Wisdom does not contain such a revelation. Further, although some historical continuity with the ‘apocalypticism’ of the communities which produced 1 Enoch and Daniel can hardly be categorically ruled out192, the likely historical and geographical distance between these communities and indeed the lack of any evidence to assess makes this something of a dead-end of a path to travel along.193 Finally, in ‘apocalyptic eschatology’ the ideas and motifs within the apocalyptic texts enjoyed a life and influence which extended well beyond the historical communities which produced them. Various distinctive aspects of the genre can be found, for 189 Collins, The Apocalyptic Imagination, 13. 190 Ibid., 2. 191 Ibid., 5, originally published in J. J. Collins, (ed.), Apocalypse: The Morphology of a Genre, Semeia 14 (Missoula, MT: Scholars Press, 1979). 192 Wisdom’s choice of texts may betray an older tradition, connected to the origins of apocalypticism (Nickelsburg, Resurrection): G. von Rad (Theologie des Alten Testaments, [Munich: Kaiser Verlag, 41965] ii, 315–30) suggested that the root of apocalyptic was in wisdom theology. 193 For apocalypticism as an historical movement within which the apocalyptic genre was used see Koch, The Prophets: Volume One, 28–33, although note the critique of Collins (The Apocalyptic Imagination, 12–14), that apocalyptic works exist, particularly those that involve a mystical heavenly journey, that have do not have an obvious historical connection with the movement in which Daniel and 1 Enoch was born.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

Jewish Texts and Theology in Wisdom

167

instance, in the New Testament, largely abstracted from the fully orbed interconnected world-view of some of the original texts.194 It is this last definition which best describes Wisdom in its shared language with 1 Enoch and Daniel, its concern about persecution, its description of the fates of the souls of the dead and its hope for cataclysmic judgement.195 Once it is recognized that Wisdom may be using apocalyptic texts while retaining some theological distance, we are then driven to investigate what the nature of this theological distance is and further, to recognize that Wisdom is less concerned with issues of genre than we might be and is consequently using a wide array of Jewish texts, some of which would not conventionally be thought of as apocalyptic.

7.5.5.3 Appearances and Reality A common characteristic of apocalypses is an understanding that reality is not what it seems but that there exists a spiritual world which will determine events in this world in a much better way than might otherwise be predicted.196 The frequent presence of the angelic messengers in the genre occurs in order to create a conduit between these worlds and for the wise to grasp the true nature of things (e. g. Dan 8:15–27).197 The angels themselves can also be witnesses to the manner in which the heavenly events are taking place, that is through angelic battles in which the opposing sides obey or rebel against the divine will.198 Although there is one explicit reference to angels in Wisdom (Wis 16:20), and some other provocatively ambiguous texts (Wis 5:5; 18:25), it seems clear that knowledge of the angelic or the heavenly realm, or even belief in such a realm, is not present in Wisdom in anything like the detail of, for instance, 1 Enoch. A plausible interpretation of Wisdom might follow Philo 194 Collins, The Apocalyptic Imagination, 256–79. 195 Collins, The Apocalyptic Imagination, 7. The route by which this shared language came to be used in Wisdom is unknown. Leonhardt-Balzer has noted Philo’s use of a tradition of psychological dualism similar to that found in The Instruction on the Two Spirits (QE 1.23; 1QS III.13-IV.26; Jutta Leonhardt-Balzer, ‘A Case of Psychological Dualism: Philo of Alexandria and the Instruction on the Two Spirits’, in Craig A. Evans/H. Daniel Zacharias (ed.), Early Christian Literature and Intertextuality, Volume 2: Exegetical Studies, Studies in Scripture in Early Judaism and Christianity, vol. 15 (London: T&T Clark, 2009) 27–45), although it is not shared with Wisdom. Further connections with apocalyptic wisdom texts found at Qumran are discussed above; cf. 7.5.5.3 Appearances and Reality, 7.5.5.4 The Order of Things. 196 J. J. Collins, ‘Apocalyptic Literature’, in Craig A. Evans/Stanley E. Porter (ed.), The Dictionary of New Testament Background (Leicester: Inter-Varsity Press, 2000) 40–45, on pp. 42–43; D. E. Aune,/T. J. Geddert/C. A. Evans, ‘Apocalypticism’, in Craig A. Evans/ Stanley E. Porter (ed.), The Dictionary of New Testament Background (Leicester: InterVarsity, 2000) 45–58, on p. 48. 197 Collins, The Apocalyptic Imagination, 5. 198 Ibid., 104–07.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

168

Personal Eschatology and Immortality in Wisdom

in his systematic understanding of the cosmos (Gig. 6–16) and identify souls, stars and angels as being of the same nature.199 In Wisdom, this nature would be pneuma (Wis 15:11, 16; 16:14).200 Such a cosmology understands reality and the cosmos similarly to the apocalyptic manner outlined above, but one that shows a greater confidence in the created nature of the world rather than looking for a divine intervention from beyond our present order: the angelic, the spiritual (that which is of pneuma) is understood as part of the cosmos, and not something that belongs in a transcendent realm. An intermediary position may be found in the use of the phrase rāz nihyeh (‫)רז נהיה‬201 in 4QInstruction (1Q26, 4Q415–418, 423), a non-sectarian202, apocalyptic wisdom document, likely from the second century BCE203, found amongst the Dead Sea Scrolls. The expression204 has been translated by Collins as ‘the mystery that is to be’.205 The translation is supported by the expression’s various uses: in 1QS 11:3–4 it is used to describe revelation206 and in 1Q27 1 i 3,4=4Q300 3 4 (the Book of Mysteries) to describe an eschatological future judgement.207 This mystery, however, particularly in 4QInstruction, is not merely a future reality208 but is the truth of ‘God’s dominion over all history from beginning to end’.209 Much like earlier wisdom texts (e. g. Prov 8:22–31), 4QInstruction affirms that the world has a rational structure that derives from the manner of its creation. In this

199 Cf. above, 7.2.7 Astral Immortality. 200 Cf. above, 5.4 Anthropology in Wisdom. 201 Michael J. Goff, Discerning Wisdom: The Sapiential Literature of the Dead Sea Scrolls, VTSup 116 (Leiden: Brill, 2007) 13–29. 202 Ibid., 61–65. 203 Ibid., 65–67. 204 ‫רז‬: ‘mystery’, occurs nine times in the Aramaic part of Daniel; ‫נהיה‬: A niphal participle of the verb ‘to be’. Collins, ‘The Mysteries of God’, 288–89. 205 For alternative translations, Michael J. Goff, The Worldly and Heavenly Wisdom of 4QInstruction, STDJ 50 (Leiden: Brill, 2003) 33–34. Caution should still be expressed with regard to assuming the expression solely has a future aspect, particularly in 4QInstruction: see below. 206 ‘For from the source of his knowledge he has disclosed his light, and my eyes have observed his wonders, and light of my heart the mystery of existence.’ My italics. Translation, including a ‘more abstract’ (Collins, ‘The Mysteries of God’, 289–90) rendering of the verbal form ‫נהיה‬, by Florentino García Martínez/Eibert J. C. Tigchelaar (ed.), The Dead Sea Scrolls Study Edition, 2 vol. (Leiden: Brill, 1997–98) i, 97. 207 ‘And they do not know the mystery of existence, nor understand ancient matters. And they do not know what is going to happen them; they will not save their souls from the mystery of existence.’ My italics. Translation by García Martínez/Tigchelaar (ed.), Dead Sea Scrolls i, 67. On the eschatology of this passage, M. J. Goff, Discerning Wisdom, 73–89. 208 On the ‘broadly compatible’ use of ‫ רז נהיה‬in 4QInstruction and The Book of Mysteries, M. J. Goff, Discerning Wisdom, 75. The Book of Mysteries uses the phrase more emphatically of future judgement (Ibid., 102), whereas 4QInstruction can speak of judgement without it (Ibid., 27). 209 M. J. Goff, Discerning Wisdom, 15. For views on the concrete form of the mystery, Aitken, ‘Apocalyptic’, 186–87.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

Jewish Texts and Theology in Wisdom

169

case, it was by the rāz nihyeh that it was created.210 This structure can be observed (4Q418 69 ii 3–4) but there is also a sense in which the truth of it needs to be revealed (4Q417 1 i 25–27) and is so by the contemplation of ‘the mystery’.211 A similar pattern emerges with regard to the knowledge of good and evil, salvation, the identity of the elect and the nature of eternal inheritance.212 In Wisdom 2:20–22, we read that the wicked oppressors of the righteous one had falsely reasoned, been blinded by their wickedness and did not know the ‘mysteries of God’ (μυστήρια θεοῦ).213 This mystery is more closely identified with right reason in Wisdom (2:21) than in 4QInstruction.214 In the wider theology of Wisdom, it is Sophia who leads the sage to the knowledge necessary for immortality (6:17–20)215 and who is also associated with the origin and nature of the world (7:17–22).216 There is no suggestion of a direct connection between Wisdom and 4QInstruction. The latter in particular lacks engagement with Hellenistic philosophy.217 Nonetheless, the texts share apocalyptic and sapiential themes concerning the true nature of the cosmos and its eschatological conclusion expressed within a ‘mystery’.218 The revelation of this mystery in Wisdom shows reality to be different from its appearance, and draws on apocalyptic motifs to describe the exaltation and vindication of the persecuted righteous. Wisdom too recognizes that the righteous can be bitterly persecuted (2:20) or never achieve conventional blessed states in this life (3:13–4:15) and that this is a challenge to the

210 Ibid., 19. Goff also notes the parallel between the instrumental uses of wisdom and the ‘mystery’ at the creation: Prov 3:19; 4Q417 1 i 8–9. 211 M. J. Goff, Discerning Wisdom, 18, 20; Collins, ‘The Mysteries of God’, 290. 4Q417 1 i 25– 27: ‘wise son, understand your mysteries … you will not go astray afte[r] yo[ur] heart /and after/ your ey[e]s […]’, translation by García Martínez/Tigchelaar (ed.), Dead Sea Scrolls ii, 859–61. On the contemplation of the mystery, cf. 4Q418 9 8–9. 212 Collins, ‘The Mysteries of God’, 290, who notes Harrington’s observation (Daniel J. Harrington, ‘Mystery’, in Lawrence H. Schiffman/James C. VanderKam (ed.), Encyclopedia of the Dead Sea Scrolls (New York: Oxford, 2000) 588–91, on p. 590 fn. 15) that the range of material covered by the mystery is similar to the origins and ways of the world and eschatology covered by the Instruction on the Two Spirits (1QS 3.13–14). 213 Collins, ‘The Mysteries of God’, 287–88. The understanding of the afterlife is also a ‘mystery’ in 1 Enoch 103:2. 214 Collins, ‘The Mysteries of God’, 305. The appropriation of revelation, however, may still involve hard study (M. J. Goff, Discerning Wisdom, 37). 4QInstruction has a greater emphasis on study (4Q417 1 i 6–8; 4Q418 221 2–3; Matthew Goff, ‘Genesis 1–3 in the Wisdom of Solomon and 4QInstruction’, in Géza G. Xeravits/József Zsengellér (ed.), Studies in the Book of Wisdom, SJSJ, vol. 142 (Leiden: Brill, 2010) 1–21, on p. 4. 215 Cf. Collins, ‘The Mysteries of God’, 291–99. 216 Cf. above, 4.2 Creation in Wisdom. 217 Collins, ‘The Mysteries of God’, 297, 305. 218 Matthew Goff (‘Genesis 1–3’) emphasizes a use of Genesis 1–3 in both texts, particularly with regard to an understanding of Adam as an ideal type of humanity. He sees this as drawing on a common Wisdom tradition of the late Second-Temple period.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

170

Personal Eschatology and Immortality in Wisdom

faith and reason of the righteous. The difference lies in Wisdom’s understanding of the cosmos and will be explored further in the following section. With 4QInstruction, amongst other Dead Sea Scroll texts, Wisdom shares an appreciation of a ‘mystery’ by which the true nature of the cosmos can be understood, although Wisdom’s use of this language shows a greater emphasis on correct reason rather than revelation. Here, too, salvation is shown ultimately to be consistent with the created order. 7.5.5.4 The Order of Things Although Wisdom believes that the cosmic structure that determines events in the world, the ‘order of things’, has been set for the benefit of the righteous, this order is not to be found exclusively in heaven in the actions of the angels, but rather resides within the whole cosmic structure of heaven and earth.219 The readers of Wisdom do not receive a revelation of the divine plan being executed through heavenly battles. They are not urged to look for a final eschatological judgement when victory will be extended to the earthly realm. Such an event is not expected for at least three reasons. Firstly, the book of Wisdom understands creation to be fundamentally good and ordered by pneuma-Sophia (8:1).220 The essential nature of the cosmos is not ambiguous, but rather is set to generate life (1:14; 2:23).221 Secondly, Wisdom expects divine intervention in this present world order. This is the implication of Wisdom’s depiction of Sophia’s actions amongst the patriarchs and also of the Exodus-Numbers narrative.222 This is also an implication of the warning to current world rulers, the fall of whose regimes is

219 This view is shared with the earlier Hebrew Wisdom texts and 4Qinstruction, as discussed in the previous section. The term ‘visitation’ (ἐπισκοπή/‫דּה‬ ָ ‫ק‬ ֻ ‫פ‬ ְ , ‫דּה‬ ָ ‫פקוּ‬ ְ ) is used in Wisdom (below, 7.6.4 The Visitation of God) and 4QInstruction (and the Instruction on the Two Spirits) to describe God’s moment of judgement which occurs as part of the divine order (Collins, ‘The Mysteries of God’, 304; Martin G. Abegg Jr/James E. Bowley/Edward M. Cook, The Dead Sea Scrolls Concordance: Volume One: The Non-Biblical Texts from Qumran (Leiden: Brill, 2003). The use of the term is not explained by the older Hebrew wisdom tradition (John Strugnell/Daniel J. Harrington (ed.), Qumran Cave 4. XXIV. Sapiential Texts, Part 2. 4QInstruction, DJD 34 (Oxford: Clarendon, 1999), 28). A distinction can be made, however, in that the determinism of 4Qinstruction and the Treatise of the Two Spirits involves a willingness to accept evil as part of the divine plan (Philip Alexander, ‘Predestination and Free Will in the Theology of the Dead Sea Scrolls’, in John M. G. Barclay/Simon J. Gathercole (ed.), Divine and Human Agency in Paul and his Cultural Environment (London: T&T Clark, 2006) 27–49, on pp. 30–31). In Wisdom, the victory of God is certain, as is the present action of Sophia/pneuma in the cosmos, but these divine actions can better be characterized as part of an ongoing dynamic of human sin followed by the response of judgement, rather than a predetermined plan working to final fulfilment. 220 Winston, The Wisdom of Solomon, 189–90. 221 Cf. above, 4.2 Creation in Wisdom. 222 Cf. above, 2.3.2 An Exposition of Wisdom 10 and 3.3 The Exodus and The Elements.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

Jewish Texts and Theology in Wisdom

171

threatened at the moment of divine visitation (Wis 3:7–8). Thirdly, the identification of the nature of the soul as pneuma implies that the soul’s postmortem existence and exaltation over its foes is in fact a cosmic existence.223 This is not, admittedly, a point made explicitly by Wisdom, but it is a logical conclusion consistent with both Wisdom’s affirmation of the goodness of the cosmos and its engagement with Stoic physics.224 The effect of these points is that the good order of things within creation will become apparent in time. No radical reorientation of the cosmic structure is required; merely patience. Eschatological hope will be realized through the created system of the cosmos.225 The same pattern was seen in Wisdom’s ‘explanation’ of the miracles of the Exodus-Numbers narrative.226 In contrast, the divine plan of Daniel, for instance, can be described as transcendent. What is required is for the divine plan to come to fruition, at which point the divine will intervene. Without this, the current world order holds no hope. Wisdom, however, has no need for this creation to come to an end because injustices will be righted in time. Consequently, Wisdom has no need for visions, heavenly journeys or angelic revelations.227 Collins’ summary is helpful: In the Wisdom of Solomon the wisdom and righteousness which bring immortality are built into the structure of the universe and constitute the order which pervades both heaven and earth. Immortality is therefore in unbroken continuity with the order of this world.228

223 Cf. above, 5.3 The Stoic Human. 224 The second and third reason are not applicable to 4QInstruction. The first needs to be treated cautiously. Although it was argued in the previous section that the 4QInstruction follows the older Wisdom texts in identifying the created order with the divine will, Collins (Collins, ‘The Mysteries of God’, 301–2) has argued that 4QInstruction (4Q417 1 i 14–18) follows the Instruction on the Two Spirits in locating the origin of human evil in the possession of two spirits, thus distinguishing between the accounts of creation in Gen 1:27 and 2:7 and placing the origin of evil within creation. A position conceptually closer to Wisdom can be found in the allegorical use of Eden in 4Q423 (part of 4QInstruction; M. J. Goff, Discerning Wisdom, 36–38; Matthew Goff, ‘Genesis 1–3’, 5–7), in which the ‘understanding one’ is urged to ‘till’ and ‘keep’ the garden – to study hard the way of truth. It can be added that in Wisdom there is no ‘spirit of flesh’, merely the work of the devil (2:24) and the absence of Sophia. 225 Cf. below, 7.6 The Identity of the Righteous One and Realized Eschatology in Wisdom 1–6, 7.7 Conclusion: The Realized Eschatology of Wisdom 1–6. This conclusion is largely in conformity with that of Kolarcik who emphasizes the subordination of apocalyptic motifs to a sapiential world-view: “the use of argument, poetic imagery, imagination and historical review, confirms the author’s commitment to the sapiential values of argument and the positive tenor of the created world” (Michael Kolarcik, ‘Sapiential Values and Apocalyptic Imagery in the Wisdom of Solomon’, in Géza G. Xeravits/József Zsengellér (ed.), Studies in the Book of Wisdom, SJSJ, vol. 142 (Leiden: Brill, 2010) 23–36, on p. 36). 226 See above, 3. The Order of the Cosmos. 227 Collins, ‘Cosmos and Salvation’, 139. 228 Ibid.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

172

Personal Eschatology and Immortality in Wisdom

Wisdom’s depictions of the creation as operating to effect divine judgement draw on apocalyptic sources.229 In Wisdom, however, these events are no longer viewed as interruptions of the normal workings of the cosmos. Instead, the presence of order in the cosmos in Wisdom stands in continuity, although not identity, with the biblical wisdom of Proverbs230 and the Hellenistic conviction that an understanding of the nature of reality was an integral foundation for ethics and the attainment of immortality. In Wisdom, Sophia both guarantees the order of the cosmos (1:4, 14; 7:15–24) and enables the sage to comprehend it. Therefore, the role of angels in apocalyptic literature as mediators of the knowledge of the heavenly order could be said to have been taken over by Sophia, with the caveat that she mediates knowledge of the cosmic order, and not merely the heavenly. An important characteristic of the theology of apocalypses, and here 1 Enoch is a prime example, are dualisms between temporal and spatial dimensions.231 In 1 Enoch in the retelling of Genesis 6, it is the confusion of heaven and earth that leads to a problem. Salvation comes from the contrasting temporal and spatial realm to the here and now, and so it is by revelations from heaven about the future that individuals are enabled to endure the present earthly situation. Although language reminiscent of these dualisms is present in Wisdom, its function has been transformed. As already mentioned, the heavenly realm has become the true realm of the souls of the righteous rather than the abode of angels, if indeed any distinction between angels and souls can be made.232 In addition, the heaven and earth dualism is itself muted. The exaltation of the righteous to a royal position over the cosmos could not be said to result in an alteration of their created nature, but rather in its fulfilment (Wis 2:23; 7:2–3). Flesh and spirit are not simple opposites (7:22–24). Heaven is therefore seen as part of the cosmos, rather than external to it. The characteristic temporal dualism of apocalyptic literature is also changed in Wisdom. The author of Wisdom may have believed in a single final judgement, but this is not what is described in Wisdom 1–5.233 The judgement of the kings of the earth and the exaltation of the righteous is something more mundane. As will be argued234, whenever a judge or king loses his throne, and is killed, readers of Wisdom could claim that the persecuted of their community had been elevated to cosmic kingship (5:14–23). Such a reading is demanded by the example of the Exodus-Numbers narrative and the experience of the patriarchs (Wis 10). Both of these witness to the consis-

229 Collins, ‘Reinterpretation’, 152–53. 230 Murphy, The Tree of Life, 112–21. 231 George, W. E. Nickelsburg, 1 Enoch 1: a Commentary on the Book of 1 Enoch, Chapters 1– 36; 81–108, Hermeneia (Minneapolis: Fortress, 2001), 40–42. 232 Cf. above, 7.2.7 Astral Immortality. 233 On the final judgement in 4QInstruction, M. J. Goff, Discerning Wisdom, 44–47. 234 Cf. below, 7.6.4 The Visitation of God.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

Jewish Texts and Theology in Wisdom

173

tent salvific and cosmological behaviour of Sophia.235 Eschatology is realized in Wisdom in the actual downfall of the political leaders of the day by the working of Sophia through the creation. The downfall of the wicked is conceptualized in an inverse relationship to the exaltation of righteous souls. These are elevated to a participation in the just ordering of the cosmos (3:8– 9). This is not the end of the world, but simply evidence of God’s ongoing exaltation of his people (19:22). 7.5.5.5 Resurrection While 1 Enoch and Daniel might place hope in a future judgement and in the planned workings of the divine court, within Wisdom there is a refusal to expel hope from this world. The order of things is such that the wicked will find their plans foiled by the workings of creation. Such a hope in the goodness and persistence of creation might be thought to imply a belief in bodily resurrection.236 Wisdom does not, however, explicitly envisage this. There is also, within the apocalypses, a reutilization of the pattern of language of persecution, divine vindication and exaltation that envisages the eschatological conclusion as not involving a restoration to the body (2 Macc 7) but an ascension to an astral immortality.237 In Daniel 12:1–3 there can be found, provocatively, both patterns of language.238 Wisdom’s stance towards this can best be understood by reflecting again on the nature of its transformation of eschatological language. If it is the case that the language of eschatological judgement is used to describe the exaltation of the righteous over their oppressors at the moment of their oppressors’ death239, their waiting in

235 See above, 2. The Unity of Wisdom to 4. Creation and Matter. This is also the conclusion of Passaro, whose chapter only became available at the conclusion of the composition of this work. He too argues that the Stoic conceptualization of creation in Wisdom means that the apocalyptic imagery of Wisdom must not simply be taken to be part of an apocalyptic world-view that understands history to be ‘the sphere of evil’ (‘Cosmology and Music’, 121). 236 Wright, The Resurrection, 162–75; Larcher (Études, 321–27) asks whether the confrontation of 4:20–5:23, which involves sight and recognition, must involve bodily resurrection and also whether the physical execution of judgement (5:17–23) must also involve a return to the body for the wicked. On this last point, it seems at points that a lack of clarity over the literary structure of Wisdom 1–6 leads Larcher to the assumption of a chronologically linear succession of events in Wisdom 5 (323–24), which does confuse matters. On the first point, Larcher is very much aware of the Hellenistic nature of Wisdom’s physical theories and the possibility of ‘resurrection’ being conceived in terms of a matter that was more pure and subtle than earthly bodies (327). 237 Hengel, Judaism and Hellenism, 196–202; Nickelsburg, Resurrection, 113. Cf. above, 7.2.7 Astral Immortality. On the similarities with 4QInstruction, Collins, ‘The Mysteries of God’, 291–99. 238 Nickelsburg, Resurrection, 107. 239 Cf. below, 7.6.4 The Visitation of God.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

174

Personal Eschatology and Immortality in Wisdom

peace concluded (3:3), then Wisdom can have no use for the language of bodily resurrection, because it would deny the present action of God on behalf of the righteous. Every time an oppressive king or politician loses his position of power and dies, the sage could rejoice. His dead colleagues who had suffered under the present regime have been exalted and are exercising their rule over creation. Bodily resurrection certainly involves an affirmation of the physical, but such a hope involves a radical restoration of creation from a transcendent realm. It is not the natural conclusion of this cosmos’ workings. Wisdom, therefore, has no use for it. 7.5.6 Conclusion Wisdom’s use of the texts of Isaiah, Psalm 2 and apocalyptic material demonstrates traditional Jewish convictions that have been distinctively shaped by the Hellenistic context. The pattern of persecution and divine vindication found in Isaiah demands both that God’s care extend beyond the grave and also that a reversal of the circumstances of the persecution should occur. This reversal is associated in Isaiah with national hope and the restoration of Zion. Wisdom translates any hope in the restoration of Zion into a hope for God’s people considered independently of any geographical location, but the warnings against those who oppress God’s people and oppose his servant are taken up more directly. The glorification of God’s people is to be closely associated with the punishment of their enemies. Psalm 2 authorizes Wisdom to identify God’s people as true royalty in direct contrast to the positions of those who oppress them. The nature of the use of the son of man motif in Wisdom is difficult to specify, despite the common use of the motifs of kingship and light in the glorification God’s ‘holy ones’. The figure most likely appears as another symbolic depiction of the people of God. Wisdom shares with apocalyticism the tension between appearances and reality which will be resolved in time. Wisdom, however, has a greater confidence in the nature of the cosmos, working to execute divine judgement in response to human actions. This is derived from traditional Jewish beliefs in creation that draw on Genesis and Proverbs and that have been reconceptualized through engagement with Stoicism.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

The Identity of the Righteous One

175

7.6 The Identity of the Righteous One and Realized Eschatology in Wisdom 1–6 7.6.1 Introduction The purpose of this section is two-fold. Firstly, the character of the righteous individual within the first part of the Book of Wisdom must be investigated. Is this individual a real figure, a type, or both? What relationship does he have to the reader, the seeker of Sophia? The second question follows from the first and concerns the nature of the eschatology in these chapters. The background of this language has already been discussed240, and it can now be stated plainly that these chapters contain personal eschatological language, as well as a strong affirmation of the role of the cosmos in God’s judgements. Scholars of Wisdom have drawn these two elements together, in order to speak of a coming of God to the world in a climactic moment of judgement and salvation.241 It will be argued that this conclusion is mistaken, and that judgement in Wisdom is an ongoing, present reality – a realized eschatology. In summary then, this section seeks to assess the nature and role of the characters and events described in Wisdom 1–6. As a necessarily preliminary study, the literary structure of Wisdom 1–6 will now be reviewed, before turning to consider in more detail the contents of the individual sections.

7.6.2 The Literary Structure of Wisdom 1–6 Wisdom is composed ‘with intricate parallel and concentric contexts which mediate a concrete argument’.242 In addressing the question of the identity of the righteous in Wisdom 1–6 it will, consequently, be important to pay close attention to the literary structure of the section which provides a ‘richer stock of imagery and relations with which to appreciate the work’.243 The provision of an original assessment of the literary structure of Wisdom 1–6 would be no small undertaking and require more space than this work would allow. Instead, the following will follow closely the expert work of A. G. Wright and Michael Kolarcik.244 240 Cf. above, 7.3 Immortality, Incorruptibility and the Soul in Wisdom, 7.4 The Question of Death and Mortality throughout Wisdom and 7.5 Jewish Texts and Theology in Wisdom. 241 For example, William Horbury, ‘The Wisdom of Solomon’, in John Barton/John Muddiman (ed.), The Oxford Bible Commentary (Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2001) 650– 67, on p. 657; Engel, Das Buch der Weisheit, 108–9; Winston, The Wisdom of Solomon, 144– 50. Cf. below, pp. 191–93. 242 Kolarcik, Ambiguity of Death, x. 243 Ibid., xi. 244 A. G. Wright, ‘The Structure of the Book of Wisdom’; Kolarcik, Ambiguity of Death, 1991.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

176

Personal Eschatology and Immortality in Wisdom

These chapters have a concentric arrangement. Wright notes the parallel between the speech of the wicked and the author’s comment in 2:1–24 and the speech of the wicked and the author’s comment in 5:4–23.245 In addition, the address and exhortation to the judges of the earth is paralleled by 6:1–21 with exhortation to the kings and judges of the earth. The section is formed thus: A

A’

1:1–15 B 1:16–2:24 C 3:1–4:20 B’ 5:1–23 6:1–21

In addition, the first section, 1:1–15, is delimited by an inclusion of δικαιοσύνην / δικαιοσύνη.246 The first subunit (v. 1 δικαιοσύνην / v. 5 ἀδικίας) is

dominated by terms antithetical to this ‘righteousness’ which provide reasons for following the exhortation of the first verse (1:3, 4, 5). Verses six to eleven (γλῶσσα) form the second subunit and allude to a court situation in which the hidden thoughts and words of the wicked will be brought to light.247 The final subunit in verses twelve to fifteen is appropriately bounded by θάνατον / ἀθάνατος. and discusses the relationship of God, creation and humanity to life and death.248 The second section, 1:16–2:24, is delimited by mirrored authorial comments (τῆς ἐκείνου μερίδος εἶναι / τῆς ἐκείνου μερίδος ὄντες) and the emphasis on the false reasoning (v. 1 λογισάμενοι / v. 21 ἐλογίσαντο) of the wicked.249 After the initial comment, the detail of the reasoning is considered, as it applies to the story of the oppression of a righteous individual. This central subsection consists of four subunits. The first, 2:1–5, contains the wicked’s reflection on the finality of death and the futility of life. The phrase ὁ βίος ἡμῶν recurs in 2:1, 4 and τελευτή in 2:1, 5 with a repeated assertion of the impossibility of a return from one’s ‘end’. Kolarcik also points out the emotive repetition (eight times) throughout this unit of the first person plural possessive pronoun attached to transitory elements of human life.250 The second subunit (2:6–11) is indicated by the inclusion (χρησώμεθα / ἄχρηστον)251 and dwells on the ethical consequences of the

245 A. G. Wright, ‘The Structure of the Book of Wisdom’, 170. 246 Ibid.; Kolarcik, Ambiguity of Death, 34. 247 Kolarcik, Ambiguity of Death, 35. 248 For an additional detailed study of the themes and structure of this section, cf. Friedrich V. Reiterer, ‘Philosophische Lehre und deren Wirkung aus der Sicht eines Weisheitslehrers. Untersuchung von Weish 1:1–15’, in Géza G. Xeravits/József Zsengellér (ed.), Studies in the Book of Wisdom, SJSJ, vol. 142 (Leiden: Brill, 2010), 125–62. 249 A. G. Wright, ‘The Structure of the Book of Wisdom’, 170–71. Kolarcik, Ambiguity of Death, 39–41. 250 Kolarcik, Ambiguity of Death, 40. 251 A. G. Wright, ‘The Structure of the Book of Wisdom’, 170.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

The Identity of the Righteous One

177

previously discussed futility of life. The wicked exhort themselves to ‘use’ as much of that which exists as their strength enables them. In contrast the weak, the righteous, the widow and the elderly are of little ‘use’ for the strong and their oppression is therefore justified. The third and fourth subunits in 2:12–20 become more specific as the reasoning of the oppressor is applied to a plan to attack τὸν δίκαιον. Verses twelve to sixteen focus on this righteous man (v. 12 τὸν δίκαιον / v. 16 δικαίων) who ‘professes to have knowledge of God’ (v. 13) and ‘boasts’ of his relationship to God (v. 16). Verses seventeen to twenty are delimited by οἱ λόγοι αὐτοῦ and contain the stated intention of the wicked to test whether the righteous man’s claims of divine sonship carry with them the reality of divine protection. Wright recognizes 3:1–4:20 as a difficult section to structure.252 Sections dealing with the just and the wicked alternate, but he makes most of a sequence of topics drawn from Isaiah LXX. Consequently, he concludes that there are three paragraphs: 3:1–12 (3:2 ἀφρόνων / 3:12 ἄφρονες; note also the repetition of ἡ ἐλπὶς αὐτῶν in 3:4, 11 and the repeated use of λογίζομαι in 3:2, 10); 3:13–4:6 (καρπὸν / 4:5 καρπὸς; 3:14 πονηρά / πονηρίας) and 4:7–20 (4:8 τίμιον / 4:19 ἄτιμον). Kolarcik follows Wright’s analysis, but organizes the alternating treatment of the just and the wicked more thoroughly and divides the middle comparison (3:13–4:6) into two further subsections.253 The first comparison (3:1–12) deals with the just from verses one to nine and the wicked from ten to twelve. The repetition of ἡ ἐλπὶς αὐτῶν (3:4, 11) in each section focusses the comparison between the immortal hope of the righteous and the empty hope of the godless whose wives are foolish and children evil. The middle comparison of Wright, which Kolarcik expands, is 3:13– 4:6.254 The first subsection (3:13–19) contrasts the blameless barren woman and the guiltless eunuch with the ‘children of adulterers’. The first-half of this diptych is bounded by the phrases οὐκ ἔγνω κοίτην ἐν παραπτώματι (v. 13) and ἐκ παρανόμου κοίτης σπέρμα ἀφανισθήσεται (v. 16) and possibly also the repetition of καρπὸς (vv. 13, 15). The second half of this diptych is delimited by (v. 16) ἀτέλεστα / (v. 19) τὰ τέλη (for once not noted by Kolarcik) which points to the purposeless and grievous end of the progeny of the unrighteous. This diptych as a whole is encapsulated by the similar idea expressed by (v. 13) ἐν ἐπισκοπῇ ψυχῶν / (v. 18) ἐν ἡμέρα διαγνώσεως. The second subsection (4:1–6), contrasts childlessness (ἀτεκνία) and virtue with the ‘prolific brood of the ungodly’ (v. 3) who will be of no use

252 A. G. Wright, ‘The Structure of the Book of Wisdom’, 171. 253 Kolarcik, Ambiguity of Death, 41–44. 254 A. G. Wright, ‘The Structure of the Book of Wisdom’, Kolarcik, Ambiguity of Death, 43.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

178

Personal Eschatology and Immortality in Wisdom

(χρησιμεύσει). It is drawn to a close with the inverted repetition of τέκνα in 4:6. The final subsection (Wright’s third, Kolarcik’s fourth; 4:7–20)255 compares an individual, well-pleasing to God, who is taken (v. 10) early in life in order to protect him from the corrupting influence of a sinful society (v. 11), and the violent end of the godless (vv. 19–20). The key organizational point is to be found in 4:16256, although this admittedly leaves 4:17–20 without a clearly defined structural position: the repetition of the words δίκαιος (vv. 7, 16), τελευτῆσαι (v. 7) / τελεσθεῖσα (v. 16) / τελευτὴν (v. 17), γῆρας (vv. 8, 16) all direct attention to the differing experiences, fates and perceptions of the just and the wicked. The unrighteous will not see the true end of the wise, but will rather despise them. In contrast, the dead righteous will condemn the godless living. Chapter 5 forms the complementary B’ section to B (1:16–2:24), marked by the inclusion στήσεται / ἀντιστήσεται. The section begins in a new and specific context (τότε, 5:1) and describes the future judgement which the wicked of Chapter 2 will face.257 Three subunits can be discerned. Firstly, an introduction depicts the new confrontation of the formerly oppressed individual with his oppressors (vv. 1–3). Secondly, the wicked 5:4–13(14) speak in parallel to the philosophising of 2:1–20. This subunit is demarcated by a repetition of (v. 4, 13) ἔσχομεν and possibly by (v. 4) οὗτος / (v. 13) οὕτως.258 Initially the wicked had held ‘this one’ in derision. Now they realize that they never had any virtue to show. Within this speech, 5:4–5 reverses the oppressors’ perception of the righteous one. Next, verses six to eight contain the oppressors’ more general reflection on their own attitudes and actions. In verses nine to thirteen the transience of their life and hope is laid bare in the face of imminent judgement. These three parts of the speech of the wicked travel through in reverse order the themes of their speech in Chapter 2.259 The transience of their lives and hopes (5:9–13) ironically confirms their earlier conclusions (2:1–5). The more general discussion of their lawless lifestyle in 5:6–8 forms a parallel with the ethical programme of 2:6– 11. Finally, the recognition of the individual whom they persecuted forms the complement to the plan to oppress in 2:12–20. Verse fourteen appears to have a transitional purpose. It succinctly summarizes the preceding speech, while continuing the repetitive use of ὡς, at the same time as beginning an inclusion which will stretch to verse 5:23 (λαῖλαψ).

255 A. G. Wright, ‘The Structure of the Book of Wisdom’, 171–72; Kolarcik, Ambiguity of Death, 44. 256 Kolarcik, Ambiguity of Death, 44. 257 Kolarcik, Ambiguity of Death, 54–55. 258 Kolarcik, Ambiguity of Death, 45. 259 Kolarcik, Ambiguity of Death, 54–55.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

The Identity of the Righteous One

179

The final section of the chapter (5:15–23260) begins in 5:15–16 with a contrasting reminder of the state of the righteous ones who ‘live for ever’ and who will receive kingly accompaniments (5:16). In 5:17–20, the arming of God with the weapons and armour of zeal, righteousness, justice, holiness, and severe wrath is described. The section is reminiscent of Isaiah 59:16– 19.261 The following verse of Isaiah, with its potential to be read messianically and its reference to Zion, is not drawn upon.262 Verses twenty-one to twenty-three predict the final destruction of the wicked. The emphasis on creation as his instrument of judgement recalls 1:14263 and paves the way for the summation of Chapter 6 which repeats and extends the exhortations of the book’s first verses. The next large section, 6:1–21264, addresses the kings and judges of the earth. The relationship of these kings to those who were laid waste in the previous chapter is not made explicit. The implication of ‘therefore’ (οὖν; v. 1), however, grounds the exhortation in the preceding passage and is repeated at verses nine, eleven and twenty-one creating the sense of a unified and extended plea. The unit is delimited by (v. 1) βασιλεῖς / (v. 21) βασιλεύσητε, and its subsections are found at verses one to eight, (v. 2) κρατοῦντες / (v. 3) κράτησις / (v. 8) κραταιοῖς, verses nine to eleven, (v. 9, 11) λόγων μου, and verses twelve to twenty-one (v. 12) ἡ σοφία / (v. 21) σοφίαν. The first section (vv. 1–8) is essentially a warning to those with power that their position is a gift from God (v. 3) and that therefore they are to live lawfully and judge rightly (v. 4). The correct response is detailed in the second section (vv. 9–11) and involves the learning of wisdom, which in turn is associated with the words of the authorial sage (v. 11). The final section, 6:12–21, begins the description of the seeker’s relationship to Sophia. Within it is contained a section on Sophia’s qualities (vv. 12–16), the sorites that explains how Sophia leads to a kingdom (vv. 17–20), and a final summary verse. The concluding verses of Chapter 6 include a change to a use of direct speech and this, with the inclusion which closes at verse twenty, strongly suggests that a new section has begun.265 The content of the seventh to ninth chapters is not completely divorced from the content of Chapter 6. There is no reason to expect a stark division between the two sections and so natu-

260 A. G. Wright, ‘The Structure of the Book of Wisdom’, 172. 261 Kolarcik, ‘Book of Wisdom’, 486. 262 Rom 11:26–27. On the ‘redeemer’ of this verse, A. Rofé, ‘Isaiah 59:19 and Trito-Isaiah’s Vision of Redemption’, in J. Vermeylen (ed.), The Book of Isaiah, le Livre d’Isaïe: les oracles et leurs relectures, unité et complexité de l’ouvrage, BETL 81 (Leuven: Leuven University Press, 1989) 407–10; cf. William Horbury, Messianism among Jews and Christians (London: T&T Clark, 2003) 44 (cf. 190). 263 Kolarcik, ‘Book of Wisdom’, 486. 264 Kolarcik, Ambiguity of Death, 48–50; A. G. Wright, ‘The Structure of the Book of Wisdom’, 172–73. 265 Kolarcik, Ambiguity of Death, 52.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

180

Personal Eschatology and Immortality in Wisdom

rally there is thematic overlap with regard to the discussion of kings and Sophia.266

7.6.3 The Righteous in Wisdom 1–6 7.6.3.1 Introduction The characters that Wisdom uses, from Solomon to the figures in the tenth chapter267, from Enoch to Aaron are all taken from the Bible. At the same time, no figure is actually named.268 This raises two issues. Firstly, if all other characters of Wisdom are identifiable figures of the Bible, who is the righteous individual in Wisdom 2, 5? Secondly, if it is the case that the anonymity of the characters of Wisdom serves to emphasize their role in a unified picture of salvation269, is this also the case with the righteous individual?

7.6.3.2 A Messianic Figure? Christian interpreters of Wisdom have argued that the figure of the righteous individual in Wisdom 2, 5 should be understood as a type or prophecy of Jesus Christ.270 Some of these readers have therefore understood the righteous individual as a messiah.271 It is widely recognized today that there was no single, fixed Jewish doctrine of a messiah in the second-temple period.272 Instead, there are various expectations of a coming ‘anointed’273 ‘pre-eminent ruler’274 who would redeem Israel. The language of anointing finds its origins in the practice of anointing prophets, priests and kings in the Hebrew Bible275 and expectation in later texts can be focused on a Davidic, royal 266 Kolarcik, Ambiguity of Death, 52–53. 267 Cf. above, 2.3.2 An Exposition of Wisdom 10. 268 On anonymity, see above p. 48 fn. 64. 269 Cf. above, 2.3 The Unified Picture of Salvation – Wisdom 10. 270 For a typically thorough overview, see Larcher, Le Livre de la Sagesse i, 258–60. 271 The primary correspondences include the identification of the individual as ‘son of God’ (2:16, 18) and the naming of God as ‘father’ (Wis 2:16; Matt 11:27), the testing of these words (2:17) in his torture and murder (2:19–20; Matt 27:39–43): Larcher, Le Livre de la Sagesse i, 258. 272 Martin Hengel/Daniel P. Bailey, ‘The Effective History of Isaiah 53 in the Pre-Christian Period’, in Bernd Janowski/Peter Stuhlmacher (ed.), The Suffering Servant (Cambridge: Eerdmans, 2004) 75–146, on p. 103; Sean Freyne, ‘The Herodian Period’, in Markus Bockmuehl/James Carleton Paget (ed.), Redemption and Resistance (London: T&T Clark, 2007) 29–43, on p. 29. 273 On the derivation of the term ‘messiah’, a transliteration of the Hebrew ‫ח‬ ַ ‫שׁי‬ ִ ‫מ‬ ָ , the Greek equivalent of which is χριστός, ‘one who is smeared or anointed’, C. A. Evans, ‘Messianism’, in Craig A. Evans/Stanley E. Porter (ed.) The Dictionary of New Testament Background (Leicester: Inter-Varsity, 2000) 698–707, on pp. 698–99. 274 Joachim Schaper, ‘The Persian Period’, in Markus Bockmuehl/James Carleton Paget (ed.), Redemption and Resistance (London: T&T Clark, 2007) 3–14, on p. 3. 275 Evans, ‘Messianism’, 698–99.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

The Identity of the Righteous One

181

ruler (e. g. Pss. Sol. 17) – a ‘branch of David’ (e. g. 4Q174 frags. 1–3 i 11), a ‘sceptre’ (e. g. 4Q161 frags. 2–6 ii 17; CD vii 18–21) and even a ‘Son of God’ (4Q246 1.9, 2.1)276. Not all texts that speak of such a figure use the word ‘anointed’.277 Within the Dead Sea Scrolls there is a hope for two messiahs, one priestly and one royal (1QS ix 9:11)278, the former of which may also be termed an ‘instructor’ or ‘interpreter of the Law’.279 A further messianic possibility, probably mentioned first in the Babylonian Talmud (Suk. 52a-b)280, which may also be relevant for our period is the Messiah ben Joseph whose struggle, possible exile, and death precedes the coming of a Davidic Messiah.281 The particular kind of messianic idea that is most relevant to Wisdom, however, is identified by Nickelsburg in the Similitudes of Enoch as that of a ‘transcendent heavenly figure’.282 This reworks earlier parts of the Enoch corpus283 to create a composite figure of the Son of Man (Dan 7), the Davidic king (Isa 11; Ps 2) and Isaiah 40–55 who is variously titled ‘the Chosen One’ (e. g. 1 En. 49:4), ‘the Righteous One’ (e. g. 1 En. 38:2) and the ‘Anointed One’ (1 En. 48:10; 52:4). This figure is ‘the pre-eminent agent of judgement’ in the heavenly court284, who judges the ‘kings and the mighty’ (1 En. 62– 63) who have themselves persecuted God’s righteous people (1 En. 46:8).285 It is also possible that this transcendent judging figure should be identified with the persecuted, righteous individual, Enoch.286 276 C. A. Evans, ‘Son of God Text’, in Craig A. Evans/Stanley E. Porter (ed.) The Dictionary of New Testament Background (Leicester: Inter-Varsity, 2000) 1134–37. 277 Evans, ‘Messianism’, 702. 278 This is likely derived from texts such as Jer 33:15–18 and Zech 4:14 and possibly triggered by the Hasmonean combination of political and priestly leadership. Evans, ‘Messianism’, 703; Jan Willem van Henten, ‘The Hasmonean Period’, in Markus Bockmuehl/James Carleton Paget (ed.), Redemption and Resistance (London: T&T Clark, 2007) 15–28, on p. 26. 279 1 Qsb 5:20; CD vii 18–21; van Henten, ‘The Hasmonean Period’, 26. 280 Joachim Schaper, Eschatology in the Greek Psalter, Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament: Reihe 2; 76 (Tübingen: J. C. B. Mohr, 1995), 120. 281 For further bibliography and discussion of the roles of such a messiah, see David. C. Mitchell, ‘A Dying and Rising Josephite Messiah in 4Q372’, JSP, vol. 18, no. 3 (2009) 181–205, on pp. 201–05. For the presence of this tradition in 4Q372, see Mitchell, ‘Josephite Messiah’. For the presence of traces of this figure in the LXX Pentateuch, see Schaper, Eschatology, 107–26, especially p. 120. 282 George W. E. Nickelsburg, ‘Salvation without and with a Messiah: Developing Beliefs in Writings Ascribed to Enoch’, in Jacob Neusner/William Scott Green/Ernest S. Frerichs (ed.), Judaisms and Their Messiahs at the Turn of the Christian Era (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1987) 49–68, on pp. 58–62 is discussed by Freyne, ‘The Herodian Period’, 41–42. Cf. Nickelsburg, Resurrection, 284–90. 283 Nickelsburg, ‘Salvation’, 62–64. 284 Ibid., 62. 285 Ibid., 57. 286 Compare 1 En. 46:3; 71:14; Nickelsburg (‘Salvation’, 64) is cautious on this point, as is J. J. Collins (‘Enoch and the Messiah Son of Man: A Response to Sabino Chialà and Helge Kvanig’, in Gabriele Boccaccini (ed.), Enoch and the Messiah Son of Man: Revisiting the Book of Parables (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2007) 216–27, on. pp. 221–27); part of the evidence

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

182

Personal Eschatology and Immortality in Wisdom

The connections between this figure and that of the righteous individual should now be obvious: the career of the righteous one in Wisdom follows that of the servant of Isaiah 53287 and he is described as a ‘son of God’.288 Wisdom’s eschatology is formulated in terms of the elevation of the righteous to cosmic kingship with an emphasis on a judging function (3:8; 5:16).289 It also draws on the language of Daniel as well as the earlier material of 1 Enoch.290 Qualifications to these observations, however, do need to be added. To begin with, the phrase ‘son of man’ does not occur in Wisdom.291 Nor is the righteous one of Wisdom described as ‘anointed’. Further, although the question of the identity of the Son of Man in the Similitudes is disputed292, it is evident that the great emphasis of his career is on his transcendent, judging role, and the selective use of the ‘exalted’ sections of Isaiah 52:13–53:12 reflect this.293 It is rather the righteous (pl. e. g. 1 En. 46:8) who fulfil a suffering role.294 In Wisdom, one might almost say

involves the witness of Wisdom. On the textual questions and for further bibliography, Daniel C. Olson, “‘Enoch and the Son of Man’ Revisited: Further Reflections on the Text and Translation of 1 Enoch 70.1–2”, JSP, vol. 18, no. 3 (2009) 233–240. 287 See above, 7.5.2 Isaiah. Note that although the fourth Servant Song has been foundational to the thought and ideas of these chapters, any notion of vicarious suffering (Isa 53:4–5) is absent (Hengel/Bailey, ‘The Effective History’, 119–31, 146), although significantly, it is absent as well from the motif of the ‘transcendent messiah’ (Ibid., 99–101) and Nickelsburg’s ‘wisdom tale’ (Resurrection, 83–88; also cf. above, 7.5.4 Enoch, Daniel and the Son of Man). 288 On ‘son of God’ above, 7.5.3 Psalm 2. The combination of the roles of the Servant of Isaiah and the son of God are centred on the application to him of the description παῖς κυρίου (Wis 2:13; Ziener, Die theologische Begriffsprache, 85). This is the term used in Isaiah 52:13 LXX for the Servant of the Lord, although in Wisdom 2 a more appropriate translation might be ‘child’, given the parallel statement in 2:16 that he ‘boasts that God is his father’ and similarly in 5:5 (the structurally parallel passage, see above, 7.6.2 The Literary Structure of Wisdom 1–6) where the wicked are astonished that the righteous one has been ‘numbered amongst the sons of God’ (κατελογίσθη ἐν υἱοις θεοῦ). Note also Ziener’s (Die theologische Begriffsprache, 33–97) discussion of the relevance of Ps 88 LXX, and in particular the identification in 88:21 of David as the Lord’s servant (ibid., 85; here δοῦλος rather than παῖς). It may also be significant, in terms of the use of pattern found in the Similitudes, that in 88:4 God addresses his ‘chosen ones’ (τοῖς ἐκλεκτοῖς μου; Ziener, Die theologische Begriffsprache, 85). Elsewhere in Wisdom the Israelites are also described as being God’s sons (9:7; 12:19, 21; 16:10, 26; 18:4, 13). The last reference in the preceding list is of note because in it God’s people in a collective sense are termed with the singular ‘God’s son’ (ὡμολόγησαν θεοῦ υἱὸν λαὸν εἶναι). It would be wise not to place too much stress on this, but it is at least thought-provoking that this usage occurs. The notion of son of God, then, need not be ‘royal’, although Larcher (Le Livre de la Sagesse i, 260) argues that in the Old Testament, when applied to an individual, this title always occurs in a messianic (for this, we can read royal) context. 289 1 En. 49:2–4; Nickelsburg, ‘Salvation’, 60. 290 See above, 7.5.4 Enoch, Daniel and the Son of Man. 291 Nickelsburg, Resurrection, 289. 292 Cf. above, fn. 289. 293 Hengel/Bailey, ‘The Effective History’, 99–101. 294 Ibid., 100.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

The Identity of the Righteous One

183

the opposite is the case, in that it is the righteous individual who suffers, but key texts that speak of immortal kingship envisage that fate for the righteous ones (3:8; 5:16). Where royal language is alluded to with regard to the righteous one, he remains in his persecuted state (2:13, 16, 18). In the confrontation of the righteous individual with his oppressors (5:1–13), the emphasis is on the righteous one’s vindication (and the confession of the wicked) rather than his own exalted judging role.295 It can also be noted that the primary agent of judgement in Wisdom 5:16–23 is God, the ‘divine warrior’, not an exalted servant figure.296 Where humans take on an eschatological judging role, it is as a group and not the sole responsibility of the righteous one of Chapter Two.297 In summary, Wisdom uses the same set of biblical passages and motifs, centred around a similar narrative of the persecution and vindication of the righteous298, as that found in the Similitudes. When analysed more closely, however, the roles vary of the righteous one, the righteous people, and God. It is especially noticeable that the righteous individual has no judging or kingly role that is unique to him. The stress is laid in Wisdom on these functions belonging to God (5:15–23) and to all the righteous (3:8).299 7.6.3.3 The Relationship Between the Righteous One and the Righteous Ones Wisdom 2–5, then, shifts its focus at various points from the righteous individual (e. g. 2:20) to the righteous considered as a group (e. g. 3:1). The use of the word ‘righteous’ to describe the follower of God first occurs in Wisdom in 2:10 (δίκαιον: note this is singular, with no article) as the first element of a triplet of targets, which the wicked exhort themselves to oppress. The verse sits within the second of the five subsections of 1:16–2:24.300 The focus of this second unit is a generalized ethical reflection on the prior discussion of the futility of life.301 It begins with encouragement to hedonism and concludes with the decision to oppress the weak because strength or might is their ‘law of righteousness’ (v. 11).302 This use of δίκαιος is something of a false start for our purposes because the persecuted individual of 2:12–20/

295 Kolarcik, ‘Book of Wisdom’, 484–85. Note also the conclusion of VII.5.4 above, that the figure of the ‘son of man’ cannot easily be identified with the righteous one. 296 Horbury, Messianism, 42. 297 Cf. below, p. 188. 298 Nickelsburg’s (Resurrection, 66–118) wisdom tale. 299 Cf. Heinz-Josef Fabry, ‘Die Messianologie der Weisheitsliteratur in LXX’, in M. A. Knibb (ed.), The Septuagint and Messianism (Leuven: Leuven University Press/Peeters, 2006) 263– 89, on p. 277. 300 See above, p. 176. 301 Winston, The Wisdom of Solomon, 113–23. 302 Cf. above, p. 145.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

184

Personal Eschatology and Immortality in Wisdom

5:1–23 has yet to appear.303 However, the presence of the adjective, in combination with the widow and the elderly, points one to the argument more generally, that faulty reasoning leads to theological and ethical mistakes. This can be seen explicitly in the parenthetical authorial comments in 2:1a, 21: For they said amongst themselves, not having reasoned rightly (2:1a; εἶπον γὰρ ἐν

ἑαυτοῖς λογισάμενοι οὐκ ὀρθῶς)

Thus they reasoned, but they were misled, for their wickedness blinded them. (2:21; Ταῦτα ἐλογίσαντο, καὶ ἐπλανήθησαν· ἀπετύφλωσεν γὰρ αὐτοὺς ἡ κακία αὐτῶν)

Consequently, the action of the wicked in attacking the righteous individual is understood to be one instance of a type of behaviour which is characteristic of all who fail to perceive the true natures of life and death. This conclusion is affirmed by Nickelsburg in his discussion of the righteous individual as a reworking of an earlier ‘wisdom tale’ tradition according to the form of Isaiah’s fourth servant song.304 The figure within the ‘wisdom tale’ (Wis 2, 4–5) acts as a particular instance, a type305, of oppression and vindication of the more generalized fate of the righteous (pl.) in Wisdom 3:7–8.306 This conclusion is consistent with the recognition made above (7.6.3.2 A Messianic Figure?) that Wisdom is concerned to ascribe to all the righteous, the exalted hope of cosmic kingship, vindication and an agency of judgement. 7.6.3.4 The Sage and the Nation When speaking of the present, the author of Wisdom avoids the term ‘people of God’: humanity is not categorized primarily as nations, but as the wise righteous and the foolish wicked.307 This categorization is achieved not only by the binary use of terms throughout the book but also by the place of right argument as an ethical duty (see the preceding section): the failure to understand leads to judgement (Wis 2:1, 21). Because salvation rests upon an individual’s right understanding, Wisdom offers an individualized and thus a universalized Jewish faith.308 Things are not so clear, however, and it is hard not to see nationalistic implications preserved in the Exodus narrative: when Wisdom 10:15 describes the Israelites as ‘a holy people’ (λαὸν ὅσιον) and the Egyptians are 303 Larcher, Le Livre de la Sagesse i, 236–37. 304 Nickelsburg, Resurrection, 67–90. 305 Larcher, Le Livre de la Sagesse i, 239, 258–63. 306 Nickelsburg, Resurrection, 82. 307 Ziener, Die theologische Begriffsprache, 83–84; 122. 308 Ziener (Die theologische Begriffsprache, 113–15) discusses how Sophia is identified with the spirit of God (Ezek 36:27), thus bringing individual conversion, but also how she is given the royal characteristics of the king in Ps 2:8, thus apparently ensuring that the notion of a kingdom of God remains removed from the nationally political. On the universal tendency of Wisdom, see Winston’s (Wisdom of Solomon, 43–46) discussion of the description of Sophia as ‘humane, benevolent’ (1:6; 7:23; φιλάνθρωπος).

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

The Identity of the Righteous One

185

termed ‘a nation of oppressors’ (ἔθνους θλιβόντων), or when the ancient inhabitants of the holy land (12:3) are described as having an evil origin (12:10; πονηρὰ ἡ γένεσις αὐτῶν) and that they were ‘an accursed race from the beginning’ (12:11; σπέρμα γὰρ ἦν κατηραμένον ἀπ᾽ ἀρχης), it is plain that the work is comfortable in propagating characterizations of whole nations.309 It would appear then, that Wisdom operates with something of a tension between its belief in the universality of Sophia and the difficulties of life in Alexandria.310 Nonetheless, when discussing salvation in the present, Wisdom’s understanding of Sophia leads to modes of discussion centred around the individual, their beliefs and choices. A related issue involves Wisdom’s attitude toward the Mosaic law, which had the potential in Judaism to be both a source of division between themselves and Gentiles311 as well as a means of rapprochement312. The question of the nature the law, perhaps in the face of Sophia’s universal nature, recedes into the background in Wisdom.313 The exact nature of ‘the law’ is not specified in the work.314 To summarize, the people of God in the present, and therefore the righteous, are defined primarily by their individual relationship to Sophia and so to God, and secondarily by their attitude towards the law and Jewish identity. The recognition of this has significance for our understanding of the righteous individual in Wisdom 2, 5 in that there is no necessary role for him in the eschatological salvation of the righteous. He is, therefore, a biblical figure whose function is little different from any other in Wisdom. He is a further example of the unified picture of salvation through Sophia found throughout the book.315

7.6.3.5 Conclusion While it is likely that the figure of the righteous individual in Wisdom 2, 5 draws upon earlier attempts to link together different figures from different texts, such as the fourth Servant Song and Psalms 2 and 88, and while it is possible that these attempts were associated with a messianic hope such as 309 Alternatively, focussing on the benevolence of God, see McGlynn, Divine Judgement. 310 Cf. below, 8.4 The Jews in Alexandria in the Hellenistic Era. 311 For instance, consider Dunn’s (2005) notion of ‘boundary markers’. 312 This is the case when the law was understood as pre-eminently rational. In Philo’s case (Opif. 8), the law’s author, Moses, had reached the summits of philosophy and thus understood the rational structure of the universe. It was thus a source of true philosophy. Cf. the short discussion above on p. 145 f. and Winston (The Wisdom of Solomon, 36–37) on reason and the law in Aristobulus. 313 Relevant texts are 18:4 (it is through the Israelites that ‘the incorruptible light of the law was to be given to the world’); 6:17–19 (Sophia leads one to the learning and keeping of law and thus divine affirmation); 2:12; 4:6; 15:17; 17:2 (in which wickedness is linked to lawlessness). 314 It is not identified with Sophia as in Sirach (20:23). See above, p. 145. 315 Cf. above, 2.3 The Unified Picture of Salvation – Wisdom 10.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

186

Personal Eschatology and Immortality in Wisdom

found expression in the Similitudes of Enoch, none of this need be determinative for how the figure of the righteous individual should be understood in Wisdom. Within Wisdom, the righteous individual operates as a real, biblical, and possibly royal, figure whose fate is not essentially different from any of the other characters who illustrate the book.316 Like every other character in the book, he can be viewed as a type of its unified picture of salvation.317 His fate does not achieve anything on behalf of anyone else, neither by vicarious suffering nor by warfare.318 The righteous ones share his immortal fate as his peers and not as his subjects. Within Wisdom, the roles of rationality and Sophia have brought with them a new individuality in which the idea of the king as the focus of hope for the people is redundant. The royal hope of Wisdom is something all the people fully enjoy at first-hand. 7.6.4 The Visitation of God 7.6.4.1 Introduction The temporal sequence of the events in Wisdom 1–6 have been a standard matter of debate in the commentaries.319 Particularly in older comments, it is often not hard to see assumptions derived from Christian doctrine in the background of the analysis.320 The primary issue of confusion concerns the question of an end-time final judgement of cosmic scope depicted in 5:17– 23. Amongst other related issues is the concern whether a resurrection will

316 This is not to deny Larcher’s (Le Livre de la Sagesse i, 256) suggestion that the figure’s characterisation may also have been shaped by the Platonic ideal sage (Rep. 361E-362A), transposed into biblical motifs. Indeed, it would be typical of Wisdom for the one character to contain allusions to both frames of reference. Cf. J. J. Collins, ‘Apocalyptic Eschatology in Philosophical Dress in the Wisdom of Solomon’, in J. L. Kugel (ed.), Shem in the Tents of Japhet. Essays on the Encounter of Judaism and Hellenism (Leiden: Brill, 2002) 93–107. 317 Nickelsburg, Resurrection, 289. 318 Against Moyna McGlynn (‘Solomon, Wisdom and The Philosopher-Kings’, in Géza G. Xeravits/József Zsengellér (ed.), Studies in the Book of Wisdom, SJSJ, vol. 142 (Leiden: Brill, 2010) 61–81, on pp. 72, 77), his role in uniting the nation by his creation of a temple does not have a significant theological role in Wisdom: the temple features only twice (3:14; 9:8) and Solomon’s status as king and judge function primarily as a pattern for the eschatological position of all sages, as this section has argued. 319 Carl Ludwig Wilibald Grimm, Commentar über das Buch der Weisheit (Leipzig: Hochhausen und Fournes, 1837) 136–37; F. W. Farrar, ‘Wisdom’, in Henry Wace (ed.), The Holy Bible According to the Authorized Version (A. D. 1611), with an Explanatory and Critical Commentary and a Revision of the Translation, by Clergy of the Anglican Church, 2 vol. (London: Murray, 1888), i, 403–534, on pp. 403–534; J. A. F. Gregg, The Wisdom of Solomon, The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1909), 43–44; Goodrick, Book of Wisdom; Fichtner, Weisheit Salomos; Larcher, Le Livre de la Sagesse ii, 398; Winston, The Wisdom of Solomon, 32–33; Kolarcik, ‘The Book of Wisdom’, 435–600; Horbury, ‘Wisdom of Solomon’, 650–67. 320 For more detail, see below, pp. 191–93.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

The Identity of the Righteous One

187

take place in the time of this judgement321, and the nature of any intermediate state that might exist between the death of an individual and this final judgement.322 Most of the key elements of a reassessment of the eschatology of these chapters have already been laid in place in the preceding sections. All that is left is to bring them together in a discussion of the texts. This can be done by focussing on the concept of ‘visitation’ (ἐπισκοπή), a favoured word in Wisdom that is used to refer to God’s judging and rewarding presence.

7.6.4.2 The Use of Episkopē in Wisdom There are six uses of the word ἐπισκοπή in the Book of Wisdom: 2:20; 3:7; 3:13; 4:15; 14:11; 19:15. In each case the word refers to God’s judging and rewarding presence for humanity. In 2:20 the oppressors repeat their mocking suspicion (vv. 17–18) that the righteous one’s claim to be a divine son carries with it no divine protection. (20) θανάτι ἀσχήμονι καταδικάσωμεν αὐτόν, ἔσται γὰρ αὐτοῦ ἐπισκοπὴ ἐκ λόγων αὐτοῦ. (20) Let us condemn him to a shameful death, for his visitation will be according to his words.

The sentiment finds its ironic counterpart in 5:4–13 where the oppressors, after having come face-to-face with those they mocked, are forced to acknowledge that their arrogance and wealth has brought them no advantage.323 The confrontation must take place in a post-mortem environment because the righteous are already dead.324 One could assume that this confrontation takes place beyond a resurrection, possibly emphasizing the physical standing (ἵστημι) of the righteous in the presence of the wicked (5:1) or the wicked’s seeing (ὁράω) of the righteous (5:2), numbered amongst the divine sons and the holy ones (5:5). But it would then be appropriate to ask why such a startling event as a re-embodiment would not receive even a passing reference in a work which is so enthusiastic about the role of the created world in the purposes of God (1:12–15; 5:17–23; 19:6–21).325 It is more likely then that Wisdom assumes some form of conscious, angelic existence for the soul after death.326 If we are guided by the primary theological concerns of the book, only that existence necessary for the cosmic kingship of 3:7–8 and the confrontation of 5:1–14 should be accepted. 321 Raised most recently in N. T. Wright, The Resurrection, 162–75. Cf. above, 7.5.5.5 Resurrection. 322 Nickelsburg, Resurrection, 90; Winston, The Wisdom of Solomon, 125. 323 Cf. above, 7.6.2 The Literary Structure of Wisdom 1–6. 324 Nickelsburg (Resurrection, 90): this confrontation occurs after the death of the persecutors. 325 Cf. above, 7.5.5.5 Resurrection. 326 Cf. above, 6.4 Spirit in Philo and 7.2.7 Astral Immortality.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

188

Personal Eschatology and Immortality in Wisdom

The visitation of God is related to the confrontation of 5:1–14.327 In 2:20 the visitation is God’s coming to the aid of the righteous one. In Chapter 5, the righteous and the wicked have their statuses reversed and are brought into confrontation. The final state of the wicked is shadowy dishonour (5:9– 13): their hope was based not on God but on their wealth and power (5:8). Now, without these things, the nature of their existence is left to the imagination. In contrast, the status of the righteous one as son of God (2:13, 16, 18) is now confirmed (5:5). God’s visitation has resulted in the establishment of justice in the cosmos. In 3:7 we find the righteous (plural) again. The concept of visitation is expanded further to include human agency.328 In 3:1–6, it is admitted that to all human eyes the death of the righteous was a misfortune that involved suffering, and even an indication of divine disapproval: they had been punished. In contrast, the book states that the righteous are known, approved and protected by God in the post-mortem state (v. 1). Their death was not punishment but was rather testing and discipline (v. 5). Their refinement in the furnace of life and suffering has revealed them to be pure in the eyes of God (vv. 5–6). Their future hope (note the change in tense) will involve a reversal of their public fortune. Those who died in disgrace will in the future become judges of nations.329 It is in this sense that ἐπισκοπή is being used here, that is in the sense of the future presence in judgement of the righteous amongst the world. (7) καὶ ἐν καιρῷ ἐπισκοπῆς αὐτῶν ἀναλάμψουσιν καὶ ὡς σπινθῆρες ἐν καλάμη διαδραμοῦνται· (8) κρινοῦσιν ἔθνη καὶ κρατήσουσιν λαῶν, καὶ βασιλεύσει αὐτῶν κύριος εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας. (7) And in the time of their visitation they will shine forth and they will run like sparks through the stubble. (8) They will judge nations and rule over peoples and the Lord will reign over them forever.

Within the passage it is the righteous (plural) who are judging. God’s activity in the passage is one of an overlord (v. 8), supervising the work of the righteous as they in turn rule over the nations. It is God’s presence in visitation which elevates the righteous to a position of kingship; his presence is then mediated through the righteous as they are present in their own visitation to judge the nations. In 4:15 the standard pattern of salvation for Wisdom is present.330 The anonymous Enoch is taken by God, in this case to preserve him from the 327 Cf. above, 7.6.2 The Literary Structure of Wisdom 1–6. Note also Nickelsburg (Resurrection, 83–88) recognition of this section as ‘Scene Two’ of the Wisdom Tale. 328 On the passivity of the righteous one, see Kolarcik, ‘Book of Wisdom’, 469. 329 An apocalyptic note (Dan 7:22; Winston, The Wisdom of Solomon, 128), although care should be used in assuming apocalyptic theology (7.5.5 Apocalypticism). 330 On Enoch in Wisdom, Schaberg, ‘Major Midrashic Traditions’ and the discussion above, 7.5.4 Enoch, Daniel and the Son of Man.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

The Identity of the Righteous One

189

influence of wickedness. The peoples, however, although they saw Enoch’s departure, did not understand its significance and so (v. 15): ὅτι χάρις καὶ ἔλεος ἐν τοῖς ἐκλεκτοῖς αὐτοῦ καὶ ἐπισκοπὴ ἐν τοῖς ὁσίοις αὐτοῦ.

[…] that grace and mercy are with his elect and visitation is with his holy ones.

In contrast to the misunderstanding of the peoples, God’s chosen ones remain in his favour: they remain under his watchful gaze. The textual ambiguity surrounding this verse need not detain us.331 The sentiment expressed and the usage of ἐπισκοπή is consistent with that we have elsewhere: human misunderstanding fails to appreciate God’s determination to come to the situation of injustice and to rule in favour of the righteous. The two remaining uses of ἐπισκοπή both carry a sense of judgement. In 14:10–11 both idol and craftsman will be punished: a visitation will come upon the idols of the nations.332 Finally, in 19:(14)15, the sin and the consequences of that sin of the Egyptians are declared to be worse than those of Sodom and Gomorrah. Lot was received with hostility, but the hospitality of the Egyptians amounted to hard labour. In consequence, the Sodomites will receive a ‘visitation’ of some sort.333 The Egyptians are lost in blindness and darkness (v. (16)17). Once again, visitation is understood to be a righteous intervention by God by which justice is achieved. Throughout Wisdom ἐπισκοπή carries a consistent sense. It is eschatological (the visitation has been envisaged as future), involves judgement and the reversal in fortunes of the oppressor and the righteous.

7.6.4.3 A Moment of Confrontation (4:16–20) In 4:16–20, the situation of Enoch receives its resolution. The standard elements of the picture of ‘visitation’ are present: the wicked observe the death 331 This verse is bracketed by Ziegler (Sapientia Salomonis) and equated with 3:9cd. The adjectives in the parallel prepositional clauses are exchanged. 332 Jer 10:15 LXX; Fichtner, Weisheit Salomos, 53. 333 The future tense here is somewhat surprising. Although the sentence structure of these verses is difficult, the force of the logic seems to be one of analogy. The Sodomites (14a) were inhospitable. But the Egyptians (14b) made slaves of their guests. The Sodomites face a visitation (15a) for their inhospitality (15b). The Egyptians who received the Israelites with celebrations before turning them to hard labour (16) were struck with blindness (17a). It seems unlikely that a further judgement is expected for the Sodomites beyond the destruction of their city, given that the just recompense for the Egyptians is the ten plagues and the destruction of the army at the crossing of the Red Sea, unless this refers to a final eschatological judgement. Such an idea could hardly be said to be prominent in the Exodus-Numbers narrative. Winston (The Wisdom of Solomon, 327, 329) explicitly translates the verse as referring to a ‘final reckoning’ and comments that the meaning of the verse is obscure. Goodrick (Book of Wisdom, 373) observes that ‘nearly every line of this chapter bears marks of carelessness if not weariness’. Larcher (Le Livre de la Sagesse iii, 1076–79) offers a typically thorough attempt to assess all the possibilities without, understandably, arriving at anything conclusive.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

190

Personal Eschatology and Immortality in Wisdom

of the righteous one but fail to appreciate God’s ongoing plans (v. 17); this plan results in eschatological confrontation (v. 16) and reversal of fortunes (v. 18). Here for the first time we see the means by which the wicked are brought to the moment of confrontation. In 4:18, the Lord ‘will laugh them to scorn’. ‘After this’ (v. 19) they will become dishonoured corpses, dashed speechless to the ground. The exact means of death is not specified. These verses can be taken as a description of a descent into Hades334 and this would leave open the possibility that the punishment of the wicked is reserved till after their death, rather than including it. The passage may draw upon Isaiah 14:3–21335 which is more explicit in its conviction that God ‘breaks the sceptre [yoke: LXX] of rulers’ (v. 5), as indeed is Wisdom 5:17–23. What remains clear is that the death of the wicked will be brought about by God. In 4:20 we read that ‘they [the wicked] will come to the reckoning of their sins, afraid, and their lawless deeds will convict them to their face’ (ἐλεύσονται ἐν συλλογισμῷ ἁμαρτημάτων αὐτῶν δειλοί, καὶ ἐλέγξει αὐτοὺς ἐξ ἐναντίας τὰ ἀνομήματα αὐτῶν). The relationship between verses nineteen and twenty is not made clear. Are the wicked to be returned from Hades for the confrontation?336 This would seem needlessly complicated, and breaks the pattern of visitation that has been seen elsewhere in Wisdom.337 Alternatively, it is helpful to remember that the fate of the righteous immediately after death should be distinguished from their time of visitation: they are preserved in the hand of God. In this case, however, there is no need for any further delay after the death of the wicked until their confrontation with the righteous. The simplest solution is to view the moment of confrontation as only one element of the visitation of God. In order for the confrontation to occur, the wicked must be brought through death to the divine courtroom. After their confrontation, their lifeless fate as a dishonoured corpse (4:19) is settled.

7.6.4.4 Creation as the Instrument of God in the Downfall of the Wicked (5:17–23) This, with 5:1–16, is probably the section of Wisdom that has caused the most confusion in the interpretation of the book. Simply put, the extreme language which describes the overthrowing of the thrones of rulers (v. 23) has been seen to refer necessarily to something extraordinary.338 The event is 334 Goodrick, ‘Book of Wisdom’, 151, following Grimm, ‘Commentar’. 335 Kolarcik, ‘Book of Wisdom’, 480; Nickelsburg, Resurrection, 101; precise textual links are absent, however. 336 Goodrick, Book of Wisdom, 151. Winston (Wisdom of Solomon, 143) offers no comment. Reider (The Book of Wisdom, 89) argues that this depicts the confrontation of the wicked and the righteous after the ‘vagueness’ of the preceding verses. 337 See above, 7.6.4.2 The Use of Episkopē in Wisdom. 338 For example, Engel, Das Buch der Weisheit, 108–9. For more detail, see below, pp. 191–93.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

The Identity of the Righteous One

191

viewed as future: ‘the Lord will take his zeal’ (λήμψεται).339 The whole earth is laid waste because of ‘those without sense’ (v. 20) and their ‘lawlessness’ and ‘evildoing’ (v. 23). And yet, how could the individual distribution of recompense set out in 5:1–14 refer to something on such a cosmic scale?340 In the destruction, the thrones of living rulers are brought low. One could speculate about two different judgements, one for oppressors (5:1–14) and one for unjust rulers (5:17–23), but this would create a breakage in the unified picture that has been seen within Wisdom’s view of salvation, judgement and visitation.341 Further, to interpret this passage as a conclusive global battle, the end of the world, would mean that it had little to do with the rest of the book. Nowhere else is such a cataclysmic ending envisaged or used for theological reflection.342 The language of judgement in 5:17–23, although it could be taken as hyperbolic343, is not obviously meant to be spiritualized or viewed as metaphorical; our studies to this point would suggest quite the opposite. No indication is given that we should view this judgement as something that involves the souls of the wicked dead. Instead, the whole thrust of the passage is to set out how God will use the created world as a tool to ‘overturn the throne of rulers’. The difficulty of identifying the precise order and nature of the described events in Chapter 5 is recognized by all. Grimm offers three possibilities for 5:17–23: an illustration of the concept of retribution in the after-life; a common, coarse mythological depiction of a messianic/eschatological judgement; and a depiction of a real rule of God on earth in which the enemies of God are crushed and the people of God rewarded. This last is preferred and taken to be speaking of the same thing as 3:7, which itself is understood as referring only to the righteous who remain alive at the future moment of visitation.344 Farrar, who generally follows Grimm, has less confidence in identifying times and locations for particular scenes.345 The statement of the righteous at the time of visitation, that they will ‘run like sparks among the stubble’, ‘seems to be a general metaphor to express the victorious and sinconsuming power of the just hereafter’.346 Similarly, the confrontations of 339 Again, above, 7.6.4.2 The Use of Episkopē in Wisdom. 340 Larcher, Le Livre de la Sagesse ii, 398. 341 Cf. above, 2.3 The Unified Picture of Salvation – Wisdom 10; 7.6.4.2 The Use of Episkopē in Wisdom. 342 Although note Goodrick’s (Book of Wisdom, 153) argument that ‘one would have thought that a scene to which a writer devoted twenty-six verses (4:18–5:23), coupled with his constant references to ἐπισκοπή and ἡμέρα διαγνώσεως, might have been considered to be an integral part of his belief, if he has any at all’. Goodrick’s point about the integration of these verses into the theology of the whole book is well made, although his implicit conclusion that the passage must therefore refer to a final judgement is unnecessary. 343 Note the caution about the nature of the language in Kolarcik (‘The Book of Wisdom’, 486). 344 Grimm, ‘Commentar’, 136–37. 345 Farrar, ‘Wisdom’, 403–534. 346 Ibid., 439.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

192

Personal Eschatology and Immortality in Wisdom

Chapter 5, although ‘coloured by the Messianic promises of the prophets and by the eschatological beliefs of his own age’, reveal no intent to systematize eschatology or to ‘enter into details of the unknown future’ but only to insist that ‘Righteousness alone is immortal and blessed’.347 ‘The conception of a Day of Judgement for the dead does not appear till a later stage of Jewish literature’.348 Gregg comments on the apocalyptic reserve of the chapter: the author ‘dislikes the local and definite, and views the individual consciousness as the theatre of all rewards and punishments’; he ‘is much more at his ease amongst abstract ideas’; ‘the victory of Truth is his confident teaching, and he is indifferent as to place and time’.349 Goodrick shows a degree of weariness over the anxiety of ‘modern’ commentators to find no Judgement Day or Resurrection in Wisdom.350 He recognizes the incongruities of Wisdom’s language but rightly insists that Wisdom envisages some form of a rule of the righteous.351 He concludes that Wisdom envisages at least the resurrection of the soul and perhaps also the body. Fichtner envisages these passages within a matrix of eschatological events leading to a final judgement.352 At more than one point, however, he is equivocal about specifics. On 3:7 he appears to equate the ‘hereafter’ (Jenseits) with the end time; 5:15–23 is described at one point as the final judgement and at another as ‘the last onrush of the godless on the community of God, a settled component of apocalyptic expectation’.353 Larcher, following the emphases of Grimm and Fichtner, while acknowledging the difficulties of being too specific, rightly points out the recurring theological and literary motifs that indicate a unified eschatological scheme.354 The earthly context of this ‘great judgement’ shows a return ‘to the great biblical theme of the Day of the Anger of God’. He argues that Wisdom’s concern for the destiny of individuals makes a final intervention of God on earth somewhat useless. However, if those already dead watch this anger, and those already glorified are associated with the glorified triumph of the righteous who are alive, some kind of synthesis of these differing eschatological concerns is possible. In 5:15–23 what is sketched is ‘a general judgement, both earthly and transcendent, with cosmic effects’. This is not the Final Judgement as the general condition of the world does not change. The glorified state of the righteous, whether it is purely transcendent or involves a new earthly existence, cannot be specified from the text. Winston, as mentioned in the introduction (above, p. 21), offers a counsel of despair with regard to a coherent explication of the eschatology

347 Ibid., 448–49. 348 Ibid., 454. 349 Gregg, The Wisdom of Solomon, 43–44. 350 Goodrick, Book of Wisdom, 126. 351 Ibid., 395, 397. 352 Fichtner, Weisheit Salomos. 353 Ibid., 23, 25. 354 Larcher, Le Livre de la Sagesse, ii, 398.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

The Identity of the Righteous One

193

of the book.355 Kolarcik offers similar caution, arguing that the author of Wisdom uses these eschatological scenes in order to highlight ‘the importance of living a life based on justice and virtue in the present’.356 Horbury describes the battle of 5:15–23 as a ‘final conflict’ but sets Wisdom’s scenes within the variety of eschatological thought that was contemporaneously available, refraining from strong conclusions.357 Wisdom avoids the language of waking and this ‘reflects preference for the notion of spiritual immortality – no insubstantial form of life’.358 Such a preference need not preclude a genuine hope for an international dominion of the saints from the holy land.359 In general, the older commentators find themselves trapped in Christian and Platonic categories, even while rejecting the former, only being able to conceive of an emphasis on resurrection or the immortality of the soul and consistently questioning the possibility of a ‘final judgement’ which must not be described in physical terms. More recent commentators allow the text, with all its ambiguity, to stand alone but there is a distinct reluctance – with the exception of Larcher – to reason about things which are considered beyond reason. A better interpretation, then, will need to recognize in the universal language of the passage a universal potentiality. The passage stresses God’s ability and desire fully to have creation do his work of visitation. The preceding short section (5:15–16) on the elevation of the righteous probably should not be taken as part of a temporal sequence which follows from the confrontation of 5:1–14 because the text has switched from a consideration of the righteous individual to the righteous many.360 Instead, it is better to read the elevation of the righteous here as connected with the following overthrowing of the wicked. The bodily language of shielding with the arm (v. 16) flows coherently into God’s taking zeal as his armour and making creation his weapon. Given this, and given also that we have established the connection between the kingly enthronement of the righteous (3:7), the death of the wicked (4:19) and the confrontation of the righteous with their oppressors (5:1–14), it is best to understand this language of cosmic upheaval as a poetic and powerful description of the means by which God will bring low the oppressors of the righteous so that they may be confronted by their deeds and their victims in the divine court.361 The consequence of all this is that the

355 Winston, Wisdom of Solomon, 32–33. 356 Kolarcik, ‘The Book of Wisdom’, 435–600. 357 Horbury, ‘The Wisdom of Solomon’, 650–67, on p. 657. 358 Ibid., 656. 359 Ibid., 657. 360 The literary structure is in agreement with this: above, 7.6.2 The Literary Structure of Wisdom 1–6. 361 This importance of confrontation in the nature of the eschatology has been noted by Nickelsburg (Resurrection, 90), although without an appreciation of the cosmic nature of judgement in Wisdom.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

194

Personal Eschatology and Immortality in Wisdom

eschatological language is no longer understood to refer to a future great event, but rather to the death of every wicked tyrant. 7.6.4.5 The Exhortation to the Kings and Judges of the Earth (1:1; 6:1–11) The passages we have been discussing are all framed by the exhortations to the rulers of the earth to seek God (1:1) and Sophia (6:9), to obey the law (6:4) and to remember that their dominion is borrowed (6:3). The exhortations are the ostensible purpose of the whole section, even if in reality the audience was a sub-group of the Jewish community.362 Those who have the potential to make Jewish life better are to pay heed lest they fall into the category of the oppressors of the righteous one, whose apparent worldly success will be (or has been) utterly reversed in the next life. No king can take comfort from his power and the protection of his army, because no king can isolate himself from the creation which is God’s tool to bring him to his grave. On the basis of the preceding section363, the judgement that awaits the king involves his own death, after which his confrontation with the oppressed will take place. The democratization of the concept of kingship which occurs through Sophia364 is not a spiritualized sleight of hand but rather results in a kingship of the righteous that stands in direct competition with the power of the wicked.365 One is encouraged to think of the righteous as possessing far more power than any earthly prince because of their angelic position amongst the sons of God (5:5). They already have the status of kings in their relationship to God366 and will judge the wicked after death including those kings and judges of the earth who either oppressed them or failed to protect them. There is no apparent need for the righteous to intervene as cosmic kings in creation because under the organization of Sophia’s providential ordering (8:1) no intervention is required. The cosmos will bring justice, as it did in the Exodus.367 The righteous stand as judges, aligned with the will of God in Sophia, eternally blessed and protected by the divine hand. The task set before kings is indeed great and consequently so too is the need to learn wisdom (6:9).

362 Cf. above, 1.4.5 Addressees of Wisdom. 363 Note the use of οὖν (6:1). Larcher, Le Livre de la Sagesse ii, 400. 364 Cf. above, 7.6.3.2 A Messianic Figure?, 7.6.3.3 The Relationship Between the Righteous One and the Righteous Ones and 7.6.3.4 The Sage and the Nation. 365 This is affirmed within the emphasis on confrontation at the heart of Wisdom’s understanding of ‘visitation’ (above, 7.6.4.2 The Use of Episkopē in Wisdom). 366 Cf. above, 7.5.3 Psalm 2 and p. 182 fn. 288. 367 Cf. above, 3.3 The Exodus and The Elements.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

The Identity of the Righteous One

195

7.6.5 The Transference of Eschatological Hope to Every Age That Wisdom’s eschatology, and in particular the depiction of the creation as a tool of judgement in 5:15–23, is focussed on the present age can be further emphasized by noting the insights of Georg Ziener that in Wisdom, the righteous one, Sophia and Solomon are all ascribed ‘messianic’ attributes or described in terms which evoke eschatological hope.368 The ‘divine’ attributes are applied to Sophia, the ‘human’ attributes to the righteous. By ‘divine’ attributes are meant such things as the world-rulership of the messiah (Ps 2:8; Wis 8:1); the enthronement of the messiah at the right hand of God (Ps 110; Wis 9:4) and the eschatological unmediated intervention of God by his Spirit in Ezekiel and Joel. The ‘human’ attribute of the messiah is his suffering (Isa 52:13–53:12; Ps 88:39–52 LXX; Wis 2:12–20) and experience of royal exaltation (Ps 2:6–12; Wis 5:16). The reason for this startling transference of attributes is, according to Ziener, because the time of salvation which was expected in the (near) future according to other messianic readings of the prophets, is already present in the understanding of Wisdom and always has been.369 Sophia was there at the moment of creation (9:9) and has led humans to salvation from the time of Adam (10:1).370 To this we can add that Wisdom’s hope is not in a future age but rather in a recognition of the true nature of the current cosmos (7:17) as ordered by Sophia (8:1). The sage may have to be patient and to endure suffering, as the righteous individual did and as did Israel in Egypt, but God will protect his people (19:22) through the instrument of the cosmos (5:17–23).371 The expectation is that the soul’s visitation remains closely tied to the downfall, through the instrument of creation, of those who oppressed them.372 Such a hope as this is characteristic of Hellenistic philosophy in its dedication to living within and understanding the nature of the cosmos.373

7.6.6 The Shape of Salvation The central thrust of the discussion in this section (7.6 The Identity of the Righteous One and Realized Eschatology in Wisdom 1–6) has been to identify the character of the righteous individual in Wisdom, recognizing how biblical material and tradition has been subordinated to a new theological and essentially Hellenistic scheme. Support for this observation has been 368 Ziener, Die theologische Begriffsprache, 113–21. 369 Ibid., 114. 370 Ibid., 119; cf. above, 2.3.2 An Exposition of Wisdom 10. 371 Cf. above, 3.3 The Exodus and The Elements. 372 Cf. above, 7.6.4.4 Creation as the Instrument of God in the Downfall of the Wicked (5:17– 23), 7.6.4.5 The Exhortation to the Kings and Judges of the Earth (1:1; 6:1–11). 373 Cf. above, 3.3 The Exodus and The Elements and 3.4 Sophia and Pneuma.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

196

Personal Eschatology and Immortality in Wisdom

found in Ziener’s recognition of the application in Wisdom of eschatological hope to every age374 and can also be found in Mack’s discussion of the common mythological pattern of salvation throughout Wisdom.375 The key exegetical point, however, is to be found in the role of Sophia in the history of the patriarchs recorded in Chapter Ten of Wisdom (and also in 3:10–15).376 Here we find that Sophia plays essentially the same role with regard to Adam, Enoch and Jacob. It cannot be the case that the eschatology of Wisdom involves an expectation of a new period of history, because the promises of God found in scripture are already present in Sophia, who undergirds the cosmic order377, and have already been fulfilled in the lives of the patriarchs.378 Consequently, all biblical events can be characterized by the superlatives usually reserved for the end-times. It is true that the different ages and stories retain their distinctive character and, for instance, as is discussed above (7.4.4 Wisdom 11–19: An Incredible Journey and a Strange Death), the status of physical death in the ExodusNumbers narrative appears to be somewhat different from that in the first part of the book. Nonetheless, it has proved possible to draw together numerous parts of the work into theological conversation and coherency (2.3 The Unified Picture of Salvation – Wisdom 10). To begin, the second exhortation to the rulers and judges of the world (6:1–21) segues into the personal testimony of king Solomon who is offered as a model for the righteous as well as secular rulers.379 As the righteous will be elevated to cosmic kingship under God (3:8; 5:16), and as the kings and judges of the earth should govern according to law and the counsel of God (6:4), so Solomon ruled the nations through Wisdom (8:13–14). Solomon’s kingship, however, appears two-fold. Sophia’s companionship brings with it immortality (8:13, 17), even if the emphasis falls on the survival of one’s renown after death.380 Much as in the first part of Wisdom, a reversal of perception (2:21; 3:2) is required. True, worthwhile mortal kingship is not an end in itself. Sophia is worth more than any riches (8:5) because, in a typical Stoic inverting of definitions381, her companionship leads to the qualities of true kingship (e. g. 8:11, 9:12). On the one hand, Solomon’s example under-

374 Cf. above, 7.6.5 The Transference of Eschatological Hope to Every Age. 375 Mack, Logos and Sophia: 78–107. 376 Cf. above, 2.3.2 An Exposition of Wisdom 10. 377 Cf. above, 3.4 Sophia and Pneuma. 378 Cf. above, 2.3.2 An Exposition of Wisdom 10. 379 The change in voice in 6:22 does mark a change in tone between the first two parts of Wisdom, and Kolarcik (‘The Book of Wisdom’, 493) is justified in noting the movement from a focus on justice and death, to an exhortation to experience true life in the ‘romantic’ pursuit of Sophia. This is, however, a change in tone; the shape of salvation remains the same. 380 Cf. above, 7.2.3 Immortality and the Community. 381 Sellars, Stoicism, 36–41; Brad Inwood/Pierluigi Donini, ‘Stoic Ethics’, in Keimpe Algra and others (ed.), The Cambridge History of Hellenistic Philosophy (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999) 675–738, on pp. 721–22.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

The Identity of the Righteous One

197

mines the primacy of political power or earthly gain by seeking Sophia above all things (8:5). On the other hand, with Sophia’s companionship came ‘all good things’ and ‘innumerable riches’ (7:11).382 The eschatological convictions of Wisdom could not accept a straightforward Stoic redefinition of kingship in terms of the virtues necessary for good kingship.383 These qualities must be possessed, but then they will be exercised. The ambiguity noted above384 concerning immortality in the ExodusNumbers narrative is also present in the life of Solomon.385 He will rule through Sophia but he will still die (9:5). It is helpful to view this problem from the perspective of the eschatology of the first part of the book, which occurs entirely within the context of the cosmos. The souls of the righteous dead experience their glorification in close connection with the downfall of their oppressors (5:1)386; the warning to the rulers of the earth in Chapter 6 is closely intertwined with Solomon’s exhortation that they should honour Sophia and therefore reign forever (6:21).387 In this way, Solomon’s hope, the hope of the present world-rulers and that of the righteous, are all to be seen as phenomena belonging to a unified reality. That the kingship of the world-rulers and that of the righteous are of the same order can be seen in the fact that they compete with one another (3:7–8) and is evident in the fact that the exaltation of the wise at the visitation of God takes place at the moment of the downfall of the wicked.388 Although the Exodus-Numbers narrative does seek to present the salvation of the children of Israel from physical death389, in both the case of the righteous of Wisdom 1–6 and of the Israelites they experience ‘death’ or suffering only for these to be reinterpreted as discipline or purification rather than misfortune (3:5; 11:9).390 Likewise in both parts, an essential element of the judgement of God is that those who oppress a son of God, doubting the veracity of any such claim to be in close relationship with the divine, are forced to acknowledge the reality of the divine sonship of the oppressed (5:8; 18:13). In both cases creation is revealed to play an instrumental role in the 382 A remarkably positive statement. The riches come ‘in Sophia’s hands’, but should not be taken ‘spiritually’ because of the preceding parallel statement and as well as the potential allusions to Prov 3:16 and 2 Chron 1:13 (Larcher, Le Livre de la Sagesse ii, 457). This might appear to stand in tension with the apparent renunciation of physical goods in the denial of death (3:2; 4:7–20) and the declarations of the blessedness of the childless with virtue (3:13– 4:6). The tension is only resolved with the recognition that immortality involves continued engagement with the cosmos (above, 7.6.4 The Visitation of God). 383 Cf. below, 8.5 The Sage as King. 384 Cf. above, 7.4.4 Wisdom 11–19: An Incredible Journey and a Strange Death. 385 Cf. above, 7.4.3 Wisdom 7–9: The Mortal Sage. 386 Cf. above, 7.6.4.3 A Moment of Confrontation (4:16–20). 387 Cf. above, 7.6.4.5 The Exhortation to the Kings and Judges of the Earth (1:1; 6:1–11). 388 Cf. above, 7.6.4.4 Creation as the Instrument of God in the Downfall of the Wicked (5:17– 23). 389 Cf. above, 7.4.4 Wisdom 11–19: An Incredible Journey and a Strange Death. 390 Kolarcik, ‘Book of Wisdom’, 534.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

198

Personal Eschatology and Immortality in Wisdom

judgement of God (5:17–23; 19:6–21). Even in some of the most difficult passages, the same pattern of salvation is present. For instance, in the diptych in Wisdom 18 (vv. 5–25), with the presence of the personified word (λόγος; v. 15) and the avenger (κολάζων; v. 22) or destroyer (ὀλεθρεύων; v. 25), we find essentially the same pattern391: the stern warrior of the word stands on earth while touching heaven (v. 16) and the apparitions which follow his appearance bring revelation of the reason for their suffering (v. 19; cf. v. 13). Similarly in the parallel section (vv. 20–25), where in contrast to the original narrative God’s agency is to be identified with the work of Aaron and not in the punishing plagues, the blameless defender of the people has the whole world (depicted)392 on his robe and wears a royal diadem on which was God’s divine majesty (v. 24). Here too, creation acts on God’s behalf to bring justice. Much more could be written but these examples should suffice to demonstrate the essentially unified picture of salvation which Wisdom stamps on each biblical story. Consequently, when we return our attention to the figure of the righteous one in Chapter 2, his experience too can be seen to conform to the same pattern and his immortality to be of the same nature.

7.7 Conclusion: The Realized Eschatology of Wisdom 1–6 In the introduction to his commentary on Wisdom, David Winston characterizes the eschatological descriptions of the work as ‘a sort of chiaroscuro, lacking any clear definition’, which ‘moves fitfully through alternating patches of darkness and light’.393 Such an assertion is not unjustified. If this section has produced a more compelling and stable interpretation of these chapters, it is certainly not in the belief that the meaning of the text is transparently obvious. What has more clearly been demonstrated is that these chapters of Wisdom do demand and reward patient reading and rereading in the light of the wider concerns of the book with an awareness of its literary structure, and that in doing this the different sections of the book can help provide new interpretative options which have not before been widely appreciated. This section has covered much ground but we have come to the point where it is now possible to define the nature of the eschatology in Wisdom. In examining the person of the righteous individual of 2:12–20, and his subsequent career, it was noted that the book may draw on a messianic tradition although without placing hope in a messianic figure (7.6.3.2 A Messianic Fig391 The possible Homeric origin of this turn of phrase (Winston, The Wisdom of Solomon, 319; Il. 4.443) need not obscure its theological use within Wisdom. 392 See the discussion above, 7.4.4 Wisdom 11–19: An Incredible Journey and a Strange Death. 393 Winston, The Wisdom of Solomon, 32.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

Conclusion: The Realized Eschatology of Wisdom 1–6

199

ure?). The righteous protagonist of this passage is seen to be an ideal sage, but not one who is essentially different from any other seeker of Sophia (7.6.3.3 The Relationship Between the Righteous One and the Righteous Ones). Instead it was argued that the eschatological hope of the blessing of the holy spirit and the kingship of the Messiah has been democratized and applied to every age (7.6.3.4 The Sage and the Nation, 7.6.5 The Transference of Eschatological Hope to Every Age). On the one hand, the shape of salvation in Wisdom is uniform. On the other, it cannot be denied that the immortal hope expressed in Wisdom 1–6 is a development (7.6.6 The Shape of Salvation). The sharpness of the difference is softened somewhat by three things. Firstly, Wisdom shows a concern that the fate of the righteous should remain tied in an inverse relationship to that of the wicked: those who possess now earthly power and who oppress (5:1), or allow oppression of (5:23), the righteous will find themselves brought low by God and judged by the righteous at the visitation of God (7.6.4 The Visitation of God). Secondly, creation remains the instrument of God (1:13–14; 5:17–23) to bring the wicked to their knees (3.3 The Exodus and The Elements, 7.6.4.4 Creation as the Instrument of God in the Downfall of the Wicked (5:17–23)). Creation is on the side of the righteous. Thirdly, this creation theme has been shown to be consonant with the Stoic-inspired understanding of soul and cosmos in Wisdom (3.4 Sophia and Pneuma, 5. Pneuma, Stoicism and Anthropology). The hope of the righteous, even after death, is conceived as a cosmic existence: the soul-pneuma is preserved by God through Sophia. Such a view of the cosmos, in which Sophia is one more example of pneuma, undermines a simple Platonic division between the physical and spiritual (7.3 Immortality, Incorruptibility and the Soul in Wisdom) and points towards the realms of a unified cosmic vision. It contributes to the rational justice of the universe by predicting the judgement of oppressors (3:8). Such a stance has political consequences. The exhortations to rulers which frame the first part of the book and the fearsome judgement of God through creation of Wisdom 5:17–23 implies that the book expects change in these spheres.394 The world order itself, however, need not change because its nature conforms to the divine will (Wis 1:12–15; 4.2 Creation in Wisdom). Only patience will be required for justice to be exercised by the cosmos, ordered by Sophia (7.5.5.4 The Order of Things). In summary, language formerly taken to be eschatological, that is referring to a final judgement of God, is in Wisdom used to describe the ongoing

394 Aitken (‘Poet and Critic’, 202) offers the possibility that poetic criticism, or even mockery, of Ptolemaic kings was an accepted part of the literary tradition of the day and therefore does not imply social division. It can be added that Wisdom’s language is not strongly targeted at one regime, be it Ptolemy or Rome (cf. Winston, The Wisdom of Solomon, 152–53) and this makes the threat less immediate. On the other hand, at these points in the text, humour is lacking and the threat of the overthrowing of thrones, linked to the actual operation of pneuma, appears real in nature.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

200

Personal Eschatology and Immortality in Wisdom

mechanisms of creation. Wisdom does not look for a future age but rather expects the work of creation to continue, bringing the wicked to their knees and the judgement seat of the righteous. In this sense, eschatological hope is found to be realized in the operation of the cosmos and the ongoing judging role of the righteous.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

8. Hellenistic Kingship and Wisdom 8.1 Introduction In its realized eschatology, Wisdom questions the authority and legitimacy of those who hold power. The book begins with an inclusion which exhorts rulers (6:1), kings and judges (6:2) to pay heed to the message of the work, warning them that as servants of the kingdom of God (6:4) they have not judged rightly and that a strict inquiry awaits them. The righteous, however, at the divine visitation will receive ‘a glorious crown and beautiful diadem’ (5:16) and will judge nations and rule over peoples under the rulership of God (3:7–8). In addition, the central section of the work offers a paradigmatic account (Wis 8:7) of the relationship between personified Sophia and the ideal biblical sage – the anonymous but still clearly identifiable King Solomon.1 Finally, the tenth chapter of Wisdom (2.3.2 An Exposition of Wisdom 10) connects the Exodus-Numbers narrative to the second and thus the first part of the book and depicts how the patriarchs of Israel through their relationship to Sophia were led to receive kingly benefits. This theme of kingship anchors the hope of Wisdom in the cosmos and cannot simply be understood as a metaphor for an otherworldly blessing: kings must be warned or will lose their thrones (5:23); those made kings by Sophia will judge the nations (3:8).2 It is important to ask, therefore, to what degree Wisdom’s royal concerns reflect and interact with the Hellenistic and Alexandrian culture in which it found its origin. In the Hellenistic world, kings gained a new significance. Politically, kingship became necessary to rule and unify the large disparate territories that Alexander had conquered and that his successors had split between them. Literature was written to educate, advise and persuade these new kings on the best ways to govern, or perhaps the best way for the king to govern in order to benefit the particular party of a tract’s author. Further, the Stoic ideal of the sage was formed which claimed, irrespective of any actual political power, that the wise man was the only true king. This last idea, a subtle means of undermining the value of raw political power, was recognized and used by the Jewish community in the work of Philo. Finally, it is also important to note the biblical and apocalyptic tradition surrounding messianism (7.6.3.2 A Messianic Figure?). We have then a diverse possible set of Hellenistic and biblical influences for Wisdom.

1 2

Fichtner, Weisheit Salomos, 25, 33–35. Cf. above, 7.6 The Identity of the Righteous One and Realized Eschatology in Wisdom 1–6.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

202

Hellenistic Kingship and Wisdom

This section will begin by considering Hellenistic kingship, and the Ptolemaic kings particularly, their self presentation and relationship to both gods and their subjects. If Wisdom offers critique of kingship, it will also be important to compare this with the literature from the Hellenistic period which offers philosophically considered advice for the task of kingship. It will also be useful to offer a sketch of the political and social position of the Jews in Alexandria in the Hellenistic age, in order to understand their relationship to the Ptolemaic kings and authorities who are warned so frankly. Finally, the Stoic and Philonic understanding of the depoliticization of kingship will be considered.

8.2 The Practice of Hellenistic Kingship We turn now to give an account of the practical shape of Hellenistic Kingship, particularly as it was practised amongst the Ptolemies. Classically, monarchy was a concept that was alien to the practice of demokratia. The principles of equality before the law, the equal right of speech and the roles of council (βουλή) and assembly (ἐκκλησία) operating within a topographically rather than tribally organized city had been established in opposition to tyranny and oligarchy.3 Even though forms of kingship persisted in Sparta, and both Plato and Aristotle advocated forms of kingship (although their preferences were strongly tied to the philosophical virtue of the ruler: Plato, Laws 4.709–712A; Rep. 5.473D; Stat. 293C, 296 ff, 300e–301; Aristotle, Pol. 5.1310bff), for the independent and self-ruling poleis of the southern Greek peninsula the idea of hereditary kingship belonged to the old-fashioned Homeric world or the ‘barbaric’ threat of Persia, and tyranny had been the undesirable context in opposition to which the principles of democracy had been solidified. The realization of this ideal was relatively short-lived, however. The victory of Philip II at Chaeronia and the formation of the League of Corinth during the winter of 338–337 BCE is generally held to mark the end of the freedom of the Greek city states.4 Aristotle’s summary of the task of kingship summarizes the manner in which the reigns of Hellenistic kings served to preserve social order rather than enshrine democratic principles: ‘a king wishes to be a guardian, to protect the owners of estates from suffering injustice and the people from suffering insult’ (Pol. 5.1310b–1311a).5 Under Philip, Alexander and the Diadochi, the king provided, in theory, unity between adjacent city-states and security. The model of the Greek city 3 4 5

G. Glotz, The Greek City and its Institutions (London: Kegan Paul, Trench, Trubner, 1929), 100–16. Raphael Sealey, History of the Greek City States, 491–92. Translation, Aristotle, trans. by H. P. Cooke and others, 23 vol., The Loeb Classical Library (London: William Heinemann, 1926–95).

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

The Practice of Hellenistic Kingship

203

remained highly valued, the cultured and civilised means of local governance. The independent polis was an ‘ally’ of the king.6 Alexander himself founded numerous new cities, including of course Alexandria which drew on the constitution of Athens for the basis of its own laws.7 In Alexandria, however, the practicalities of succession, occupation and a diverse ethnic populace reduced over time the effective power of the citizen-body and placed more power and prestige in the hands of the royal administration.8 The non-citizen residents, such as the native Egyptians and the Jews, while undoubtedly still valuing full recognition as citizens, were able at different points to gain influence in the royal administration and thus in part sidestep the obstacle of their exclusion from the assembly.9 Ultimate power, therefore, lay in the hands of the king and the increasing ineffectiveness of the polis only furthered the reach of the royal administration. While the relations between city and sovereign may appear over time almost accidental, the primacy of the king and his presentation as an almost supernatural character was not so. Alexander and his immediate successors ruled, not because of virtue or argument but because of military ability and personal charisma and these characteristics became the prized marks of kingship even in times of peace.10 Alexander’s son, Philip, achieved little, it was said, because of his weak character.11 Alexander’s generals, however, had

6 7 8

Tcherikover, Hellenistic Civilization, 23. Glotz, The Greek City, 390–91; Fraser, Ptolemaic Alexandria i, 110–11. Fraser argues that the polis operated relatively independently until the second-century (Fraser, Ptolemaic Alexandria i, 94–107) when individuals began to hold offices within both the Crown’s administration and that of the city. During this period, the general populace repeatedly determined the outcome of the interminable conflicts between Ptolemy VI Philometer, Cleopatra II and Ptolemy VIII Euergetes II (169–17 BCE; ibid., 119–21). Fraser conjectures that the assembly was removed by Euergetes II after his return to Alexandria in 145 BCE (ibid., 95, 797–98). On the one hand, the support of the general populace, including the majority of non-citizens, becomes more important. On the other hand, potential organized opposition in the polis has to be controlled. The removal of the council of the polis would become a contributory source of tension between Greeks and Jews, particularly as the Jewish community was able to regulate itself under a council of elders (and at one point a Roman authorized ethnarch; Josephus, Ant. 14.117; Tcherikover, Hellenistic Civilization, 302) and yet also sought the privilege of citizenship (Alan K. Bowman, ‘Egypt’, in The Cambridge Ancient History, 14 vol. [Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 21971– 2005], x, Alan K. Bowman/Edward Champlin/Andrew Lintott [ed.], The Augustan Empire, 43 B. C.–A. D. 69 [1996] 676–702, on pp. 700–1; John M. G. Barclay, Jews in the Mediterranean Diaspora: from Alexander to Trajan [323 BCE – 117 CE] [Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1996], 58). 9 Consider the support of the Jew Onias for Cleopatra II (ibid., 121). 10 Hahm’s discussion of kingship theories (see the following section) highlights the independence of the Antigonid dynasty from the restrictions of law and tradition (David E. Hahm, ‘Kings and constitutions: Hellenistic theories’, in Christopher Rowe/Malcolm Schofield (ed.), The Cambridge History of Greek and Roman Political Thought (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000) 457–76, on p. 459). 11 Suda, s. v. Basileia (2) = M. M. Austin, The Hellenistic World from Alexander to the Roman Conquest (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1981), no. 37.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

204

Hellenistic Kingship and Wisdom

already proven their abilities in leadership and, most importantly, could command the loyalty of their respective armies. Victory, therefore, naturally came to be recognized as a key attribute of royalty and power, a proof of merit to rule and a means of engendering loyalty amongst troops: the lands of Hellenistic kingdoms would be known as ‘spear-won land’ and a frequent characteristic of Hellenistic statues of kings involves a raised arm holding or leaning on a spear.12 Succession was problematic. Over time, ironically, these personal characteristics of victory and charisma would become to be associated with dynasties. Co-regency was used when necessary during the king’s lifetime in order to secure the succession. The brother-sister marriage of the Ptolemies, initiated by Ptolemy II and his full sister Arsinoe II, may also have been an attempt to avoid inter-dynastic quarrels and so secure an institution founded on personality.13 The depiction of kings on statues and coins gives insight into the promulgation of the royal public image. The frequent appearance of the grasped spear has already been mentioned. In addition, the diadem was present, signalling succession from Alexander and, to those familiar with it, Archaemenid royal authority. An artificial Greek ætiology was created at some point, which linked the diadem with a victorious Dionysus. Other than this, however, images meant for public consumption show a lack of regalia. Divine attributes could be present, generally indicating association rather than identity with the deity. An oft-quoted example is the portrait of Demetrios Poliorketes, where the king is depicted with small bull’s horns, associating him with Dionysus although Dionysus himself never wears them. The king’s facial appearance is generally smooth and youthful, even ageless, courting associations with the divine and Alexander and in clear distinction from the aged depictions of philosophers and civil leaders which aimed to convey human and moral qualities.14 The first generation of Alexander’s successors is an exception which proves the rule. Their images certainly show a greater maturity – Ptolemy’s displaying a warrior’s broken nose15 – than those of later kings, although they certainly do not betray their real age. The bodies

12 R. R. R. Smith, ‘Kings and Philosophers’, in Anthony W. Bulloch and others (ed.), Images and Ideologies: Self-Definition in the Hellenistic World (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1993) 202–12 [accessed 19th July 2010], 207; F. W. Walbank, ‘Monarchies and Monarchic Ideas’, in The Cambridge Ancient History, 14 vol. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1971–2005), vii, F. W. Walbank and others (ed.) The Hellenistic World, Part I, (21984) 62–100, on p. 66. 13 Walbank, ‘Monarchies and Monarchic Ideas’, 67; see Lloyd for an account of the role marriage played in ensuring the formidable character and ability of Arsinoe II worked for, rather than against, the rule of her brother (Alan B. Lloyd, ‘The Ptolemaic Period (332–30 BC)’, in Ian Shaw (ed.), The Oxford History of Ancient Egypt (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000) 388–413, on pp. 403–4). 14 Smith, ‘Kings and Philosophers’, 206. 15 Walter M. Ellis, Ptolemy of Egypt (Florence, Kentucky: Routledge, 1993), 54.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

The Practice of Hellenistic Kingship

205

of the kings are largely nude in the style of gods and athletes, but with an exaggerated physique compared to the athlete. Again, this emphasized power and charisma over the characteristics which more readily have been associated with the ethical, philosophical or democratic.16 The young Hellenistic court was likewise distinctive in Greek eyes. It consisted of a group of ‘Friends’ (philoi). Rewarded with gifts of land for their loyalty and service, this group of well-educated Greeks perhaps began as a small group of intimate confidants, but over time it stratified forming hierarchical layers17, in effect becoming the civil service. Faced with the need to build a governing class and in later years the challenge of forming an administration from one’s supporters, ability initially was prized over nobility. Although there were a few notable exceptions, at first natives or nonGreeks were generally not considered for these posts. In later years in Alexandria, when the problems of succession had repeatedly riven the country, the challenge became one of forming administrations from one’s supporters and opportunities arose for educated young Egyptians and Jews.18 Much of the king’s identity and priorities were to be formed by the reciprocal relationship he had with the people he governed and particularly with the already existing power bases in cities of local government and cult. Already established cities greeted their new rulers with respect and admiration, flattering them with titles they hoped would characterize their relationship such as ‘bringer of peace’, ‘protector’ and ‘liberator’. In return, the king would act as a benefactor, building theatres, gymnasia and sending gifts of food in shortage. The king’s image as a benefactor and particularly as a patron of culture was especially important for the Ptolemies. Alexandria had its famous library19 and museum, the lighthouse, a zoo, and an observatory.20 The main power of the king, however, was established through military means. The king’s public image as divinely favoured victorious saviour, liberator, benefactor21 and champion of civilization was the means of unifying and ordering realms which were conquered and disparate. Extravagant displays of riches in palaces, festivals and processions, were an important means of reinforcing the power and greatness of the royal public image.22 Religion was an important tool in maintaining the reciprocal relationship between king and people. We have already mentioned the depictions of 16 Smith, ‘Kings and Philosophers’, 209–10. 17 Fraser, Ptolemaic Alexandria i, 103. 18 Jane Rowlandson, ‘The Character of Ptolemaic Aristocracy: Problems of Definition and Evidence’, in Tessa Rajak and others (ed.), Jewish Perspectives on Hellenistic Rulers (Berkley: University of California Press, 2007), 29–49. 19 The library reputedly eventually held 500,000 volumes, including the official editions of Aeschylus, Sophocles and Euripedes (Ellis, Ptolemy, 5). 20 Walbank, ‘Monarchies and Monarchic Ideas’, 73. For more on the Alexandria as a showcase for Ptolemaic wealth and culture, see Alan Lloyd, ‘The Ptolemaic Period’, 399–402. 21 Walbank, ‘Monarchies and Monarchic Ideas’, 81–82. 22 Ibid., 84.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

206

Hellenistic Kingship and Wisdom

kings which associated their reigns with gods, implying divine patronage. Ptolemy’s use of an eagle and thunderbolt linked his dynasty to Zeus.23 Claiming divine descent was a related tactic: an inscription copied at Adulis in the sixth century CE describes Ptolemy III as descended on his father’s side from Heracles, son of Zeus, and on his mother’s side from Dionysus, son of Zeus.24 Ptolemy XII was unique in introducing into his official title a claim to divinity as the ‘god New Dionysus’.25 The declaration of the king as a god, initially was more likely to come from the populace than from the administration. Such a declaration was reciprocated with benefaction, safety and prosperity. The ‘ithyphallic’ hymn, reputedly sung in honour of Demetrius’ liberation of Athens in 291 BCE, makes plain the psychological and functional dynamic which could lead to such veneration: Hail son of the most powerful god Poseidon and of Aphrodite! For the other gods are either far away, or they do not have ears or they do not exist, or do not take any notice of us, but you we can see present here: you are not made of wood or stone, you are real. And so we pray to you: first bring us peace, dearest; for you have the power.26

Similarly, it was after the siege of Rhodes that Ptolemy I gained his title of Saviour (σωτήρ) when the city established a cult for the king.27 Consequently, the king could have different cults and titles in different cities, although some titles may later have become official and dynastic and so gained a wider use. The three most common epithets were God (θεός), Saviour (σωτήρ) and Benefactor (εὐεργέτης).28 The cult would be associated with a temple and its ceremony performed either by a specially appointed priest or by one borrowed from another deity.29 A cult-statue (ἄγαλμα) or an image (εἰκών) of a ruler, might be introduced into a temple. The cult-statue generally was an item for worship and the image was understood as a sign of respect to the benefactor who enabled the cult to take place.30 In contrast, instances of dynastic cult were instituted by the administration. Ptolemy II created a cult to his father as saviour (σωτήρ) and to both father and mother as saviour gods (θεοὶ σωτῆρες).31 Festivals could be associated with the celebration of the cult, and the Ptolemaieia in Alexandria was 23 Koenen, ‘The Ptolemaic King’, 44–46; on the Thunderbolt and Alexander, Margarete Bieber, ‘The Portraits of Alexander’, Greece and Rome, 2nd Series, vol. 12, no. 2 (1965) 183–88, on p. 184. 24 Austin, The Hellenistic World, no. 365=OGIS 54. 25 Walbank, ‘Monarchies and Monarchic Ideas’, 86. On the reign of Pt. XII Auletes, Thompson 1994: 318–20. 26 Austin, The Hellenistic World, no. 35. 27 Walbank, ‘Monarchies and Monarchic Ideas’, 93. 28 Ibid. 29 Ibid. 30 Cf. below, fn. 97. 31 Koenen, ‘The Ptolemaic King’, 50–52.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

The Ideals of Hellenistic Kingship

207

begun in honour of this new cult.32 Ptolemy II allied himself and his wife to the cult of Alexander as brother-sister gods (θεοὶ ἀδελφοί) beginning the worship of the monarch while still alive.33 Walbank suggests that the dynastic cult met an important need for the displaced Greek administration of Egypt. The members of the royal house no longer belonged to a traditional Greek city with its religious ritual and structure. Dynastic cult filled this void while fostering loyalty and strengthening the royal public persona.34 This cult was also found in the native temples. In Egypt, identifying the king as Pharaoh, which carried divine connotations35, was a straightforward task and helped to draw the subjected native priesthood into an attitude of loyalty.36 In summary, then, Hellenistic kingship was founded on the military success of Alexander and his successors. The cult of the king was a means of establishing social stability. Cities flattered their benefactors, and kings emphasized their god-like abilities to rule unchallenged. Over time, what had grown up relatively spontaneously began, naturally, to be formalized and the king came to be praised for his power, success and god-like presence simply because of his lineage. Where it was possible, local religion was incorporated into this system, while always ensuring that the Greek characteristics remained primary.

8.3 The Ideals of Hellenistic Kingship During the fourth century Isocrates and Xenophon produced works designed to flatter and influence a king. In works such as Ad Nicoclem and Nicocles (Isocrates) and Cyropaedia and Hieron (Xenophon) they advocated a virtuous ideal of piety, beneficence, justice and self-control in material appetites.37 Plato had repeatedly expressed a preference for the supremacy of Walbank, ‘Monarchies and Monarchic Ideas’, 97. Koenen, ‘The Ptolemaic King’, 50–52. Walbank, ‘Monarchies and Monarchic Ideas’, 96–97. Jaromir Malek, ‘The Old Kingdom’, in Ian Shaw (ed.), The Oxford History of Ancient Egypt (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000) 83–107, on pp. 92–93; Betsy M. Bryan, ‘The 18th Dynasty before the Amarna Period’, in Ian Shaw (ed.), The Oxford History of Ancient Egypt (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000) 207–64, on p. 222; Alan B. Lloyd, ‘The Late Period (664–332 BC)’, in Ian Shaw (ed.), The Oxford History of Ancient Egypt (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000) 364–87, on p. 369; Walbank, ‘Monarchies and Monarchic Ideas’, 168. 36 Walbank, ‘Monarchies and Monarchic Ideas’, 73–74; Koenen, ‘The Ptolemaic King’, 25 & figs 1a & 1b. The Rosetta stone illustrates this during the reign of Ptolemy V; Austin, The Hellenistic World, no. 227=OGIS 90. For the attempt to integrate Pharaonic and Hellenistic conceptions of kingship, Koenen, ‘The Ptolemaic King’, 25. 37 V. J. Gray, ‘Xenophon and Isocrates’, in Christopher Rowe/Malcolm Schofield (ed.), The Cambridge History of Greek and Roman Political Thought (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000) 142–54, on pp. 146–51; Walbank, ‘Monarchies and Monarchic Ideas’, 75.

32 33 34 35

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

208

Hellenistic Kingship and Wisdom

the philosopher and his right to rule (Rep. 499B-C, Laws 4.711E-712A), even putting some of this theory into practice in repeated visits to Sicily to train the son, and then later the nephew of Dionysus I.38 Plato may have become disillusioned about the possibility of realizing the ideal, but the idea of a philosopher-king would be a persistent one39, even if there remained a general Greek suspicion of monarchies, associating them with barbarism and Persia.40 The advent of Alexander and his successors provided a new and distinctive context for these ideas. Hellenistic kingship, with all its autocratic power41, unrestricted by law or tradition42, inspired new reflections ‘On Kingship’. The essential virtues of kingship, such as justice, wisdom and self-control, remained largely unchanged from the earlier period.43 However, the new unfettered power of the kings as well as rival relationships with other kingdoms encouraged the crafting of new relationships with the masses and with cities through acts that were benevolent (φιλάνθρωπος) and beneficent (εὐεργετικός) and works on kingship, usually from a philosophical standpoint and often from within the royal court44, dwelt further on these accepted virtues to encourage behaviour that would benefit the people and particular factions.45 Although we are aware of numerous works which were written on this subject, relatively few are extant for the period in question.46 The primary sources include the fictional letter from Aristotle to Alexander the Great, the Rhetorica ad Alexandrum, which urges the king to study rhetoric and reasoning and insists on the king’s rational discourse as the means of benefiting those ruled in contrast to the role played played by law in democracy (1420a19–27).47 A second source is Diodorus Siculus, whose first book in his Historical Library on Egypt is taken by Murray to be based on the work of Hecataeus of Abdera who wrote in Egypt under Ptolemy.48 This idealized picture of 38 Armstrong, Ancient Philosophy, 57; Walbank, ‘Monarchies and Monarchic Ideas’, 76. 39 Oswyn Murray, ‘Philosophy and Monarchy in the Hellenistic World’, in Tessa Rajak and others (ed.), Jewish Perspectives on Hellenistic Rulers (Berkley: University of California Press, 2007) 13–28, on p. 16. 40 Glotz, The Greek City, 28; Murray, ‘Philosophy and Monarchy’, 14. 41 Murray, ‘Philosophy and Monarchy’, 23. 42 Hahm, ‘Kings and constitutions’, 457, 59. 43 Walbank, ‘Monarchies and Monarchic Ideas’, 76. 44 Murray, ‘Philosophy and Monarchy’, 16–17, 24. 45 See above, p. 205; Walbank, ‘Monarchies and Monarchic Ideas’, 83. 46 For a recent survey of the evidence, see Murray, ‘Philosophy and Monarchy’, 17–21. Cf. Schofield (‘Social and Political Thought’, 742–44), who would include Philodemus’ On the Good King according to Homer (PHerc. 1507) but is sceptical whether such works offered anything except ‘variations on stock themes inherited from To Nicocles’. 47 Hahm, ‘Kings and constitutions’, 458–59. 48 Oswyn Murray, ‘Hecataeus of Abdera and Pharaonic Kingship’, The Journal of Egyptian

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

The Ideals of Hellenistic Kingship

209

Pharaonic kingship as ruling according to the minutely detailed prescriptions of law (Diodorus Siculus i.70–71) was, at least at points, intended to be directly relevant to Ptolemaic rule.49 The question of the king’s relation to law is an important issue to which we will return, but what is most significant about this account is its lack of realism when placed in the context of the actual practice of Hellenistic kingship. This reveals the nature of most kingship material. It actually stands outside of the realm of real power, even when written from within the court (such as was the case with Hecataeus)50, offering flattery and potentially shame where necessary and attempting to cajole those with power into pursuing an ethical, philosophically-driven, model of kingship which would benefit the author’s circle. The third source of material is The Letter of Aristeas to Philocrates.51 This offers insights on certain Alexandrian Jewish views of Ptolemaic kingship and their relationship to the state in the second century.52 The work shows a

49 50 51

52

Archaeology, vol. 56 (1970) 141–71, on pp. 142–50. Murray’s work is still widely accepted in more recent summaries; e. g. Hahm, ‘Kings and constitutions’, 462; Walbank, ‘Monarchies and Monarchic Ideas’, 77. Interestingly, Murray himself did not emphasize this depiction of law-bound ideal kingship in his own recent survey of the topic (‘Philosophy and Monarchy’, 15). Murray, ‘Hecataeus of Abdera’, 159. Ibid., 166. Attempts to extract the framework of a non-Jewish work On Kingship by deleting the distinctively Jewish elements (G. Zuntz, “Aristeas Studies I: ‘The Seven Banquets’”, JSS 4 [1959] 21–36, on pp. 24–31) have not been well-received and rather miss the point that Hellenistic Kingship was an idea which could be theorized upon by multiple Greek philosophical schools, as well as by Egyptians and Jews (Oswyn Murray, ‘Aristeas and Ptolemaic Kingship’, Journal of Theological Studies, vol. 18, no. 2 [1967] 337–71, on pp. 350–53). Having said this, it is still possible to see in Aristeas what are likely to be general traits in the way in which kingship tracts critiqued the reality of Hellenistic rulership (Walbank, ‘Monarchies and Monarchic Ideas’, 78; Hahm, ‘Kings and constitutions’, 461–62). The conventional title of ‘letter’ is misleading in that the work was first so termed in the fourteenth century (Honigman, The Septuagint and Homeric Scholarship, 1). The earliest possible date is the reign of Ptolemy III (246–22) because of the references to ‘these kings’ (τοῖς βασιλεῦσι τούτοις) / ‘the kings’ (τοὺς βασιλεῖς) (Let. Arist. 28, 182), which seems to distance the author from the immediate literary context of the reign of Ptolemy II (285/2–246). The latest possible date is the end of the first century: Josephus paraphrased the work around 90 CE in Ant. 12.12–118. A recent multi-faceted assessment of the question by Honigman (The Septuagint and Homeric Scholarship) has located Aristeas shortly before the persecutions of Ptolemy VIII, which affected Jews and intellectuals (Tcherikover, Hellenistic Civilization, 282; Fraser, Ptolemaic Alexandria i, 87). According to Honigman, Aristeas functions as a ‘Charter Myth’ (8, 37–63; the concept itself is borrowed from Oswyn Murray (‘The Letter of Aristeas’, in B. Virgilio (ed.), Studi ellenistici II (Pisa: Giardini, 1987) 15–29), establishing the authority of the LXX by describing its origins. This is achieved using ‘Homeric’ and ‘Exodus’ narrative paradigms. The former paradigm identifies the LXX translation as a critical work held within the Alexandrian Library, created by royal patronage (Let. Arist. 30–32) using the best practices of Alexandrian scholarship as practised by Aristarchus in his edition of Homer (Honigman, The Septuagint and Homeric Scholarship, 130–35). These included the establishing of original works by paying careful attention to the acquisition of the best sources (Let. Arist. 38–39) and to the evalua-

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

210

Hellenistic Kingship and Wisdom

remarkably positive and optimistic attitude with respect to the possibility of living a fully Jewish life that is integrated with and respected by the surrounding Hellenistic culture. At the heart of the work is a duality: an assertion that the God of the Jews is in fact the same god as Zeus under a different name (v. 16), and that the particularism that is derived from Torah obedience should be maintained (v. 139).53 It is the universality of the Jewish God which leads to the universality of natural reasoning, and it is this which the more obscure injunctions of the Jewish law are meant to convey (vv. 143– 71). Further, it is by the King’s attention to the sophia of the Jewish translators that the king will learn to continue (he is, according to Aristeas, already doing this) to treat distinct peoples within his kingdom in manners appropriate to each (v. 267). Firstly, the work offers flattery and respect. Ptolemy II is depicted as a benefactor54 to the Jews, sending exquisite and valuable furniture for use in the Jewish temple (vv. 51–82) and of course instigating translation of the Torah, for which royal patronage would appear to be necessary (v. 30). Similarly, the king is depicted as the patron of the civilized world, doubling the tion of different versions (Let. Arist. 301–02; Honigman, The Septuagint and Homeric Scholarship, 42–48; Sylvie Honigman, ‘The Narrative Function of the King and the Library in the Letter of Aristeas’, in Tessa Rajak and others (ed.), Jewish Perspectives on Hellenistic Rulers (Berkley: University of California Press, 2007) 128–46, on pp. 139–41). The latter paradigm is biblical and retells the Exodus narrative so that in this no escape from Egypt is necessary (Honigman, The Septuagint and Homeric Scholarship, 53–59). Pharaoh is not the persecutor of the Jewish people but rather the translator and student of their law. Honigman’s conclusion sets Aristeas in a period of growth and establishment for the Jewish community in Alexandria. Following the Maccabean crisis, it is argued, an organized group of refugees may have arrived in Alexandria (Honigman, The Septuagint and Homeric Scholarship, 98–101) and necessitated the creation of the Jewish politeuma (πολίτευμα). This group appears not to have been identical with the Jewish people (Honigman, The Septuagint and Homeric Scholarship, 99; Let. Arist. 310), and from the evidence of papyri from Heracleopolis in Middle-Egypt in the second century BCE (P. Polit. Iud.: 9, 11, 28–9) the archontes (ἄρχοντες) of the politeuma were able to make legal rulings for Jewish cases (Honigman, The Septuagint and Homeric Scholarship, 109). This partial self-governance of the Jewish people in the second century, under the sanction of the Ptolemies in the second century, shows continuity with the role of the ethnarch (ἐθνάρχης) described by Strabo in the first century BCE (Josephus, Ant. 14.117). The role of Aristeas, as a charter myth, was therefore to establish the LXX as an authoritative, accurate and royally sanctioned law for the Jewish community in Alexandria within the overarching Ptolemaic regime. The notion that Aristeas intends such a role for the LXX is strengthened by Orlinsky’s identification of the biblical ‘ratification’ themes in 310–11 (H. M. Orlinsky, ‘The Septuagint as Holy Writ and the Philosophy of the Translators’, Hebrew Union College Annual 46 (1975) 89–114). Even though there is no direct evidence to establish the nature of the relationship of the document of Aristeas to the establishment of the politeuma in Alexandria, it remains the case that the letter witnesses to a particular Jewish political aspiration in the second century. 53 The appeal to the divine is a characteristic of Aristeas: ‘even the kingly qualities of justice, clemency, and benevolence, which were traditionally advocated for their utility in securing popular favour, are formally recommended on the grounds that God is just forgiving and benevolent to human beings (187–8, 205)’ (Hahm, ‘Kings and constitutions’, 462). 54 See above, p. 205.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

The Ideals of Hellenistic Kingship

211

size of his library and seeking out the ancient wisdom of the world. He is a magnanimous liberator, freeing the 100,000 Jewish captives (vv. 12–27) taken during his father’s reign. In these ways, the author is harnessing the official public picture of the Ptolemies. Of course, there is plenty in this picture which would be far more difficult for a typical Jewish mindset and that here is only mentioned indirectly. Polytheism and idolatry is attacked (vv. 134– 38) and there is a strong emphasis on the king’s common mortal nature with his people (vv. 262–63; 282) that stands in contrast to the official idealized god-man. Secondly, the kingly ideal advocated is essentially ethical and virtuous. Ironically, the king is praised for his divine characteristics, but he is presented with an ideal which eschews a public idealization of himself and which exhorts him to emulate the ethical characteristics of the Jewish God. This king’s glory is not to be measured by military prowess, great wealth or personal charisma. He is to be god-like, not in the sense that he performs great feats of battle, but in the sense that he is just and merciful (vv. 288–90). The highest form of sovereignty is not world domination, wealth or glamour but self-control (vv. 211, 222). Further, at the heart of this critique is the view that the sophia that the king needs to learn is reflective and only then practical. Practical sophia cannot be taught, it is a disposition of the soul mediated by the power of God (v. 236). Again and again, one reads that the king’s questions can be answered through the ‘realization’ of God’s reality, the nature of his world and his ways of working in it, and that this realization is a gift of God (e. g. vv. 208, 210, 224, 240, 253).55 One final point should be noted regarding the king’s relationship to the law. The Jews are urged to be obedient to the law (v. 127) but there is a pragmatic slant in the work’s recognition that kings actually have absolute power and that advocating the king’s subservience to law would be pointless (vv. 253–254). Although such a view would appear to be consistent with speculation on the king’s embodiment of the law56 it is not here a technical discussion. Instead, given that the king is meant to imitate God’s rule, and indeed is depicted as funding and approving of the translation of the Jewish law, the king’s absolute power in his kingdom is to be understood as a subservient execution of God’s rule over the cosmos. The Letter of Aristeas depicts a Jewish people in Alexandria who are largely at peace with their cultural and political context.57 While Ptolemy is a student of the Jewish law, much as is advocated in Wisdom (6:9) and so is humbled beneath it, he is also the patron of its translation who acknowledges

55 Murray, ‘Aristeas and Ptolemaic Kingship’, 352. 56 See the discussion of Diotogenes above, p. 212. 57 Honigman has argued that Aristeas advocates that the LXX be viewed as an ethnic law for the Jews in Alexandria sanctioned by the Ptolemaic regime (Honigman, The Septuagint and Homeric Scholarship, 108–13).

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

212

Hellenistic Kingship and Wisdom

and values the Jewish community. Within the world of this document, no need was felt for the thinly veiled threat of Wisdom (5:23–6:1). A final source of material for the discussion of Hellenistic kingship tracts is the pseudo-Pythagorean fragments to be found in Stobaeus.58 The dating of the works is generally placed in the second to third century CE59, to have no direct connection with the Ptolemaic court60, but to contain material which through correlation with earlier evidence may yet contribute to a fuller picture of Hellenistic kingship theory.61 The king is depicted as a great individual who in Diotogenes organizes his state in a harmony that should imitate God’s organization of the world. The king, who is animate law, is to the city as God is to the world. With a more mystical tone, Ecphantus’ king is the most divine of human beings who ‘as a splendid light’ is a model of excellence to his subjects and source of inspiration to his government through his virtue. Sthenidas urges the king to emulate the providential creator and father of the world in magnanimity, gravity and mildness. Diotogenes urges the king to deport himself with such ‘actions, body motions and gestures, that those who observe him may perceive that he is adorned and fashioned with modesty and temperance, and a dignified disposition’. Even the king’s body was moulded by the best sculptors and serves as the archetype for others. The king’s job is to lead an army, administer justice and to worship the gods. He is a pilot whose job is to preserve the ship, saving those who are in danger in battle. He is to be self-controlled and should overcome pleasure rather than be overcome himself by it. Diotogenes provides an apologetic for wealth, as necessary to benefit friends, relieve those in want and punish enemies, but yet still wishes to assert that the virtuous king will in reality be a king. He does not go so far as to say that the king lacking virtue would not be a king. It might be expected from the above that the king would be above the law in these fragments and this is largely the case. Diotogenes describes the king as animate law (νόμος ἔμψυχος) himself, although with some qualification.62 There is no presentation of the king as somehow bound by law, but rather a

58 Stobaeus 4.6.22, 7.64 (Ecphantus); 7.61–2 (Diotogenes); 7.63 (Sthenidas). English translations can be found in Thomas Taylor (trans.), Political Fragments of Archytas, Charondas, Zaleuccus, and Other Ancient Pythagoreans, Preserved by Stobaeus (Chiswick: C. Whittingham, 1822), 18–20, 26–37. For further texts, bibliography and analysis see Schofield, ‘Social and Political Thought’, 742–44; Walbank, ‘Monarchies and Monarchic Ideas’, 78. 59 Walbank, ‘Monarchies and Monarchic Ideas’, 78; Bruno Centrone views them as first century BCE-CE: ‘Platonism and Pythagoreanism in the early empire’, in Christopher Rowe/ Malcolm Schofield (ed.), The Cambridge History of Greek and Roman Political Thought (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000) 559–84, on p. 575. 60 Fraser, Ptolemaic Alexandria i, 485. 61 The works contain ‘standard ideas of monarchy’ but are ‘pale reflections’ rather than original: Murray, ‘Philosophy and Monarchy’, 20–21. 62 Murray (‘Philosophy and Monarchy’, 21) is doubtful about the relevance of this concept to Hellenistic kingship theory.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

The Jews in Alexandria in the Hellenistic Era

213

tying of the true kingly nature to a divine ideal of virtue.63 In summary, these works show a subtle ability to accept the more grandiose ideas of the kingly nature and yet still to argue that the greater one is, the more profound one’s responsibilities to one’s subjects become. Whether these works really reflect an official political philosophy of the Hellenistic age64 is hard to say with certainty65, but they do demonstrate how a philosophical and political class and, in the case of the Letter of Aristeas, a religious and ethnic minority, might attempt to rationalize and mould the popular, extrovert and effective self-presentation of the kings as great, victorious, powerful and wealthy into something more reflective, self-controlled and thoroughly benevolent.

8.4 The Jews in Alexandria in the Hellenistic Era Although there may have been a Jewish presence in Egypt from even the seventh century, and a military colony at Elephantine had existed during the fifth century66, Jews arrived in Egypt in greater numbers in the Hellenistic period.67 Each of the three Syrian wars (320, 312, 302 BCE) brought about forced or voluntary immigration.68 Aristeas, with likely inflated figures, records that 100,000 Jewish prisoners were deported to Egypt, 30,000 of which Ptolemy I took as soldiers.69 From 302 to 198 BCE, Palestine was part of the Ptolemaic Empire and there were no barriers separating it from Egypt. Greek speaking Jews could move to the prospering, developing Alexandria and its surrounding area supplementing the Jewish soldiers, ‘cleruchs’, who had settled on the reward for their service.70 After a time, incomers would find there a Jewish community to welcome them, particularly on the NorthEast coast of the city, a home from home.71 Modrzejewski, on the basis of Josephus’s view, argues that as Greek speakers the Jews could be classified as 63 Centrone, ‘Platonism and Pythagoreanism’, 573; Walbank, ‘Monarchies and Monarchic Ideas’, 80. 64 Erwin, R. Goodenough, ‘The Political Philosophy of Hellenistic Kingship’, in Austin M. Harmon (ed.), Yale Classical Studies, vol. 1 (New Haven/London: Yale University Press/ Oxford University Press, 1928) 55–102, on p. 102. 65 Murray (‘Philosophy and Monarchy’, 20–21) argues against Goodenough that monarchic rule was justified by the virtues of the king. Walbank (‘Monarchies and Monarchic Ideas’, 79) is more positive, arguing that the idealized picture can be complemented by archaeological evidence. 66 Stephen G. Rosenberg, ‘The Jewish Temple at Elephantine’, Near Eastern Archaeology, vol. 67, no. 1 (2004) 4–13; Alan B. Lloyd, ‘The Late Period’, 376. 67 Honigman, The Septuagint and Homeric Scholarship, 100; Barclay, Jews in the Mediterranean Diaspora, 20. 68 Barclay, Jews in the Mediterranean Diaspora, 20; Josephus, C. Ap. 1.184–89; Modrzejewski, The Jews of Egypt, 99 ff. 69 Let. Aris. 13. 70 Modrzejewski, The Jews of Egypt, 83–87. 71 Ibid., 91, 258.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

214

Hellenistic Kingship and Wisdom

“Hellenes”, citizens, part of the conquering, ruling and upper class, in contrast to the Egyptians, who even after learning Greek remained subjects.72 Fraser, using Strabo as quoted by Josephus, argues that the Jews gained a distinct and established position within Alexandria but that it is unlikely that they gained citizenship as a whole.73 The ambiguity of Jewish status was likely increased, as both the Egyptians and the Jews gained influence in the royal court during the second century. Further, the removal of the Alexandrian assembly partially undermined the privilege of a citizenship reserved only for Greeks and allowed Jews to rise in public influence. This, in part, explains the increase in tension at the introduction of the laographia under Augustus: for those who possessed it, citizenship suddenly began to make a meaningful difference once again.74 With the King and the Greek language acting as unifying bonds over such a diverse populace, it is likely that the Jews were free to worship according to their ancestral customs75 and not at all obligated to be involved in the pagan religious practices that had been associated with the classical Greek idea of citizenship.76 Synagogues were constructed at least as early as the middle of the third century77 and were frequently dedicated to their ‘benefactors’ who were often kings and queens. Such an act of dedication was a participation in the Hellenistic practice of euergetism and thus reinforced the image of the benefactor at the same time as establishing a central part of Jewish life in the city with the affirmation of a widely respected figure.78 For many aspirational Jews, Greek culture and education offered new and exciting vistas and Alexandria became a place where this could be enjoyed while still retaining one’s traditional faith and community.79 Diana Delia estimates that by the Roman period, around a third of Alexandria’s 500,000 population was Jewish.80 The transition to a new country was not without complications, however. Although there were a number of well established, and officially dedicated, houses of prayer (the word ‘synagogue’ was reserved for community meetings), Hebrew literacy undoubtedly suffered and some form of Greek translation would have become necessary for public meetings.81 72 73 74 75 76

77 78 79 80 81

Ibid., 80–81; Josephus, Ag. Ap. 2.35–36; 488; Ant. 12.8. Fraser, Ptolemaic Alexandria i, 54–55; cf. Tcherikover, Hellenistic Civilization, 297–302. Tcherikover, Hellenistic Civilization, 311. Modrzejewski, The Jews of Egypt, 87. Barclay, Jews in the Mediterranean Diaspora, 28–29. On the question of the political status and self-organization of the Jewish community during the third and second century, see Honigman, The Septuagint and Homeric Scholarship, 98–101. Modrzejewski, The Jews of Egypt, 87–98. Leonhardt, Jewish Worship, 76–79; cf. above, 205. Barclay, Jews in the Mediterranean Diaspora, 30. Diana Delia, ‘The Population of Roman Alexandria’, Transactions of the American Philological Association (1974–), vol. 118 (1988) 275–92. The actual reason for the original translation of the Pentateuch cannot be determined with certainty. The work came to be used throughout Jewish life, in worship, education and legal

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

The Jews in Alexandria in the Hellenistic Era

215

Under Ptolemaic rule, the Torah was permitted to function as ‘ancestral’ rather than ‘imperial’ law82, as part of the civic, ‘common’ law.83 There was a hierarchy of judicial systems. The King’s legislation had priority, and if this legislation was not sufficient then local laws – for Jews the Greek Torah, for other immigrants their own preferred traditions – could be applied.84 In theory then, there was remarkable freedom for the Jews to live according to their own traditions. In practice, it would have been necessary for Jews to interact with their fellow non-Jew Hellenes and for all such business transactions and activities, the Torah had no bearing.85 It seems likely that the height of Jewish favour and involvement in the administration in Egypt and Alexandria came during the reign of Ptolemy VI Philometor (185–145 BCE).86 Some evidence for this, again undoubtedly exaggerated, is to be found in 2 Maccabees 1:10, where the second letter is addressed to the Jewish philosopher Aristobulus who is described as ‘teacher of King Ptolemy’.87 In addition, Josephus writes in Against Apion (2, 49) that Ptolemy VI and his wife Cleopatra had ‘committed their whole kingdom to the Jews and that two Jews called Onias and Dositheos were generals of their ‘whole’ army.’88 From a different perspective, this period was marked in Palestine by a fraught relationship between Jews and Gentiles and it seems plausible that a conservative reaction to Hellenism, fuelled by the Maccabean crisis, would have been communicated from Judea at least in some small way.89

82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89

settings (Tcherikover, Hellenistic Civilization, 348; on the legal use especially, Modrzejewski, The Jews of Egypt, 99–119) but the purpose of the origin of the document is not necessarily related to its later usage. Honigman, after surveying arguments for origin based on each area of later usage (Honigman, The Septuagint and Homeric Scholarship, 105–13), has argued for the primary role of prestige in the creation of the LXX, arguing that the picture of Ptolemy II in the The Letter of Aristeas may be closer to reality than has been considered likely (The Septuagint and Homeric Scholarship, 93–119, 136–38). In this scenario, second or third generation Jews in Alexandria would have become aware of their dependence on scribes to mediate the text to the wider community. They would have desired to benefit from the euergetism of the king, displayed in the creation of his library in Alexandria, and sought the funds and permission for their own translation. The library played an important role in national and international royal propaganda, demonstrating the king’s culture and magnanimity (Andrew Erskine, ‘Culture and Power in Ptolemaic Egypt: The Museum and Library of Alexandria’, Greece and Rome, 2nd ser., vol. 42, no. 1 (1995) 38– 48), its claimed universal content from every land paralleling the claimed universal domination of Ptolemy II, and it would have been from this that the Jews sought to benefit (Honigman, The Septuagint and Homeric Scholarship, 116–17). Modrzejewski, The Jews of Egypt, 55. Ibid., 97–112. Ibid., 107–12; Fraser, Ptolemaic Alexandria i, 107–10; Tcherikover, Hellenistic Civilization, 297–309. Modrzejewski, The Jews of Egypt, 112–19. Ibid., 121; Barclay, Jews in the Mediterranean Diaspora, 35–37. Modrzejewski, The Jews of Egypt, 121. Ibid., 121–33; Barclay, Jews in the Mediterranean Diaspora, 35–37. Although it should be noted that the Jewish antagonism in Palestine was associated with the

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

216

Hellenistic Kingship and Wisdom

The typical Jew in Alexandria was a soldier in the service of the king and therefore from a native Egyptian point of view, part of an oppressive occupying military power.90 Egyptian myths developed which stigmatized the Jews as leprous foreigners previously cast out of their land.91 Similarly, Greek prejudices developed which characterized the Jews as unsocial, atheistic and cannibals: a far cry from the earlier enthusiastic wonder of Theophrastus at the monotheistic ‘nation of philosophers’.92 Jews, in their turn, responded with apologetic accounts of how Egyptian civilisation had been established by Abraham and Joseph.93 The first significant actualization of tensions may be found in the recounted events of the escape of the Jews from a stampede of elephants found in 3 Maccabees and Josephus’ Against Apion 2.49–55. This is dated by Modrzejewski to the reign of Ptolemy IV (following 3 Maccabees), rather than Ptolemy VIII Euergetes II (following Josephus) although Tcherikover considers such an event ‘quite unjustified’ in the earlier reign but having the character of ‘historical authenticity’ in the reign of the brutal Euergetes II against whom Onias the Jew had been drawn into opposition in support of Cleopatra II.94 The points of contention in the account are the “Dionysianism” of Philopator and the census of the Jews.95 Modrzejewski places these together and speculates that a census, which was traditionally very offensive to Jews in and of itself, may have been combined with an attempt to categorize Judaism as a Dionysian sect – possibly bringing them under the auspices of the Ruler cult. In either case, we have a recurring account which attests to difficulty in remaining part of Alexandrian society while yet remaining distinctly Jewish, the events of which may be dated to 222–205 or 145– 146 BCE.96 Further, irrespective of the connection of 3 Maccabees with

90 91 92 93

94 95 96

Seleucid regime, and Honigman argues that it was immigrants from Palestine into Alexandria, arriving during and after the Maccabean crisis, who contributed to the formalizing of the identity and status of the Jewish community within the Ptolemaic administration (Honigman, The Septuagint and Homeric Scholarship, 100). Modrzejewski, The Jews of Egypt, 136. Tcherikover, Hellenistic Civilization, 273, 358–64; Barclay, Jews in the Mediterranean Diaspora, 33–34. Eusebius, Praep. ev. 9.2; Modrzejewski, The Jews of Egypt, 49, 153–57. See the three summaries of Artapanus work preserved in Eusebius Praep. ev. 9.18, 23, 27 (and available in English translation in James H. Charlesworth [ed.], The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha, 2 vol. [New York: Doubleday, 1983–85] ii) that present Abraham as the founder of astrology, Joseph as the discoverer of measurements and Moses, amongst other things, as the inventor of Egyptian arms, water-drawing equipment and philosophy. Modrzejewski, The Jews of Egypt, 141–53; Tcherikover, Hellenistic Civilization, 282; Barclay, Jews in the Mediterranean Diaspora, 37–38. Modrzejewski, The Jews of Egypt, 149–51. Barclay, Jews in the Mediterranean Diaspora, 192–201. Cf. David S. Williams, ‘3 Maccabees: a Defense of Diaspora Judaism?’, JSP, vol. 7, no. 13 (1995) 17–29, who dates the composition of 3 Macc around 100 BCE and argues that the work is directed towards Palestinian

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

The Jews in Alexandria in the Hellenistic Era

217

Euergetes II, the events of the latter’s reign did see the Jewish community drawn into the support of the losing side of the Ptolemaic dynastic dispute, introducing a new source for the suspicion of Jews by royal authority.97 In 30 BCE, Octavian (later to become Augustus) conquered Egypt. Overall, the Jews had advanced and prospered in the Ptolemaic administration, seeking to be considered amongst the Greek-speaking ruling class – the ‘Hellenes’.98 The Roman concept of citizenship, however, was far less flexible.99 A poll-tax, known as the laographia, was introduced by Augustus. Citizens were to be exempt.100 The Jews who lived outside of the cities were to pay the tax. They became no different from the Egyptians who had formerly been the conquered underclass.101 In addition, however, property-owning Greek-speaking and educated Jews in the cities suddenly found their position amongst the higher echelons of society undermined.102 Some individuals, no doubt, could convincingly claim citizenship, but the Jews as a body were perceived to be a separate non-Greek grouping by the Roman regime.103 Matters came to a head at the accession of Gaius Caligula in 37 CE. Flaccus had been prefect of Alexandria and Egypt since 32 CE. He had, however, supported the accession of an alternative, rival candidate in Rome and so found himself with a year in which to consolidate his position and so sided with Alexandrian nationalists104. Philo describes the situation in black and white terms, highly reminiscent of apocalyptic and Stoic binary categorizations: ‘What then did the governor of the country do? He knew that the city, as the rest of Egypt, has two kinds of inhabitants, us and them, and that there

Judaism in defense of Diaspora Judaism. Note also Tcherikover (Hellenistic Civilization, 317–18) for whom the issues of laographia and citizenship (3 Macc 2:28; 3:12–29) locate the work in the Augustan period. 97 Barclay, Jews in the Mediterranean Diaspora, 37–39; Fraser, Ptolemaic Alexandria i, 121. The nature of the tension should not be overstated, however. Note the brief summary in Schwartz (‘Philo’, 18–19), which emphasizes the ability and desire of Jews, such as Philo, to receive an education in the gymnasium during the Ptolemaic period; cf. Allen Kerkeslager, ‘Maintaining Jewish Identity in the Greek Gymnasium: A “Jewish Load” in CPJ 3.519 (= P. SCHUB. 37 = P. BEROL. 13406)’, JSJ, vol. 28, no. 1 (1997) 12–33. 98 Modrzejewski, The Jews of Egypt, 73–83. 99 Bowman, ‘Egypt’, 676–79. 100 David Peacock, ‘The Roman Period (30 BC-AD 395)’, Ian Shaw (ed) The Oxford History of Ancient Egypt (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000) 422–45, on p. 417; Naphtali Lewis, Life in Egypt under Roman Rule (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1983), 169–72. 101 On the change of status of the Jews under the Romans, Tcherikover, Hellenistic Civilization, 311; Modrzejewski, The Jews of Egypt, 161–63; Schwartz, ‘Philo’, 20. 102 Martin Goodman, ‘Judaea’, in The Cambridge Ancient History, 14 vol. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1971–2005), x, Alan K. Bowman/Edward Champlin/Andrew Lintott (ed.), The Augustan Empire, 43 B. C.–A. D. 69, (21996) 737–81, on pp. 778–79. 103 Modrzejewski, The Jews of Egypt, 161–65. 104 Modrzejewski, The Jews of Egypt, 165–69.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

218

Hellenistic Kingship and Wisdom

are no less than one million Jews living in Alexandria and the rest of the country’.105 Thence followed a series of events, in which relations between the Jews and the public administration became increasingly strained as the Jews appealed to their new Roman hosts for equal political status.106 Flaccus’ attempt to consolidate his position proved fruitless. He was arrested in 38 CE, exiled and executed some months later. The following year Philo set out with a Jewish delegation to plead the Jewish case before the Emperor, recording an account of the trip in his Embassy to Gaius.107 The embassy proved unsuccessful, and on the death of Gaius Caligula the Jews took their revenge on those who with public support had attacked them in 38. Claudius’ letter to the Alexandrians preserved the status quo. The Jews and their customs were to be respected, but equally, the Jews themselves were to remain inhabitants of a city which was ‘not their own’ and neither were they to ‘aim at more than they had previously had’.108 Matters would not get better. Although there were notable exceptions – for instance the brilliant career of Philo’s nephew, Tiberius Julius Alexander109 – Alexandria was not independent from the terrible events taking place in Judea. It takes us beyond the scope of this study, but the end would come in 115–117 CE when the Jews of the western and eastern diaspora rebelled against the Romans. From this point, there were no more Hellenized Jews in Alexandria.110

8.5 The Sage as King A further use of kingship language is to be found in the Stoic understanding of the sage as king. The ideal Stoic sage is something of a superhuman. He is ‘richer, stronger, freer, happier and the only person truly deserving the title “king”’.111 105 Philo, Flacc. 43; translation, Pieter Willem van der Horst, Philo’s Flaccus: The First Pogrom: Introduction, Translation, and Commentary (Leiden: Brill, 2003), 62; cf. ibid., 135–36. 106 Schwartz, ‘Philo’, 21; Goodman, ‘Judaea’, 778–79. On Agrippa I’s visit to Alexandria, during which he was publicly parodied by Alexandrian nationalists, Flaccus’ erection of statues of Caligula in the city’s houses of prayer, the Jewish closure of proseuchai and Flaccus’ edict declaring the Jews as ‘foreigners’ in Alexandria, Modrzejewski, The Jews of Egypt, 169. The Jewish population in Alexandria was displaced into one of the city’s five ‘quarters’, during which mob violence took and looting took place, damaging Jewish businesses (Philo, Flacc. 55–56). 107 Bowman, ‘Egypt’, 701. 108 CPJ 153, lines 73–104. 109 Modrzejewski, The Jews of Egypt, 185–90; Schwartz, ‘Philo’, 23. 110 T. D. Barnes, ‘Trajan and the Jews’, Journal of Jewish Studies, vol. 40, no. 2 (1989) 145–62. 111 Cf. a sarcastic Cicero, Fin. 3.75. Cf. Sellars, Stoicism, 36; Sharples, Stoics, Epicureans and Sceptics, 76.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

The Sage as King

219

[The Stoics say:] Only he [the wise man] is free, but the inferior are slaves. For freedom is the power of autonomous action, but slavery is the lack of autonomous action. […] Besides being free the wise are also kings, since kingship is rule that is answerable to no one; and this can only occur amongst the wise, as Chrysippus says in his work on Zeno’s proper use of terminology. For he says that a ruler must have knowledge of what is good and bad, and that no inferior man has this. Likewise only the wise are holders of public office, judges and orators, whereas no inferior man is. (Diogenes Laertius 7.121–22 LS 67M)

Such reasoning has a strangely practical cast: the true sage is best equipped to meet all the tasks of life and to deal with them in a virtuous manner.112 He is therefore more appropriately termed a king than someone who possesses political power but not wisdom and virtue. Such a stance is not as apolitical as it might at first be supposed. Implied in it is the understanding that there are certain abilities and virtues which allow kingship to be performed successfully and the recognition and pursuit of these could form a king’s training as much as it could for any other stoic sage. The abilities and virtues in question are conceptually gathered around the core understanding of the universe’s ordering by divine reason and the sage’s apathy – his indifference to all external things.113 In practice, very few people could claim to have reached this ideal. This, combined with the Stoic tendency to categorize all people as either wise or foolish114, had a tendency to create frustration among critics.115 If only the sage was wise, but no-one appeared to be a sage, then everyone was a fool. In order to counter accusations that the ideal was impossible, only one individual needed to be produced. Socrates, despite not being a Stoic, was often used as such a figure.116 This kind of philosophy can be found in Philo, and his Alexandrian, Jewish and first century provenance make him especially relevant for a consideration of the influence of these ideas on Wisdom. That Philo shares the general conviction that the sage is only truly blessed can be seen in his treatise,

112 Schofield, The Stoic Idea of the City, 95–97. The origin of the reasoning in Stoicism lies, according to Schofield, in Zeno’s Republic, a depiction of an ideal state founded for the sake of concord on the common possession by its citizens of reason and virtue rather than the morally and rationally arbitrary ties of family and geography. With this redrafting of conventional political ideas came the redefining of political nomenclature. The good person, the sage, could be termed king. In later Stoicism, the primacy of virtue and reason was extracted from the immediate context of conventional politics and the range of predicates used for the sage could expand. The redefinition of kingship in terms of ability and knowledge necessary to rule, rather than possession of power, may find its roots in Xenophon who ascribes the tradition to Socrates (Mem. 3.9.10; although cf. Cyr. 1.1.3). In Xenophon and Isocrates, as in Zeno (according to Schofield), this redefinition is not a renunciation of enlightened monarchy (Gray, ‘Xenophon and Isocrates’, 147). 113 Armstrong, Ancient Philosophy, 126. 114 Plutarch, Comm. not. 1063A-B SVF 3.539 LS 61T. 115 Sellars, Stoicism, 37–38. 116 Ibid., 40–41; Epictetus, Dissertationes 4.5.1–4, quoted in A. A. Long, ‘Socrates in Hellenistic Philosophy’, The Classical Quarterly, n. s., vol. 38, no. 1 (1988) 150–71, on p. 150.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

220

Hellenistic Kingship and Wisdom

Every Good Man is Free (Quod omnis probus liber sit). Here he argues, replacing God for the Stoic virtues, that only he who has God for his leader is truly free.117 In Prob. 20, the man who has God for his leader receives the charge of earthly things from the immortal king whom he serves as viceroy. In Prob. 31, Homer is referenced with regard to his calling kings ‘shepherds of the people’ (Il. 2.243). Philo, however, proceeds to apply the title to ‘the good’ as kings are more often in the position of sheep than shepherds, led as they are by an enslavement to the pleasures of life. And, lastly, in paragraph 43 a worshipper of God becomes himself a god to men, admittedly leaving God as the Father of All and the God of gods. Philo’s theory of kingship is further developed and used in his works on Joseph and Moses118, Flaccus and Embassy to Gaius. Consequently, Moses is presented as that most elusive of individuals, a true sage who understood the divine providential ordering of the world and was able to incorporate this sophia into the Torah. Moses’ ability to give the law means he can rightly be termed animate law (νόμος ἔμψυχος; Mos. 2.4).119 Philo’s thoughts are obviously indebted to the Stoic tradition. Such philosophy seeks to elevate the status of the sage by association with the prestige of kingship. It shows some similarity with the On Kingship genre in its dedication to philosophy over power, even if the fragments of kingship treatises we possess are not obviously Stoic. As we have noted, the concept of kingship was tremendously important in the first century BCE, politically and philosophically. What is interesting here for the study of Wisdom is the transformation of the concept of kingship so that it can apply to the life of the sage.

8.6 Hellenistic and Cosmic Kingship In what has been discussed, the commonly held ideas and understanding of kingship in the Hellenistic world have been set out. The question of Wisdom’s relationship to these must now be explored. How, for instance, might this relate to Wisdom’s use of royal language to describe the salvation of the righteous? To what degree does the apocalyptic-patterned language of Wisdom 1–6 reflect ideological separation from and criticism of the Ptolemaic or Roman administration? Finally, how does Wisdom’s stance compare to the 117 James R. Royse, ‘The Works of Philo’, in Adam Kamesar (ed.), The Cambridge Companion to Philo (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2009) 32–64, on p. 55. 118 Erwin R. Goodenough, An Introduction to Philo Judaeus, (Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 21962), 33 ff. 119 Moses functions as an ideal king, someone in control of his passions, in Mos. 1.89 in a comparison between him and Pharaoh: Tessa Rajak, ‘The Angry Tyrant’, in Tessa Rajak and others (ed.), Jewish Perspectives on Hellenistic Rulers (Berkley: University of California Press, 2007) 110–27, on p. 115.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

Hellenistic and Cosmic Kingship

221

positive attitude toward the administration to be found in the Letter of Aristeas? J. M. Reese includes a short chapter in his Hellenistic Influence on the significance of Hellenistic kingship in Wisdom.120 This juxtaposes the Hellenistic kingly ideal, found particularly in The Letter of Aristeas and in the three fragments of kingship treatises which have been preserved in Stobaeus, against Wisdom’s depiction of God and anthropology. Reese notes influence, however, not simply in the depiction of the sage but also in the picture of God. In Wisdom 12, God is depicted as benevolent towards all of humanity (v. 13). He possesses δύναμις (‘power’), shows ἐπιείκεια (‘clemency’) and is φιλάνθρωπος (‘humane’ or ‘kind’) (vv. 15–19).121 These three terms follow the pattern found in Aristeas 206–08, where they are used to describe not God but the ideal king. God and human earthly kings are compared in this passage. As the ideal king, God benefits and teaches his people (12:19). The anthropology of Wisdom also follows the ‘subject matter and methodology’ of the kingship tracts in that it portrays human perfection ‘as an imitation of the virtues of the divine ruler of the universe’.122 Reese’s treatment of this parallelism can be expanded by reference to Wisdom 3:9, where the righteous govern under the rule of God, and to Wisdom 6:4, where the kings and judges of the earth are described as servants of God’s kingdom. In Wisdom 5:16, God is the victorious ruler who dispenses crowns and diadems (5:16). He examines the ungodly ‘as a stern king does in condemnation’ (11:10). One final kingly theme noted by Reese in Aristeas is that of beneficence. The idea that an important aspect of a ruler’s task is to benefit his subjects is present in Wisdom in the depictions of God, Sophia and the people of God. In addition to the depiction of God in Wisdom 12, Sophia herself is described as beneficent (εὐεργετικός) in 7:23 and the chosen people are described as benefactors (εὐεργέται) in 19:14. To claim to be a benefactor is, in effect, to claim to hold power.123 To use these terms with respect to God, Sophia and the people of God is identify them as powerful, cultured and compassionate. The question of their relationship to others in society who would be normally associated with these terms remains to be answered. It is important to note that there is a significant difference in political attitude between Aristeas and Wisdom. Aristeas is interested in the actual political and cultural relationship between the Ptolemaic administration and the Jews.124 Its aim, in part, is to portray a Greek mythological religion that emphasizes the uniqueness of one god as an inferior attempt to worship the Jewish God. It shows the administration as the benefactors and protectors of 120 Reese, Hellenistic Influence, 71–87. 121 Ibid., 75. 122 Ibid., 76. 123 Cf. above, p. 205; Walbank, ‘Monarchies and Monarchic Ideas’, 83. 124 Cf. above, pp. 209 ff.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

222

Hellenistic Kingship and Wisdom

the Jews. Those aspects of Ptolemaic religion which undoubtedly were unacceptable to Jews, are dealt with as though unrelated to the administration (Aristeas vv. 134–38) or ignored altogether. When we turn to Wisdom, while similarities of outlook can be discerned, the political aspect of its outlook has become far less positive. Eschatology has appeared: Wisdom looks forward to a royal judging of oppressors and kings in which the righteous will participate.125 Insofar as Wisdom addresses contemporary rulership directly, it is in warning and the thrust of the work’s concern is not community relations but the development of loyal Jewish sages who do not seek advancement through compromising their own religion (Wis 2:12), because through Sophia they will have in God all riches and power.126 Secondly, while Philo’s Moses achieves rational perfection127, both Aristeas and Wisdom stress the human limitations of the king (Aristeas vv. 262– 63; 282. Wis 7:1). Rulers are servants in Wisdom and will be judged (6:3–4). Greatness can be achieved, as with Solomon, through Sophia (8:10–15). Aristeas takes a similar position, urging reflection and recognition rather than engagement with Sophia. It is by understanding, itself a gift of God, that the good life can be lived. Wisdom’s position can perhaps be made clearer by noting the analysis of the origin of Ruler Cult in Wisdom 14:15–21. Rulers may become great by the hand of Sophia, but certainly cannot be worshipped.128 Finally, although Wisdom seeks a new application of the idea of kingship, as we have seen, this cannot simply be thought of as withdrawal from the political sphere. It would not be adequate to describe the cosmic kingship of the righteous in Wisdom 3:7–8 as a metaphor for the fact that the righteous are answerable to no one, as became Stoic common practice.129 The view of virtue or righteousness as a primary cosmic and political reality more important than conventional power as found in Schofield’s reconstruction of Zeno’s political thought130, is in accord with Wisdom although there is no suggestion of a direct connection between the two. They share a common displeasure with the possession of power by those unqualified to wield it, that is, those whose lives are not shaped and directed by the rational nature of the universe. In addition, Wisdom’s eschatological language is framed in, admittedly unconventional, direct political challenge. The elevation of the righteous to kingship takes place in close connection with the downfall of the wicked.131 The importance of the kingly function is, for Wisdom, not 125 Cf. above, 7.6.4.2 The Use of Episkopē in Wisdom. 126 Ibid. 127 Carlos Lévy, ‘Philo’s Ethics’, in Adam Kamesar (ed.), The Cambridge Companion to Philo (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2009) 146–71, on p. 170. 128 Winston (The Wisdom of Solomon, 270–80) argues that Aristeas (134–37) uses Euhemeristic sources more directly than Wisdom. 129 Cf. above, 8.5 The Sage as King. 130 Cf. Schofield, The Stoic Idea of the City; above 8.5 The Sage as King. 131 Cf. above, 7.6.4 The Visitation of God.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

Hellenistic and Cosmic Kingship

223

something which must be subordinated to the practice of virtue. The practice of kingship is itself fundamental to the human ideal and emulates the being of God. The consequence of all this is that kingship in the Hellenistic world and the battles for the Ptolemaic throne are drawn into the history and hope of the Jewish sage in the Roman Empire. Political power was lost by the Jews in the denial of their citizenship. In response, they could not turn to the royal administration as they had done during Philometor’s reign.132 The response found in Wisdom to a situation of political powerlessness, is for the Jews to take to themselves the greatest possible power in the Hellenistic world, that of kingship. From one perspective, this ‘kingship’ could be understood as a withdrawal from political engagement, or perhaps as a response to an expulsion from the political scene, and thus as having no real relation to the social, historical reality of life in Alexandria.133 From Wisdom’s perspective, however, the immortal kingship of the sage is a present cosmic reality and thus in direct competition with that of the conventional rulers of the day134 and involving a questioning of the location of true power.

132 Cf. above, p. 215. 133 Mack, Logos und Sophia, 27. 134 Cf. 7.6.4 The Visitation of God, 7.6.5 The Transference of Eschatological Hope to Every Age, 7.6.6 The Shape of Salvation.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

9. Providence and Fate in The Book of Wisdom 9.1 Introduction The Book of Wisdom expresses a hope in the eschatological action of God on behalf of his people realized by the created order of the cosmos. An example of this is the Exodus-Numbers narrative in which miraculous events are explained, in a manner reminiscent of Stoic physics, by reference to the elemental structure of the cosmos. Further, in a somewhat inconsistent manner, the soteriological agent of God, Sophia, is described as a physical pneuma, ordering the cosmos and bringing individuals to recognize that order and to practice the piety consistent with it. As will be discussed below, within Hellenistic philosophy ethics was grounded in an understanding of the human as located within the physical system of the cosmos. The good, wise, virtuous and philosophically admirable life, was achieved through an understanding of this system. Wisdom can be understood as a distinctly Jewish version of such world-views. Within Wisdom, Jewish particularity of nation and revelation is reconceptualized through an understanding of past creation and present cosmos. The particular Jewish God is understood afresh as the universal creator. The agent of salvation, Sophia, whose function is largely epistemological and supervenes upon – amongst other things – the practice of the Jewish sapiential tradition, was also present at the creation (Wis 6:22; Prov 8:22–31) to endue the cosmos with her nature. Further, the original ordering of the cosmos at the moment of creation, receives in Wisdom the sense of continuing dependency (Wis 8:1). Just as the present nature of both individual things and the cosmos was understood by Stoics to be the result of an ongoing pneumatic tension, so Wisdom understands Sophia’s role to be the present administration, regulation or ordering of the cosmos (Wis 8:1).1 In Wisdom’s consistent vision of the creation, ordered by pneuma and operating in the Exodus and in the respective fates of the Jewish sage and their earthly rulers, can be seen a substantial interaction with Stoic concerns to explicate the meaning of life in close relationship to the cosmos. What is perhaps now required is to be clearer as to the limits of that interaction. Obviously, Wisdom is not a Stoic work. But in what sense is this the case? To address this question it will be sufficient to discuss one more issue, that 1

The word used here (διοικέω) is firstly a domestic term for the ordering of the household, but is additionally used in the political context, and by extension by Plato (e. g. Phaedrus 246c) and the Stoics for the management of the world (Winston, The Wisdom of Solomon, 189–90).

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

226

Providence and Fate in The Book of Wisdom

of fate, which is closely connected to the physical discussion outlined above and with which Wisdom might be expected to have some concern given its engagement in related Stoic issues. The discovery that Wisdom does not concern itself with this subject matter will help clarify the boundaries of Wisdom’s interaction with Stoicism.

9.2 Fate and Providence in the Greek Tradition The history of the personal concept of fate stretches far back in the Greek tradition. Very broadly speaking there are two related streams of thought, what might be termed the personal and the systemic. The personal concept of fate focuses on the destiny of individual humans. In Homer, fate is personified as an individual who at birth spins the thread of an individual’s life (Μοῖραι or Αἶσα e. g. Il. 24.209–10; 20.127).2 The gods, Zeus in particular, are also depicted as determining fate. So for instance, in the Iliad, Zeus holds the scales of fate and justice and on the day of battle decides the result between the warring Trojans and Achaeans (Il. 8.69–74).3 From Hesiod onwards, the Μοῖραι, or the Fates, were three sisters.4 The relationship between the gods and fate remains a matter of debate: in Prometheus Bound even Zeus’ power finds its limit in what has been foretold by the Μοῖραι (Prom. 515).5 In summary, there is in all of the above a common understanding of fate as a personal issue, in which the significant events of one’s life are planned and brought about. There is no discussion of the management of one’s every action, but rather the assumption – in the case of death, for instance – that whatever one does, one’s final hour and perhaps its place and significance, cannot be altered. In contrast to the personal concept of fate is what might be termed the ‘systemic’ concept of fate. Here, the reason for the occurrence of events is determined in part by the nature of things. An early version of such a philosophy might be seen in the Milesian understanding of δίκη or Justice (Simplicius In Phys. 24,13 ff; DK 12 A96).7 Here, the development of the cosmos 2 3 4 5

6 7

On fate in Homer, see B. C. Dietrich, ‘The Spinning of Fate in Homer’, Phoenix 16 (1962) 86–101. Kees W. Bolle, ‘Fate’, in Encyclopedia of Religion, 15 vol. (London: Macmillan, 22005), v 2998–3006, on p. 3000. Ibid.; William Chase Greene, Moira: Fate, Good, and Evil in Greek Thought (Cambridge, MA.: Harvard University Press, 1944), 28 ff. Carl-Martin Edsman, ‘Divine and Demonic Necessity in the Oresteia’, in Helmer Ringgren (ed.), Fatalistic Beliefs in Religion, Folklore, and Literature (Uppsala: Almqvist & Wiksells, 1967) 19–34, on p. 26. For translation and comment, Jonathan Barnes, The Presocratic Philosophers. Vol. 1: Thales to Zeno (London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1979) i, 28 ff. Armstrong, Ancient Philosophy, 3–5; Sambursky, Physical World, 8; Jean-Pierre Vernant, The Origins of Greek Thought (London: Methuen, 1982), 122–24.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

Fate and Providence in the Greek Tradition

227

is depicted in terms of meteorological phenomena, the separating and recombining of ‘the hot’, ‘the cold’, ‘the wet’ and ‘the dry’ (e. g. Anaximander, DK 12 A10, 11).8 This whole process governs the formation and dissolution of earth, sea and sky and offers a ‘rhythm of balance and retribution’.9 Some similarities can be seen in Plato’s treatment of the generation of the cosmos in the Timaeus 29e–30. There, the world is created because God is good and desired that all things should be as like him as possible. Therefore he brought everything visible from disorder to order, and realizing that intelligence makes a creature fairer, he placed mind within soul and soul within body and thus, ‘in all probability’, ‘the world became a living creature truly endowed with soul and intelligence by the providence of God’ (Tim. 47e). Providence is here closely identified with the goodwill of God. It is intelligible, in contrast to fate or necessity which involves the sensible, physical realm.10 In summary, the world is likened to an intelligent animal consisting of the material and the spiritual or rational. Fate involves the limitations of the world, that is physicality, mortality, cause and effect. Providence is the ordering and direction of that limitation for God’s purposes. In the Hellenistic period, it could be said that the personal and systemic types of conceptualization of fate and providence reach a new unity in Stoic philosophy. The period was marked by significant social and cultural upheaval as the power and independence of the local city state was undermined. Τύχη or Fortune (in the sense of luck or success) was the most worshipped of Hellenistic goddesses.11 Both Epicurean and Stoic philosophies are marked by the concern to achieve an inner, personal security. In both however, this was not achieved through a direct return to Greek mythology12 but through an understanding of the individual and his or her place within the system of the cosmos. Stoic fate is understood in close connection to the Stoic’s materialism and understanding of causation.13 It also has significant consequences for the

8

9 10 11 12

13

For translation and comment, Barnes, The Presocratic Philosophers i, 42–44; Keimpe Algra, ‘The beginnings of cosmology’, in A. A. Long (ed.), The Cambridge Companion to Early Greek Philosophy (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999) 45–65, on pp. 47–48. Armstrong, Ancient Philosophy, 4; James Warren, Presocratics (Stocksfield: Acumen, 2007), 23–37. Plato: Timaeus, trans. by Donald J. Zeyl (Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing, 2000), xxxvi– xxxvii; Greene, Moira, 303 f. Armstrong, Ancient Philosophy, 115. Although note Cleanthes’ apparent sincerity of devotion to Zeus understood allegorically as the movement of the elements. The Epicurean acceptance of distant, uninvolved deities proves the point in question. The picture here will be largely that of Chrysippus, whose philosophical precision appears to have developed the idea of fate into a concept which embraced all events in a tightly defined causal nexus. There is some evidence that earlier Stoics, such as Zeno and Cleanthes took a more traditional position where fate was understood, as described above, as human destiny in which certain key moments of life, such as birth, death and tragic events, were determined at birth (Long/Sedley, Hellenistic Philosophers i, 392).

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

228

Providence and Fate in The Book of Wisdom

individual’s ethical life. With regard to their materialism, the fundamental distinction to be made in their physics is that between the active and passive principles, the former of which is associated with the livelier elements of air and fire and the latter with the heavier water and earth. All order and quality in the material world is imposed by the active on the passive through pneuma, a compound of fire and air, which permeates all material objects. It is the tension exerted by the respective expansion and contraction of the fire and air which determines the particular form of any individual thing.14 A consequence of this is that all causing is corporeal: only bodies can act and be acted upon (Seneca Ep. Mor. 117.2), therefore causing comes through the interaction of bodies (Sextus Empiricus Ad. Mat. 9.211; Clement, Strom. 8.9.26.3–4).15 The ordering which mind and soul might produce in the Timaeus is preserved, but with mind and soul conceived materially. Fate is conceived as the sum-total of all these causes, the interaction and existence of all things, which together create a world and history which is providentially ordered to be the best, and therefore the most rational, possible. This history of the operation of pneuma repeated itself eternally, beginning and ending in an intense conflagration of intelligent fire before expanding again, turning into air and then moisture and producing body and soul (Diogenes Laertius 7.142, Plutarch Stoic rep. 1052C-D, 1053B).16 Every detail of this cycle is repeated. Anything else would imply imperfection and improvement, neither of which is possible for the perfectly rational and ordered cosmos. Naturally, the very idea of such a system invites questions regarding human freedom and responsibility. Chrysippus, who himself appears to have been a strong advocate of the cyclical conflagration and the all-pervading field of fate and causation (Gellius 7.2.3 LS 55K; Diogenianus (Eusebius, Praep. ev. 4.3.1) LS 55P), was also a fervent defender of the significance of human action. Although the fragmentary evidence is not univocal with respect to the precise terms used and the matter is further complicated by the

14 For example, Alexander, Mixt. SVF 2.442 LS 47I; Annas, Hellenistic Philosophy of Mind, 50–53. Cf. above, 3.3 The Exodus and The Elements. 15 Hankinson, ‘Explanation and Causation’, 483–86. 16 It is not clear the degree to which the idea of a cosmic conflagration was widely accepted in Stoic circles at the time of Wisdom, or had been superseded by an understanding of an eternal, static cosmos. See Armstrong (Ancient Philosophy, 142), but also note the view of the Stoics in Philo De aeternitate mundi 7–9, which is generally thought to be either contemporaneous or later than Wisdom (A. A. Long, ‘Scepticism about Gods in Hellenistic Philosophy’, in Mark Griffith/Donald J. Mastronarde (ed.), Cabinet of the Muses: essays on classical and comparative literature in honor of Thomas G. Rosenmeyer (Atlanta: American Scholars Press, 1990) 279–91, on p. 287). Were De aeternitate mundi to be pseudonymous its date is likely to be later, and the argument is unchanged. On the authenticity of the work, see David T. Runia, ‘Philo’s De aeternitae mundi: the problem of its interpretation’, in Exegesis and Philosophy (Aldershot: Variorum, 1990) 105–51 (first publ. in Vigiliae Christianae, vol. 35, no. 2 (June, 1981) 105–51).

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

Fate and Providence in the Greek Tradition

229

necessity of correlation between Latin and Greek terms17, Chrysippus’ analogy of a rolling cylinder is capable of illustrating the basic points (Cicero, Fat. 39–43 LS 62C; Gellius 7.2.6–13 LS 62D).18 A cylinder, lying on the rough ground of a slope remains unmoving until it is pushed after which it continues to roll. The external force given to the cylinder is the ‘preliminary’ cause (αἴτιον προκαταρκτικόν / causa proxima) of its rolling. The same force, if continued to be applied as the cylinder rolls, will become an ‘auxiliary’ cause (αἴτιον συνεργὸν / causa adiuvans).19 However, once the cylinder begins to roll it only continues to do so because of a third cause, the ‘containing’ or ‘sustaining’ cause (αἴτιον συνεκτικόν / causa continens).20 This cause can best be understood as the nature of the object. In this case it is the shape of the cylinder which enables it to roll. One could remove the preliminary or auxiliary cause and the cylinder would continue to roll. However, if the cylinder ceased to be round and became a pyramid, the rolling would stop (Clement, Strom. 8.9.33.1–9). This sustaining cause is determined by the operation of pneuma, the action of the divine active principal upon passive matter.21 It is because of this that what in other philosophical systems might be thought a quality or an attribute is here considered an active cause. The reason Chrysippus is reported by Cicero to use this model is to strike a middle position between a strong deterministic view of fate and a view of the freedom of the mind from all such necessity (Cicero, Fat. 39–43 LS 62C) and he does this by ascribing fate not to the entire causal nexus, including sustaining causes, but only to the connection of all preliminary causes or triggering causes.22 When the model of the cylinder is transposed into the realm of human action the proposed benefit can be seen more clearly. Fate, according to Chrysippus, concerns external physical actions. These events may trigger internal human responses, but these responses are themselves determined by nothing other than the nature of the individual.23 The response is not compelled, even though the individual will do nothing other than act according to his or her own nature and even though the nexus of preliminary causes guarantees the ordering of all events. Such a view, a ‘soft determinism’, allows the Stoics to make sense of human moral responsibility as the individual’s response to the providential, rational ordering of the cosmos.24 One cannot change this ordering, but one might choose how to 17 Hankinson, ‘Explanation and Causation’, 483–97. 18 For the following, Sellars, Stoicism, 35–36; Hankinson, ‘Explanation and Causation’, 487– 90; Long, Hellenistic Philosophy, 166–67; Sharples, Stoics, Epicureans and Sceptics, 74–75. 19 Hankinson, ‘Explanation and Causation’, 485, 494. 20 Hankinson, ‘Explanation and Causation’, 484–86, 488; cf. Long, Hellenistic Philosophy, 166. 21 Long, Hellenistic Philosophy, 166. 22 The picture is, however, not quite so clear. Note Alexander, De fato 191.30–192.28 LS 55N (3). 23 Sharples, Stoics, Epicureans and Sceptics, 74–75. 24 Hankinson, ‘Determinism and Indeterminism’, 529–41.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

230

Providence and Fate in The Book of Wisdom

respond to it. Using Zeno’s famous illustration, which was repeated by Chrysippus (Hippolytus, Haer. 1.21 LS 62A), when a dog is tied to a cart it will follow the cart by necessity, whether it chooses to or not. What it may do, however, is to run along with cart.25 An obvious and often anticipated objection to this is the ‘Lazy Argument’ (Cicero Fat. 28–30 LS 55S) which suggests that no action is ever justified since fate will result in the same outcome whatever one does.26 Cicero provides the example of falling ill but failing to call the doctor because one is under the impression that whether one recovers or not is determined by fate and not the doctor. Chrysippus’ response to such an argument is to introduce the category of co-fated (confatalia) events (cf. Diogenianus (Eusebius, Praep. ev. 6.8.25–9) LS 62F).27 The fated event ‘Oedipus will be born to Laius’ is a complex event. What is fated is that the child will be born and that Laius and his wife will have intercourse and that the child will be conceived. In the case of the patient and doctor, if one is fated to live it may be that one is fated to recover through the ministrations of the doctor: one’s recovery and the help given by the doctor to cause the recovery are co-fated.28 The Stoic ethical position is solidly founded in the context of this rational, physical and causal understanding of fate. Rather than being stilted by questions of determinism, it takes this as its starting point. In fact virtue is for them grounded in the capacity of humans for rational thought. The new born child, as an ethical creature, is different from an animal only in his or her potential for mental development into a rational being.29 It is then, as one becomes a rational creature, and in theory develops into the almost mythical ‘sage’, that one is able to be virtuous.30 The challenge is to live ‘according to nature’ (Stobaeus 2.75.11–76.8 LS 63B), where there is no strong distinction between individual human nature and the nature of the cosmos (Diogenes Laertius 7.87–89 LS 63C). It is the same pneuma, the same Zeus or will of Zeus, which providentially orders both. Humanity is in the unique position of sharing in the rationality of God. Using Zeno’s simile, mentioned above, the rational and therefore ethical action is to attempt to run along with the cart. The Stoic soul is one, undivided reason.31 An implication of this is that passions and emotions, which have the potential to overwhelm rational judgement, are not viewed as ‘inferior activities of the soul to be controlled by

25 Cf. Cleanthes, quoted by Epictetus, Manual 53 LS 62B. 26 Sellars, Stoicism, 103. 27 Sharples, Stoics, Epicureans and Sceptics, 75; Hankinson, ‘Determinism and Indeterminism’, 531–32. 28 Hankinson, ‘Determinism and Indeterminism’, 533–34. 29 Inwood/Donini, ‘Stoic Ethics’, 678. 30 Cf. above, 5.3 The Stoic Human. 31 Armstrong, Ancient Philosophy, 126.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

Fate and Providence in the Greek Tradition

231

reason’ as they might with a tripartite or bipartite view of the soul.32 Instead, they are viewed as wrong judgements, mistakes that corrupt the reason and that lead to fear, desire, pain and pleasure. It is the task of moral education to prevent the soul from falling into these habits in the first place.33 The Stoics are not emotionless; they are aware of the highs and lows of life. However, just like the runner who cannot change direction quickly, when emotions are disturbed by wrong understandings of external events one is no longer able to think rationally and is subsequently impaired in further rational assessment of the situation.34 The sage is to welcome everything that is fated: providence has dictated that whatever fate brings will be for the best. The Stoics show multiple responses to the prevalence of evil in the world. On the one hand we read of Chrysippus arguing that bed-bugs are useful for waking us (Plutarch, Stoic Rep. 1044D LS 54O) and that the pig is benefited when it achieves its natural end and is slaughtered and eaten (Porphyry, Abst. 3.20.1, 3 LS 54P).35 On the other hand, evils are understood as necessary logical opposites (Plutarch, Stoic rep. 1050F, 1051A-B LS 61R), or worthwhile concomitants, of good things. Plato’s suggestion in the Timaeus that the fragility of the skull enables quick perception is taken up by the Stoics (Plato, Tim. 75; Gellius 7.1.1–13 LS 54Q). In Cleanthes’ Hymn (Stobaeus, 1.25.3– 27.4 LS 54I), it can be read that evil deeds are the only ones which occur outside of the divine will, but that even these crooked things can be made straight by the divine reason.36 Even murder, it could be argued, can be worked into the divine plan.37 There is therefore never a case for despair or indeed for divine intervention: divine action never ceases. If the sage is to welcome everything that is fated, there is in practice a problem: one cannot know whether an impending event will really happen, and therefore whether it is fated. It is for this reason that one must welcome events as they approach ‘with reservation’ (Stobaeus, 2.115.5–9; Seneca, Ben. 4.34.4). In doing this, the Stoic never desires something which is not fated.38 Further, by seeking things with the full knowledge that if fate so decrees he will not succeed, he thereby continues to live ‘according to nature’.39 In acting in this way, the sage is never disappointed and so avoids the temptation to give way to excessive, and ultimately irrational, passions.

32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39

Armstrong, Ancient Philosophy, 126, 143. Inwood/Donini, ‘Stoic Ethics’, 711–13. Chrysippus in Galen Plac. 4.2.10–18 LS 65J; Long, ‘Stoic Psychology’, 582–83. Jane Mansfield, ‘Theology’, in Keimpe Algra and others (ed.), The Cambridge History of Hellenistic Philosophy (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999) 452–78, on p. 467. Ibid. Hankinson, ‘Determinism and Indeterminism’, 539–40. Inwood/Donini, ‘Stoic Ethics’, 733–34. Ibid., 736–38.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

232

Providence and Fate in The Book of Wisdom

Should the sage, then, even welcome death? Acts of self-preservation are not irrational. Indeed, our natural instincts for self-preservation are part of our created nature and it will be appropriate to preserve life until one can be confident that the fated end truly has come.40 One final issue worth considering is the relation of fate and providence to traditional Greek theology. Regarding god, the Stoics use three closelyrelated types of expressions.41 Firstly, god is πνεῦμα, an imminent and rational providentially-ordering principle (Aetius 1.7.33 SVF 2.1027 LS 46A).42 Some texts treat providence, fate and πνεῦμα as the will of god, rather than god himself.43 Secondly, god is the whole world itself.44 Just as one might describe a human, body and soul, as an individual so following Plato’s Timaeus the whole world could be viewed as an animal and as god, even though only the active elements are rational (Diogenes Laertius 7.127 LS 54A; Cicero, N. D. 1.39; Plato, Tim. 30B, 34b).45 Thirdly, the traditional Greek pantheon is understood allegorically as in Cleanthes’ Hymn to Zeus (LS 54I). Despite the degree of sincerity, however, the pantheon remains allegorical: he was also capable of speaking of the world as divine (Cicero, N. D. 2.23–5, 28–30 LS 47C).46 In summary, the Stoic philosophy of fate responds to the concerns of the age for personal and emotional security. It is tightly connected with their materialism and related physics. Fate is the outworking of the inherent rationality of the ordered cosmos. The challenge for the sage was to recognize and accept this and not to seek happiness in the irrational and therefore futile. Once one accepts that there is no good to be found except in living according to nature, the system is deeply optimistic. Tragedy can never truly happen for the Stoic.

9.3 The Providence of God in the LXX The technical words associated with Stoic fate and providence do not play a significant role in the LXX. Providence (πρόνοια) occurs just once in the books translated from the Hebrew, at Daniel 6:18.47 The providence of God, understood as God’s care for his people expressed in his orchestration of history and people, occurs in 3 Maccabees 4:21 and 5:30. ‘To take thought for’, ‘to care for’ (προνοέω) does not occur with God as the subject. In addition, 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47

Sellars, Stoicism, 128. Long/Sedley, Hellenistic Philosophers i, 331. Ibid; Cf. above, p. 68. See Cleanthes, Hymn to Zeus LS 54I and the third point below. Long/Sedley, Hellenistic Philosophers i, 331. On Stoic Pantheism, Dirk Baltzly, ‘Stoic Pantheism’, Sophia, vol. 42, no. 2 (2003) 3–33. Long, Hellenistic Philosophy, 149, 181–82. The occurrence is an addition, without correspondence in the Hebrew.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

The Providence of God in Wisdom

233

neither ‘that which is allotted, destiny’ (ἡ εἱμαρμένη) nor ‘one’s portion in life, fate’ (μοῖραι) occur in the Greek text. ‘Distress, affliction, necessity, compulsion’ (ἀνάγκη) occurs a number of times but generally with the sense of ‘compulsion’ (e. g. 2 Macc 15:2) or ‘distress or affliction’ (e. g. 1 Sam 22:2; LXX Ps 24:17; 30:8). Only in Wisdom (17:16; 19:4) does the word occur with the meaning of a fated event. Similarly, ‘cause’ (αἴτιον) does not occur in a technical philosophical sense. Despite the absence of technical Stoic material on this subject in the LXX, it is important to recognize that the sovereign care and guidance of God, for creation generally and more particularly for his people, is an important independent biblical theme which Wisdom itself is aware of.48 The concluding declaration of the book (19:22) reads, Κατὰ πάντα γάρ, κύριε, ἐμεγάλυνας τὸν λαόν σου καὶ ἐδόξασας καὶ οὐχ ὑπερεῖδες ἐν παντὶ καιρῷ καὶ τόπῳ παριστάμενος.

For in all things, O Lord, you magnified and glorified your people and did not disregard them, standing by them in every time and place.

Given this, the entire history of the world and of Israel related in the Bible, from the creation (Gen 8:22; Ps 104) to the calling of Abraham and the hardening of the heart of Pharaoh (Exod 14:8), from the summoning of the nations to punish Israel (Lev 18:24–28; 26:17, 25), to their use to liberate Israel (Isa 45:13), can be understood as divine activity. It is worth reiterating here how the language of ‘spirit’ and ‘wisdom’ is present in the Jewish Scriptures in the discussion of creation, in the establishment of the created order, and also in the inspiring transformation of individuals to live and act according to the divine will. This too would prove fertile soil for the growth of the new conceptualization of the Jewish faith, responsive to its contemporary context, that is found in Wisdom.

9.4 The Providence of God in Wisdom 9.4.1 Introduction In Wisdom 9:9 we read that Sophia/Pneuma is with God and knows his works and was present when God made the world.49 The implication can be 48 James K. Aitken has argued for a common belief in the care of God over humanity, particularly in the use of the word ‫רצון‬, in documents found at Qumran and in Ben Sira (‘Divine Will and Providence’, in Renate Egger-Wenzel [ed.], Ben Sira’s God, Beihefte zur Zeitschrift für die alttestamentliche Wissenschaft 321 [Berlin: de Gruyter, 2002] 282–301). The latter usage may be modelled on the reciprocal, euergetistic relationship of king and city that Wisdom also uses (ibid: 297–99; cf. above, p. 221). For the purposes of this study, though, it can be noted that specifically Stoic language and concepts remain absent. 49 For more detail in the following, cf. above, 4.2 Creation in Wisdom.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

234

Providence and Fate in The Book of Wisdom

drawn that Sophia’s continuing work is entirely in accordance with the divine will. The idea of an on-going creative will of God is also expressed in Wisdom 1:14 where ‘the generative forces’ of the cosmos are described as ‘wholesome’ (NRSV & NET) (σωτήριοι αἱ γενέσεις τοῦ κόσμου). The continuing role of pneuma is also suggested in Wisdom 11:25–12:1, where the present existence of created things is guaranteed by divine beneficence (11:24) and conceived in close connection to the omnipresence of God’s imperishable Spirit. In 8:1 we read that Sophia orders the cosmos well in a manner reminiscent of the Stoic pneuma, which is foundational for their understanding of fate.50 In summary, the view of the creation depicted in Wisdom involves an original purposefulness which is presently realized by Sophia/pneuma. God wills the sustaining of the existence of things and pneuma operates in the maintenance of the form of individual things. Thus the world is ordered for the nurturing of life. It will be helpful now to consider the handful of relevant passages in Wisdom in order to assess the nature of the ordering of the cosmos for God’s purposes and the extent to which Wisdom utilizes Stoic words and ideas.51 9.4.2 Wisdom 6:7 – proneō οὐ γὰρ ὑποστελεῖται πρόσωπον ὁ πάντων δεσπότης οὐδὲ ἐντραπήσεται μέγεθος, ὅτι μικρὸν καὶ μέγαν αὐτὸς ἐποίησεν ὁμοίως τε προνοεῖ περὶ πάντων

For the Lord of all will not stand in awe of anyone, or show deference to greatness; because he himself made both small and great, and he takes thought for all alike. [NRSV]

This verse occurs in the first subsection (v. 2 κρατοῦντες, v. 3 κράτησις / v. 8 κραταιοῖς) of the conclusion (v. 1 βασιλεῖς / v. 21 βασιλεύσητε) to the first part of Wisdom (1:1–6:21). This conclusion is structurally parallel to the opening section of Wisdom (1:1–15) and returns to the same theme of warning to the judges and kings of the earth in the light of what has been discussed in 1:16–5:23.52 Kingship is a divine gift (6:3), to be exercised in the service of the divine kingdom (v. 4), with justice and the aid of Sophia/wisdom (vv. 4, 9, 17–21). In 6:7, the rule of the kings and judges is contrasted with that of the divine ruler of all (ὁ πάντων δεσπότης). This creator king, who made both great and small, will not be swayed by human greatness but will in fact subject those who rule to a severe judgement (v. 5). God ‘takes thought for all alike’; by implication, the princes of the earth do not.53 The 50 Winston, The Wisdom of Solomon, 189–90. 51 The discussion of these verses is absent from Winston’s section on freedom and determinism in Wisdom (The Wisdom of Solomon, 46–58). 52 For the literary structure of this section, cf. above, 7.6.2 The Literary Structure of Wisdom 1–6. 53 The verse carries much the same sentiment as Job 34:19.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

The Providence of God in Wisdom

235

verb προνοέω can carry the sense of foresight and foreknowledge but also, as is the case here, the meaning of ‘to provide or care for’.54 This provision is envisaged as an extension of God’s beneficent creative will: God created (ἐποίησεν: Gen 1:1; Wis 6:7) small and great and takes care of all alike. The declaration of the will of God for the universal good, supported by God’s identity as the Creator, is a recurring sentiment in Wisdom (1:14; 11:24– 25).55 Here, however, the nature of God’s provision is left unspecified. The use of προνοέω has the potential to bring to mind Stoic ideas of providence as well as biblical ones.56 The Stoic understanding of the directing of fate according to reason for the cosmic good could well be understood impersonally, in contrast to the Bible’s language. However, the examples of Cleanthes’ Hymn illustrates how such ideas could be integrated with sincere expressions of faith in a deity conceived as a person.57 As has already been indicated, however, the logic of Wisdom 6:7cd is to base an understanding of God’s non-prejudicial care for all his creatures on the fact that his creatures are his creation. Although all humans are the offspring of Zeus (Cleanthes Hymn: Stobaeus 1.25.3–27.4 LS 54I: ἐκ σοῦ γενόμεσθα), and he is rightly titled ‘Father’ in common with Wisdom58, this creative language is more typically biblical (Job 25:2–3; Ps 144(145): 9). The idea of God’s care is probably best first understood in terms of the ordering of the cosmos for life, health and revelation (13:1) and is comprehensible in both world-views. In addition, God’s care is seen in the offering of a salvation of cosmic kingship through the ministrations of Sophia (6:20; 19:22). This particular care is in theory open to all who love instruction and God’s law (6:17–18): the Jews, who are a holy nation (10:15, 17; 18:1, 5, 9), receive the ‘imperishable light of the law’ (18:4) for the benefit of the world.59 The context of the passage is also one of judgement and this stands in tension with Stoic thought60: Wisdom is not concerned with justifying the rationality of events which occur within the cosmos, as Stoic apologetic efforts were often concerned to61, but is more exercised to demonstrate how the cosmos operates to judge the wicked and benefit the righteous.62 In doing this, the same end that the Stoics sought is achieved: the rationality of

54 The latter sense usually takes the genitive. The use of περὶ is not unknown, however, in older texts and does not alter the sense significantly. See Larcher, Le Livre de la Sagesse ii, 411. 55 See above, sections 4.2 Creation in Wisdom & 5.4.2 Pneuma and Anthropology. 56 Engel, Das Buch der Weisheit, 112 and above, 9.2 Fate and Providence in the Greek Tradition. 57 See above, p. 232. 58 See comment below on Wisdom 14:3. 59 See above, 7.6.3.4 The Sage and the Nation. 60 Kolarcik, ‘Book of Wisdom’, 490. 61 Sharples, Stoics, Epicureans and Sceptics, 53–55. 62 See above, 7.6.4.4 Creation as the Instrument of God in the Downfall of the Wicked (5:17– 23).

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

236

Providence and Fate in The Book of Wisdom

the cosmos is effectively defended. However, every event is not justified, but rather every human action judged. 9.4.3 Wisdom 14:3 – pronoia (1) πλοῦν τις πάλιν στελλόμενος καὶ ἄγρια μέλλων διοδεύειν κύματα τοῦ φέροντος αὐτὸν πλοίου σαθρότερον ξύλον ἐπιβοᾶται. (2) ἐκεῖνο μὲν γὰρ ὄρεξις πορισμῶν ἐπενόησεν, τεχνῖτις δὲ σοφία κατεσκεύασεν· (3) ἡ δὲ σή, πάτερ, διακυβερνᾷ πρόνοια, ὅτι ἔδωκας καὶ ἐν θαλάσσῃ ὁδὸν καὶ ἐν κύμασι τρίβον ἀσφαλῆ (4) δεικνὺς ὅτι δύνασαι ἐκ παντὸς σῴζειν, ἵνα κἄν ἄνευ τέχνης τις ἐπιβῇ. (1) Again, one preparing for a voyage and about to travel over raging waves calls upon a piece of wood more fragile than the piece of wood that carries him. (2) For it was longing for gain that planned it, and wisdom the craftswoman that built it, (3) but it is your providence, Father, that pilots it, because you have made a way in the sea and a safe path in the waves, (4) showing that you can save from everything so that even a person who lacks skill may put to sea. [NETS]

The literary structure of the context of this extract is complicated.63 It is sufficient for our purposes to note that this text comes from the second digression (13:1–15:13) made within the synkrisis of animal plagues and the quails fed to Israel. This digression focuses on non-Jewish religion, on nature worship (13:1–9) and idolatry (13:10–15:17). Our particular section concerns itself with the comparison between a wooden idol called upon for protection upon the open sea (v. 1) and the providence of God which guides a boat to safety (vv. 3–5). Verses two and five acknowledge the role of Sophia/wisdom in the technology of boat construction, but it is the fatherly divine care of God in verse three that is understood as necessary for survival and which steers (διακυβερνάω) the course of a boat through the waves.64 This verse evokes Wisdom 10:4 which recounts the salvation of Noah in the Ark. Interestingly, in the earlier verse it is Sophia who directly operates to save Noah through the mean wood of the ark, steering (κυβερνάω) the Ark to safety. The close proximity of πρόνοια and διακυβερνάω in 14:3 brings to mind Stoic language (e. g. Cleanthes Hymn)65, except here the piloting of the boat is understood literally, rather than as a metaphor for the guidance of the cosmos. We have already noted in Wisdom the typical close proximity of providential and ordering language with other Stoic terminology (e. g. 8:1). Here, however, can be seen a distinct emphasis. The care envisaged is quite particular. Unlike 6:7, which could be interpreted with regard to God’s general provision for the essentials of life through the established systems of the creation, this passage with 10:4 speaks of an unapologetic personal care in a parti-

63 A. G. Wright, ‘The Structure of the Book of Wisdom’, 180–81. 64 A point emphasized by Engel (Das Buch der Weisheit, 112). 65 Also, see Winston (Wisdom of Solomon, 214, 265).

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

The Providence of God in Wisdom

237

cular situation. The use of the title ‘Father’ is not unique to Judaism66, but it does here reinforce the personal tone and one could sensibly call into question the degree to which Stoicism allowed for the personal protection of the righteous.67 This type of care is also present in Wisdom in the shielding of the souls of the dead in 3:1 and by the operation of the cosmos on behalf of God, described in the final part of the book.68 We are presented then with a cosmos, the structure of which is ordered towards the provision of life, but also towards the benefit of God’s people. This benefit is not realized, however, through the meaning and good purpose of every event, and the embracing by sages of their fate within a greater rational plan, but rather through a cosmic balancing act by which evil deeds are punished and righteousness rewarded through the application of eschatological ideas in the present world order. 9.4.4 Wisdom 17:2 – pronoia ὑπειληφότες γὰρ καταδυναστεύειν ἔθνος ἅγιον ἄνομοι δέσμιοι σκότους καὶ μακρᾶς πεδῆται νυκτὸς κατακλεισθέντες ὀρόφοις φυγάδες τῆς αἰωνίου προνοίας ἔκειντο.

For when lawless people thought to oppress a holy nation they themselves lay prisoners of darkness, captives of long night, shut in under roofs, exiles from eternal providence. [NETS]

This verse comes from the beginning of the fifth antithesis between the respective fates of the Egyptians and the Israelites. The section (17:1–18:4) is marked off by the inclusions of κατακλεισθέντες and σκότους (17:2) / κατακλείστους and σκότει (18:4).69 Taking inspiration from Exodus 10:23, the Egyptians are plunged into a darkness in which their irrational consciences (17:11–12) are terrified by strange sounds and dismal phantoms (17:4). They are described as ‘exiles/fugitives of eternal providence’.70 In the previous section it was argued that πρόνοια in Wisdom carries the sense of a personal concern which leads to the provision of that necessary in order to meet needs. It was argued above that πρόνοια can be used in relation to the continuing beneficent creative will that provides water and food for creatures and which is also manifested in the propagation of species.71 In this verse, 66 For Judaism, consider Ps 2:7; 3 Macc 6:3, 8; Sir 23:1, 4. Within Wisdom, see 2:13–18. In Stoicism, once again, see Cleanthes’ Hymn. 67 Self-preservation was accepted as an act ‘according to nature’, although not in every circumstance – in certain circumstances, the most rational act may be suicide (Sellars, Stoicism, 107– 09; Diogenes Laertius 7.130, English translation, Inwood/Gerson, Hellenistic Philosophy). 68 Cf. above, 3.3 The Exodus and The Elements. 69 A. G. Wright, ‘The Structure of the Book of Wisdom’, 183. 70 That the ‘lawless’ are exiles from providence is implied by their exclusion from light (Larcher, Le Livre de la Sagesse iii, 949–50). 71 9.4.2 Wisdom 6:7 – proneō.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

238

Providence and Fate in The Book of Wisdom

the Egyptians are excluded from the benefits of the ordering of the cosmos. For them, day does not follow night as God has providentially decreed (7:15–20; Gen 8:22) and as Sophia teaches (7:22) and implements (8:1).72 Instead, they find themselves in perpetual dark. Behind this exclusion lies a movement of divine punishment or chastisement73 and salvation. The Egyptians are not subject to God’s care because they have oppressed ‘a holy people and a blameless race’ (10:15). It would be logically possible, taking inspiration from the Stoic allusions found in Wisdom, to use the language of providence to describe the ordering and planning of everything that happens for the ultimate rational good. As has been argued, Wisdom is indebted to such concerns, but the eschatological concerns of the book stand in tension with them. Eschatology, normally conceived, presumes a future judgement at which good and evil are to be respectively rewarded and punished.74 Wisdom shows no significant interest in a singular, universal judgement but there is still within it an implicit recognition that evil does occur that cannot simply be understood to be subsumed under a providential ordering of all for the greater good. It is still the case that judgement must occur.75 This is the reason that the Egyptians are no longer the beneficiaries of divine care. Providence is ultimately reserved for the righteous.76 If Wisdom was to restrict its thoughts purely to the Stoic philosophical schema, one would have to insist that even the fate of the Egyptians was in some sense included within the ordering of all events for the ultimate rational good. Even though Wisdom wishes to conceptualize the miraculous events of Exodus as part of the ordering of the cosmos, and therefore draw eschatological actions into the natural workings of the cosmos, the language of judgement remains primary.77 It is an indicator of the limit of the engagement of Wisdom with Stoicism that Wisdom prefers to view the Egyptians as excluded from divine care rather than experiencing necessary sacrifices for a greater cause. 9.4.5 Wisdom 17:17; 19:4 – anagkē εἴ τε γὰρ γεωργὸς ἦν τις ἢ ποιμὴν ἢ τῶν κατ᾽ ἐρημίαν ἐργάτης μόχθων, προλημφθεὶς τὴν δυσάλυκτον ἔμενεν ἀνάγκην

For whether a farmer or shepherd or labourer in the wilderness, he was caught and awaited the inescapable fate.78 72 73 74 75 76 77

Larcher, Le Livre de la Sagesse iii, 948. Compare 12:1–2 with 19:1–4. See above, 1.3 Eschatology. See above, 7.6.4.2 The Use of Episkopē in Wisdom. Larcher, Le Livre de la Sagesse iii, 948–50. Cf. above, 3.3 The Exodus and The Elements and 7.6.4.4 Creation as the Instrument of God in the Downfall of the Wicked (5:17–23). 78 My translation: NRSV and NET use plurals for the subject.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

Summary

239

εἷλκεν γὰρ αὐτοὺς ἡ ἀξία ἐπὶ τοῦτο τὸ πέρας ἀνάγκη καὶ τῶν συμβεβηκότων ἀμνηστίαν ἐνέβαλεν, ἵνα τὴν λείπουσαν ταῖς βασάνοις προσαναπληρώσωσιν κόλασιν

For the fate they deserved drew them on to this end and made them forget the things that had happened in order that they might fill up the punishment that their torments still lacked [NETS]

In both of these passages the final destiny of the Egyptians is described using the word ἀνάγκη or ‘fate’ which carries the sense of distress, trouble, necessity or compulsion.79 A technical reference to the precisely-defined philosophical should not be recognized here.80 In these verses there is no explicit Stoic terminology or reference to pneuma or Sophia.81 In both cases the term can be understood in popular and traditional sense to refer to the ordained end of a life82, in this case the death of the Egyptians in divine punishment for their oppression of the Israelites. In both cases, the word stands in its negativity in contrast to the use of πρόνοια: the Israelites experience divine care, but the Egyptians face an unavoidable fate. Such a distinction is not to be found in Stoicism, where fate does not carry these negative connotations but refers more simply to a neutral chain of cause and effect.83 In contrast, while Wisdom shows a willingness to conceive its philosophical and religious position in close connection to a Hellenistic understanding of the cosmos, the division between πρόνοια and ἀνάγκη reflects an eschatological hope which is realized in the contemporary historical realm.

9.5 Summary Wisdom retains a commitment to the God of the history related in the Jewish scriptures. This particularism, summarized in the concluding verse of the book, is not without a related appeal to universality: the Jewish God is the creator of the whole world who continues to care for his creation; he desires that all should be enlightened by his law (Wis 6:4, 18; 18:4). This universalism was undoubtedly encouraged by the experience of Jews living in the midst of Hellenistic culture, at times being educated and often interacting for business within it. It seems evident that the predominant philosophy with which the author of Wisdom was confronted was Stoicism. In both Stoicism and Epicureanism, a fundamental method was to establish one’s position upon an accepted understanding of the nature of things, the world and the 79 80 81 82 83

Liddell and others, Greek-English Lexicon, s. v. ἀνάγκη. Larcher, Le Livre de la Sagesse iii, 966. Discussion of this aspect of the verses is minimal in the secondary literature. Cf. above, 9.2 Fate and Providence in the Greek Tradition. It is the Stoics’ conviction that this inescapable nexus of causation is a good thing because that which is caused is directed by the divine for the ultimate rational good. See above, p. 231 f.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

240

Providence and Fate in The Book of Wisdom

individual. Once this appeal to cosmic explanation had been made, the question of human action had a context within which it could be coherently founded. Wisdom similarly makes an appeal to an explanation of the nature of the cosmos in explicating the Jewish faith, particularly through the use of the concept of pneuma in the ordering of the cosmos and the nature of the soul. There is a limit, however, to Wisdom’s engagement with Stoicism. Firstly, ethics in Wisdom are not directly based on the idea of acting ‘in accordance with nature’.84 Although the argument of the oppressors in the second chapter is based on a faulty understanding on the nature of life and death, it is also plain within that chapter (v. 12) that the ethics in Wisdom are fundamentally law-based (2:12; 6:18). This is not to deny that the Law is understood as a rational expression of God in accordance with Sophia’s activity in the cosmos85, but rather to insist that the ethical argumentation in Wisdom is quite distinct from Stoicism particularly with regard to the Law. Secondly and finally, it can briefly be noted that there is no substantial discussion or use of Stoic causation in Wisdom. Appeal is made in Wisdom to an explanation of the nature of the cosmos through the language of the elements and pneuma, and there is a clear assumption that this nature is rational (7:23), but there is no concomitant use for the idea of an all-encompassing concept of fate within which all events find a place with their own causes and effects. The likely reason that Wisdom does not engage with such an idea, despite its use of Stoic physics and pneuma, is the primacy of the idea of judgement.86 Although Wisdom does at times argue for the educative purpose of events, the strongest emphasis is placed on an expectation of judging divine action within the cosmic system: eschatological hope is to be fulfilled in the present unfolding of history. Just as Israel was liberated from Egypt, so the Jews now must have hope that God will not neglect to help them. Even life after death is understood as the ongoing survival of the soul of the oppressed righteous within the cosmos and in direct juxtaposition with the fate of those who oppressed them. The idea of providence in Wisdom undoubtedly alludes to the universality of the Greek tradition, but redefines this on the basis of Jewish election and law. The care of God for the Jewish people in his application of reward, chastisement and punishment to all is not cast aside, but is rather understood as something that is potentially available to all should they choose to seek Sophia.

84 See above, p. 230. 85 See above, p. 145. 86 It is likely that this idea is intimately related to the Jewish dedication to Law. This necessitates judgement if it is to be accepted by all.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

Part Five – Conclusion

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

10. Conclusion This work has identified pneuma and eschatology as distinct, but connected, ideas that are central to the theological outlook of The Book of Wisdom. In doing this, the purpose has not been primarily to establish whether Wisdom is a unity by the discussion of the form of the book and the differing genres or literary techniques on display in each section. Instead, what has been investigated is part of the material theological content of the book. It has been argued that Wisdom follows the Hellenistic trend towards the philosophical explanation of human life by understanding it as set within a larger cosmic and physical system. The first aspect of this which was discussed was Wisdom’s understanding of pneuma and its use of the related idea of the transformation of the elements. By this, the biblical language of the self and spirit is drawn into conversation with Stoic philosophy. The soul, its origin and future, is understood physically in relation to the life-giving pneuma that is identified with Sophia. Its origin is found in the breath of God and its future, ambiguously, is to to be part of the angelic host, retaining its individuality and yet participating in the judging order of the cosmos.1 This understanding of pneuma was shown to exist in nuanced continuity with the biblical tradition. The original ideas and ambiguities associated with ַ ‫ רוּ‬were found to have been preserved remarkably well in the translation of ‫ח‬ the LXX. At the same time, this act enabled the possibility of a new conceptualization of these ideas within the context of Hellenistic philosophy. The consequence of this is that it is possible and appropriate to read Wisdom’s uses of pneuma – whether with regard to meteorology, Sophia, the soul or world order – as physical description: an explanation of the way the world works. This concern for the cosmos is not undermined by Wisdom’s redefinition of death and use of the ideas of immortality. Instead, the personal eschatology of the book is understood in close relationship to cosmic events, in particular the downfall of the enemies of the righteous. These cosmic events themselves occur within and according to the cosmic order determined by pneuma.

1

Further work could beneficially be embarked upon, in order to locate Wisdom more precisely in its philosophical context by a systematic comparison of Wisdom and Philo and also of Wisdom and the variety of Middle Platonic authors, who largely accepted a Stoic view of the cosmos (Dillon, The Middle Platonists, 52–113).

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

244

Conclusion

It was noted in the introduction that the term ‘realized eschatology’ was coined to describe the presence of the judgement of the final great Day of the Lord in the person and ministry of Christ. In Wisdom, however, no individual plays such a role. Instead, the eschatological hope of the individual and the Jewish nation is realized in the present cosmic order. As a consequence, this hope is individual, historical, political, cosmic and purposive. The hope expressed in Wisdom is always in a future, but it is a hope that has been fulfilled for others in the past (e. g. Wisdom 10–19) and is being continually fulfilled in the present. Although it may be the case that the author(s) of Wisdom believed that the world faced a future climactic end or transformation, as it had also been created at a single moment, this is not a hope expressed clearly in the book. Instead, the end-result of most eschatological hope – the vindication of the righteous and the punishment of the wicked – is expected in the present era and as a product of the natural workings of the cosmos.2 Wisdom is a work which finds its home in Hellenistic culture, but the period of its authorship was likely one in which the Jewish community found itself increasingly marginalized from the centre of that society. The response found in Wisdom is not to encourage direct political action but rather to argue that the true meaning of Hellenistic culture and philosophy is found in the Jewish religion practised with the aid of Sophia. Those who ignore or reject this and persecute Jewish sages will find themselves removed from power, just as was Pharaoh, by the workings of the cosmos which have been determined by pneuma, which is itself identified in Wisdom with Sophia.

2

This consistently applied view of Wisdom’s eschatology, while drawing on numerous insights of others, is novel and hopefully begins to offer a clearer eschatological picture than the ‘chiaroscuro’ found by Winston (The Wisdom of Solomon, 32–33), as well as finding in the philosophical allusions to Stoicism a greater coherency of setting and eschatological language than was possible in earlier works (cf. above, pp. 191–93).

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

Bibliography Anonymous Primary Sources The Babylonian Talmud: Seder Mo’ed, ed. by Isidore Epstein (London: Soncino Press, 1938). The Holy Bible, Revised Standard Version, containing the Old and New Testaments, with the Apocrypha / Deuterocanonical Books (New York: Collins, 1973). The Holy Bible, containing the Old and New Testaments, with the Apocrypha / Deuterocanonical Books, New Revised Standard Version, anglicized edn (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1995). Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia, ed. by K. Elliger/W. Rudolph, (Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 41990). Leviticus, ed. by John William Wevers, Septuaginta: Vetus Testamentum Graecum / Auctoritate Acad. Scientiarum Gottingensis vol. 2.2 (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1986). Sapientia Iesu Filii Sirach, Septuaginta: Vetus Testamentum Graecum / Auctoritate Acad. Scientiarum Gottingensis vol. 12.2, ed. by Joseph Ziegler (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1952). Sapientia Salomonis, Septuaginta: Vetus Testamentum Graecum / Auctoritate Acad. Scientiarum Gottingensis vol. 12.1, ed. by Joseph Ziegler (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1980). A New English Translation of the Septuagint, ed. by Albert Pietersma/Benjamin G. Wright (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007). Septuaginta, ed. by Alfred Rahlfs (Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 1935). Beentjes, Pancratius C., The Book of Ben Sira in Hebrew: A Text Edition of All Extant Hebrew Manuscripts and a Synopsis of All Parallel Hebrew Ben Sira Texts, VTSup 68 (Leiden: Brill, 1997). Black, Matthew, The Book of Enoch or 1 Enoch: A New English Edition : with Commentary and Textual Notes (Leiden: Brill, 1985). Peek. W., Der Isishymnus von Andros und verwandte Texte (Berlin: Weidmann, 1930). Strugnell, John/Daniel J. Harrington (ed.), Qumran Cave 4. XXIV. Sapiential Texts, Part 2. 4QInstruction, DJD 34 (Oxford: Clarendon, 1999). Thackeray, H. St. J. (ed.), ‘The Letter of Aristeas’, in An Introduction to the Old Testament in Greek, by Henry Barclay Swete (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1900) 499–574.

Ancient Authors Aristotle, Aristotle, trans. by H. P. Cooke and others, 23 vol., The Loeb Classical Library (London: William Heinemann, 1926–95).

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

246

Bibliography

Cicero, De finibus bonorum et malorum, trans. by H. Rackham, Loeb Classical Library (London: William Heinemann/G. P. Putnam’s Sons, 21931). – The Nature of the Gods, trans. by Horace C. P. McGregor (Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1972). Diodorus Siculus, Diodorus of Sicily in Twelve Volumes, trans. by C. H. Oldfather and others, Loeb Classical Library (London, William Heinemann, 1933–67). Diogenes Laertius, Vitae philosophorum, ed. by H. S. Long (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1964). Eusebius, Die Praeparatio Evangelica, ed. by Karl Mras, 2 vol., Die griechischen christlichen Schriftsteller der ersten drei Jahrhunderte, Eusebius Werke, vol. 8 (Berlin: Akademie-Verlag, 1954–56). Galen, Galen on the Doctrines of Hippocrates and Plato, edition, translation and commentary by Phillip De Lacy, Corpus medicorum Graecorum; vol. 4.1–2, 3 parts (part 2) (Berlin: Akademie, 21980–84). Homer, The Odyssey, trans. by A. T. Murray, 2 vol., Loeb Classical Library (London: William Heinemann, 1919). – The Iliad, trans. by A. T. Murray, 2 vol., Loeb Classical Library (London: William Heinemann, 1924). Josephus, Josephus, trans. by H. St. J. Thackeray and others, Loeb Classical Library (London: William Heinemann, 1926–65). Philo, Philonis Alexandrini: Opera quae supersunt, ed. by Leopold Cohn/Paul Wendland, 7 vol. (Berlin: Georgii Reimeri / Walter de Gruyter, 1896–1930). – Philo, trans. by F. H. Colson/G. H. Whitaker/Ralph Marcus, 10 vol. & 2 suppl., The Loeb Classical Library (Cambridge, Mass./London: Harvard University Press/William Heinemann, 1929–62). Plato, Platonis opera, ed. by John Burnet, 5 vol. (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1903). – Plato in Twelve Volumes, trans. by H. N. Fowler and others, The Loeb Classical Library (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1914–35). – Plato: Timaeus, trans. by Donald J. Zeyl (Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing, 2000). Plutarch, Lives, trans. by Bernedotte Perrin, Loeb Classical Library (London: William Heinemann, 1914–26). – Moralia, trans. by Frank Cole Babbitt and others, 16 vol., Loeb Classical Library (vol. 1–15, London: Heinemann; vol. 16, London: Harvard University Press, 1927–2004). Seneca, Ad Lucilium Epistulae Morales, trans. by Richard M. Gummere, 3 vol., Loeb Classical Library (London: William Heinemann, 1917–25). – Moral Essays, trans. by John W. Basore, 3 vol., Loeb Classical Library (London: William Heinemann, 1928–35). Sextus Empiricus, Sextus Empiricus, trans. by R. G. Bury, 4 vol., Loeb Classical Library (London: William Heinemann, 1933–49). Stobaeus, Eclogae et Florilegium, Anthologium, ed. by Curtis Wachsmith/Otto Hense, 5 vol. & appendix (Berlin: 1884–1923). Xenophon, Xenophon in Seven Volumes, trans. by E. C. Marchant, Loeb Classical Library (London: William Heinemann, 1923).

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

Anthologies of Primary Sources

247

Anthologies of Primary Sources von Arnim, H. F. A. (ed.), Stoicorum veterum fragmenta, 4 vol. in 2 bks (Leipzig: B. G. Teubner, 1903–24). Austin, M. M., The Hellenistic World from Alexander to the Roman Conquest (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1981). Charlesworth, James H. (ed.), The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha, 2 vol. (New York: Doubleday, 1983–85). Cowey, James M. S./Klaus Maresch (ed.), P. Polit. Iud., Urkunden des Politeuma der Juden von Herakleopolis (144/3–133/2 v. Chr.) (Wiesbaden: Westdeutscher Verlag, 2001). Diels, Hermann/Walter Kranz (ed.), Die Fragmente der Vorsokratiker, 2 vol. (Berlin: Weidmann, 31934–37). Dittenberger, W. (ed.), Orientis graeci inscriptiones selectae, 2 vol. (Leipzig: Hirzel, 1903–05). García Martínez, Florentino/Eibert J. C. Tigchelaar (ed.), The Dead Sea Scrolls Study Edition, 2 vol. (Leiden: Brill, 1997–98). Grenfall, B. P./A. S. Hunt (ed.), The Oxyrhynchos Papyri, XI (London: Egypt Exploration Society, 1915). Horbury, William/David Noy (ed.), Jewish Inscriptions of Graeco-Roman Egypt, (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992). Inwood, Brad/L. P. Gerson (trans.), Hellenistic Philosophy: Introductory Readings, (Indianapolis: Hackett, 21997). Long, A. A./D. N. Sedley, The Hellenistic Philosophers, 2 vol. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1987). Taylor, Thomas (trans.), Political Fragments of Archytas, Charondas, Zaleuccus, and Other Ancient Pythagoreans, Preserved by Stobaeus (Chiswick: C. Whittingham, 1822). Tcherikover, Victor A. (ed.), Corpus papyrorum Judaicarum, 3 vol. (Cambridge, MA: Magnes Press, 1957–64).

Dictionaries, Grammars and Concordances Abegg Jr, Martin G./James E. Bowley/Edward M. Cook, The Dead Sea Scrolls Concordance: Volume One: The Non-Biblical Texts from Qumran (Leiden: Brill, 2003). Borgen, Peder/Kåre Fuglseth/Roald Skarsten, The Philo Index (Leiden: Brill, 2000). Brown, Francis/S. R. Driver/Charles A. Briggs, The Brown-Driver-Briggs Hebrew and English Lexicon (Boston: Houghton, Mifflin and Co., 1906.; repr. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 2004). Clines, David J. A., The Dictionary of Classical Hebrew, 6 vol. (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1993–). Danker, Frederick W., A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 32000). Gesenius, Wilhelm/E. Kautzsch/A. E. Cowley, Gesenius’ Hebrew Grammar, (Oxford: Clarendon, 21910). Hatch, Edwin/Henry A. Redpath, A Concordance to the Septuagint and the Other

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

248

Bibliography

Greek Versions of the Old Testament, with Hebrew/Aramaic Index to the Septuagint by Takamitsu Muraoka (Grand Rapids: Baker, 21988). Koehler, Ludwig/Walter Baumgartner, The Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament, rev. by Walter Baumgartner/Johann Jakob Stamm with Benedikt Hartmann and others, 5 vol. (Leiden: Brill, 1994–2000). Liddell, Henry George and others, A Greek-English Lexicon, 9th edn with suppl. (Oxford: Clarendon, 1968; repr. Oxford: Clarendon, 1977). Lust, J./E. Eynikel/K. Hauspie, Greek-English Lexicon of the Septuagint, revised edn (Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 2003). Mandelkern, Solomon, Veteris testamenti concordantiae: hebraicae atque chaldicae (1937; repr. Graz, 1975). The Oxford English Dictionary, [accessed 2006–10]. Suidae Lexicon, Thomas Gaisford/G. Bernhardy (ed.), 2 vol. (Halis and Brunsviga, 1853).

Commentaries Collins, J. J., Daniel, Hermeneia 27 (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1993). Engel, Helmut, Das Buch der Weisheit (Stuttgart: Katholisches Bibelwerk, 1998). Farrar, F. W., ‘Wisdom’, in Henry Wace (ed.), The Holy Bible According to the Authorized Version (A. D. 1611), with an Explanatory and Critical Commentary and a Revision of the Translation, by Clergy of the Anglican Church, 2 vol. (London: Murray, 1888), i, 403–534. Fichtner, Johannes, Weisheit Salomos, Handbuch zum Alten Testament: Zweite Reihe 6 (Tübingen: J. C. B. Mohr, 1938). Goodrick, A. T. S. (ed.), The Book of Wisdom: with Introduction and Notes, The Oxford Church Bible Commentary (London: Rivingtons, 1913). Grandjean, Yves, Une Nouvelle Arétalogie d’Isis à Maronée (Leiden, E. J. Brill, 1975). Gregg, J. A. F., The Wisdom of Solomon, The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1909). Grimm, Carl Ludwig Wilibald, Commentar über das Buch der Weisheit (Leipzig: Hochhausen und Fournes, 1837). – Das Buch der Weisheit, Kurzgesfasstes exegetisches Handbuch zu den Apokryphen des A. T. (Leipzig: S. Hirzel, 1860). Harl, Marguerite, La Bible D’Alexandrie. La Genèse (Paris: Les Èditions du Cerf, 1986). Heinisch, Paul, Das Buch der Weisheit (Münster, 1912). Horbury, William, ‘The Wisdom of Solomon’, in John Barton/John Muddiman (ed.), The Oxford Bible Commentary (Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2001) 650–67. van der Horst, Pieter Willem, Philo’s Flaccus : The First Pogrom: Introduction, Translation, and Commentary (Leiden: Brill, 2003). Kolarcik, Michael, ‘The Book of Wisdom’, in The New Interpreter’s Bible, vol. 5 (Nashville: Abingdon, 1997), 435–600. Larcher, C., Le Livre de la Sagesse ou la Sagesse de Salomon, 3 vol. (Paris: Gabalda, 1983–85).

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

Secondary Literature

249

Nickelsburg, George, W. E., 1 Enoch 1: a Commentary on the Book of 1 Enoch, Chapters 1–36; 81–108, Hermeneia (Minneapolis: Fortress, 2001). Reider, Joseph, The Book of Wisdom (New York: Harper, 1957). Scarpat, G., Libro della Sapienza, Biblica, Testi e Studi 1, 3, 6 (Brescia: Paideia, 1989– 1999). Skehan, Patrick W./Alexander A. Di Lella, The Wisdom of Ben Sira, The Anchor Bible 39 (New York: Doubleday, 1987). Westermann, Claus, Genesis 1–11: A Commentary (Minneapolis, Augsburg, 1984). Winston, David, The Wisdom of Solomon, The Anchor Bible, vol. 43 (New York: Doubleday, 1979).

Secondary Literature Aitken, James K., ‘Apocalyptic, Revelation and Early Jewish Wisdom Literature’, in P. J. Harland/C. T. R. Hayward (ed.), New Heaven and New Earth: Essays in Honour of Anthony Gelston (Leiden: Brill, 1999) 181–93. – ‘Divine Will and Providence’, in Renate Egger-Wenzel (ed.), Ben Sira’s God, Beihefte zur Zeitschrift für die alttestamentliche Wissenschaft 321 (Berlin: de Gruyter, 2002) 282–301. – ‘Poet and Critic: Royal Ideology and the Greek Translator of Proverbs’, in Tessa Rajak/Sarah Pearce/James Aitken/Jennifer Dines (ed.), Jewish Perspectives on Hellenistic Rulers (Berkley: University of California Press, 2007) 190–204. Alexander, Philip, ‘Predestination and Free Will in the Theology of the Dead Sea Scrolls’, in John M. G. Barclay/Simon J. Gathercole (ed.), Divine and Human Agency in Paul and his Cultural Environment (London: T&T Clark, 2006) 27–49. Algra, Keimpe, ‘The beginnings of cosmology’, in A. A. Long (ed.), The Cambridge Companion to Early Greek Philosophy (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999) 45–65. Amir, Yehoshua, ‘The Figure of Death in the Book of Wisdom’, Journal of Jewish Studies 30 (1979) 154–78. Annas, Julia E., Hellenistic Philosophy of Mind (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1992). Arbman, E., ‘Untersuchungen zur primitiven Seelenvorstellungen mit besonderer Rücksicht auf Indien’, pts. 1–2, Le Monde Oriental 20–21, (1926) 85–222, (1927) 1–185. Armstrong, A. H., An Introduction to Ancient Philosophy, (London: Methuen, 31977; repr. Littlefield: Rowman and Allenheld, 1983). Aune, David. E., The Westminster Dictionary of New Testament and Early Christian Literature and Rhetoric (Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2003). Aune, D. E./T. J. Geddert/C. A. Evans, ‘Apocalypticism’, in Craig A. Evans/Stanley E. Porter (ed.), The Dictionary of New Testament Background (Leicester: InterVarsity, 2000) 45–58. Baltzly, Dirk, ‘Stoic Pantheism’, Sophia, vol. 42, no. 2 (2003) 3–33. Barclay, John M. G., Jews in the Mediterranean Diaspora: from Alexander to Trajan (323 BCE – 117 CE) (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1996). Barker, Andrew D., ‘Music’, in Simon Hornblower/Antony Spawnforth (ed.), The Oxford Classical Dictionary (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 31996), 1003–12.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

250

Bibliography

Barnes, Jonathan, The Presocratic Philosophers. Vol. 1: Thales to Zeno (London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1979). Barnes, T. D., ‘Trajan and the Jews’, Journal of Jewish Studies, vol. 40, no. 2 (1989) 145–62. Barton, John, Oracles of God (London: Darton, Longman and Todd, 1986). Baslez, Marie-Françoise, ‘The Author of Wisdom and Cultured Environment of Alexandria’, in Angelo Passaro/Giuseppe Bellia (ed.), The Book of Wisdom in Modern Research, Deuterocanonical and Cognate Literature Yearbook (Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 2005) 33–52. Baumgärtel, F., ‘Spirit in the OT’ and other sections, in Geoffrey W. Bromiley (ed.), Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, 9 vol. (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1933–73), vi (1968) 359–68. Bieber, Margarete, ‘The Portraits of Alexander’, Greece and Rome, 2nd Series, vol. 12, no. 2 (1965) 183–88. Blischke, Mareike Verena, Die Eschatologie in der Sapientia Salomonis (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2007). Bolle, Kees W., ‘Fate’, in Encyclopedia of Religion, 15 vol. (London: Macmillan, 2 2005), v 2998–3006. Bowman, Alan K., ‘Egypt’, in The Cambridge Ancient History, 14 vol. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 21971–2005), x, Alan K. Bowman/Edward Champlin/Andrew Lintott (ed.), The Augustan Empire, 43 B. C.–A. D. 69 (1996) 676– 702. Bremner, Jan, The Early Greek Concept of the Soul (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1983). – The Rise and Fall of the Afterlife (London: Routledge, 2002). Bryan, Betsy M., ‘The 18th Dynasty before the Amarna Period’, in Ian Shaw (ed.), The Oxford History of Ancient Egypt (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000) 207–64. Bultmann, Rudolf, ‘New Testament and Mythology’, in Hans-Werner Bartsch (ed.), Kerygma and Myth: A Theological Debate (London: SPCK, 1953) 1–44. Burkert, Walter, Greek Religion (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1985). Caird, G. B., The Language and Imagery of the Bible (London: Duckworth, 1980). Cancik, H., ‘The End of the World, of History and of the Individual in Greek and Roman Antiquity’ in J. J. Collins/B. McGinn/S. Stein (ed.), The Encyclopedia of Apocalypticism, 3 vol. (New York: Continuum, 1998) i 84–125. Casey, P. M., Son of Man: The Interpretation and Influence of Daniel 7 (London: SPCK, 1979). Centrone, Bruno, ‘Platonism and Pythagoreanism in the early empire’, in Christopher Rowe/Malcolm Schofield (ed.), The Cambridge History of Greek and Roman Political Thought (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000) 559–84. Cheon, Samuel, The Exodus Story in the Wisdom of Solomon: A Study in Biblical Interpretation, JSPSup 23 (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1997). Collins, J. J., ‘Cosmos and Salvation: Jewish Wisdom and Apocalyptic in the Hellenistic Age’, History of Religions, vol. 17, no. 2 (1977) 121–42. – ‘The Root of Immortality: Death in the Context of Jewish Wisdom’, HTR 71 (1978) 177–92. – (ed.), Apocalypse: The Morphology of a Genre, Semeia 14 (Missoula, MT: Scholars Press, 1979).

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

Secondary Literature

251

– Jewish Wisdom in the Hellenistic Age (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1997). – The Apocalyptic Imagination, (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 21998). – ‘Apocalyptic Literature’, in Craig A. Evans/Stanley E. Porter (ed.), The Dictionary of New Testament Background (Leicester: Inter-Varsity Press, 2000) 40–45. – ‘Eschatologies of Late Antiquity’, in Craig A. Evans/Stanley E. Porter (ed.), The Dictionary of New Testament Background (Leicester: Inter-Varsity Press, 2000) 330–37. – ‘Apocalyptic Eschatology in Philosophical Dress in the Wisdom of Solomon’, in J. L. Kugel (ed.), Shem in the Tents of Japhet. Essays on the Encounter of Judaism and Hellenism (Leiden: Brill, 2002) 93–107. – ‘The Mysteries of God: Creation and Eschatology in 4QInstruction and the Wisdom of Solomon’, in F. García Martínez (ed.), Wisdom and Apocalypticism in the Dead Sea Scrolls and in the Biblical Tradition, BETL 168 (Leuven: Leuven University Press/Peeters, 2003) 287–305. – ‘Life after Death in Pseudo-Phocylides’, in Jewish Cult and Hellenistic Culture: Essays on the Jewish Encounter with Hellenism and Roman Rule, SJSJ, vol. 100 (Leiden: Brill, 2005) 128–42. – ‘The Reinterpretation of Apocalyptic Traditions in the Wisdom of Solomon’, Jewish Cult and Hellenistic Culture: Essays on the Jewish Encounter with Hellenism and Roman Rule, SJSJ, vol. 100 (Leiden: Brill, 2005) 143–58. – ‘Enoch and the Messiah Son of Man: A Response to Sabino Chialà and Helge Kvanig’, in Gabriele Boccaccini (ed.), Enoch and the Messiah Son of Man: Revisiting the Book of Parables (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2007) 216–27. Cook, Johann, The Septuagint of Proverbs: Jewish and/or Hellenistic Proverbs?, VTSup 69 (Leiden: Brill, 1997). Crenshaw, James L., Old Testament Wisdom (Atlanta: Westminster John Knox, 1981). Davila, James R., The Provenance of the Pseudepigrapha: Jewish, Christian, or other?, SJSJ 105 (Leiden: Brill, 2005). Davis, Norman/Colin M. Kraay, The Hellenistic Kingdoms: Portrait, Coins and History (London: Thames & Hudson, 1973). Delia, Diana, ‘The Population of Roman Alexandria’, Transactions of the American Philological Association (1974–), vol. 118 (1988) 275–92. Dietrich, B. C., ‘The Spinning of Fate in Homer’, Phoenix 16 (1962) 86–101. Di Lella, Alexander A., ‘The Textual History of Septuagint-Daniel and TheodotionDaniel’, in John J. Collins/Peter W. Flint (ed.), The Book of Daniel: Composition and Reception, VTSup vol. 83.2, Formation and Interpretation of Old Testament Literature vol. 2.2 (Leiden: Brill, 2001) 586–607. Dillon, John M., The Middle Platonists: A Study of Platonism, 80 B. C. to A. D. 220 (London: Duckworth, 1977). Dodd, C. H., The Parables of the Kingdom (London: Nisbet, 1935). – The Apostolic Preaching and its Developments (London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1963). Dorandi, Tiziano, ‘Chronology’, in Keimpe Algra and others (ed.), The Cambridge History of Hellenistic Philosophy (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999) 31–54. Drummond, James, Philo Judaeus, 2 vol. (London: Williams and Norgate, 1888). Dunn, James D. G., The New Perspective on Paul: Collected Essays, Wissenschaf-

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

252

Bibliography

tliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 185 (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2005). Edsman, Carl-Martin, ‘Divine and Demonic Necessity in the Oresteia’, in Helmer Ringgren (ed.), Fatalistic Beliefs in Religion, Folklore, and Literature (Uppsala: Almqvist & Wiksells, 1967) 19–34. El-Abbadi, Mostafa, ‘Aspects of Scholarship and the Library in Ptolemaic Alexandria’, Diogenes, vol. 36, no. 141 (1988) 21–37. Ellis, Walter M., Ptolemy of Egypt (Florence, Kentucky: Routledge, 1993). Erskine, Andrew, ‘Culture and Power in Ptolemaic Egypt: The Museum and Library of Alexandria’, Greece and Rome, 2nd ser., vol. 42, no. 1 (1995) 38–48. Evans, C. A., ‘Messianism’, in Craig A. Evans/Stanley E. Porter (ed.) The Dictionary of New Testament Background (Leicester: Inter-Varsity, 2000) 698–707. – ‘Son of God Text’, in Craig A. Evans/Stanley E. Porter (ed.) The Dictionary of New Testament Background (Leicester: Inter-Varsity, 2000) 1134–37. ַ ‫ רוּ‬Rûaḥ ’, parts VII–VIII, in G. Johannes Botterweck/Helmer Fabry, Heinz-Josef, ‘‫ח‬ Ringgren/Heinz-Josef Fabry (ed.), Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament, 15 vol. (1974–), xiv (2004) 396–402. – ‘Die Messianologie der Weisheitsliteratur in LXX’, in M. A. Knibb (ed.), The Septuagint and Messianism (Leuven: Leuven University Press/Peeters, 2006) 263–89. Festugière, A. J., ‘À Propos des Arétalogies d’Isis’, HTR, vol. 42, no. 4 (1949) 209–34. Finan, Thomas, ‘Hellenistic Humanism in the Book of Wisdom’, Irish Theological Quarterly 27 (1960) 30–48. Fraser, P. M., Ptolemaic Alexandria, 3 vol. (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1972). Frede, Michael, ‘Epilogue’, in Keimpe Algra and others (ed.), The Cambridge History of Hellenistic Philosophy (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999) 771–97. Freyne, Sean, ‘The Herodian Period’, in Markus Bockmuehl/James Carleton Paget (ed.), Redemption and Resistance (London: T&T Clark, 2007) 29–43. Frick, Peter, Divine Providence in Philo of Alexandria, Texte und Studien zum antiken Judentum 77 ( Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1999). Furley, David, ‘Cosmology’, in Keimpe Algra and others (ed.), The Cambridge History of Hellenistic Philosophy (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999) 412–51. Gentry, Peter J., ‘Ecclesiast: to the Reader’, in Albert Pietersma/Benjamin G. Wright (ed.), A New English Translation of the Septuagint (Oxford, OUP, 2007) 648–50. Gigante, Marcello, Philodemus in Italy (Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press, 1995). Gilbert, Maurice, ‘Wisdom Literature’, in Michael E. Stone (ed.) Jewish Writings of the Second Temple Period (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1984) 283–324. – ‘The Literary Structure of the Book of Wisdom: A Study of Views’, in Angelo Passaro/Giuseppe Bellia (ed.), The Book of Wisdom in Modern Research, Deuterocanonical and Cognate Literature Yearbook (Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 2005) 19– 32. Glotz, G., The Greek City and its Institutions (London: Kegan Paul, Trench, Trubner, 1929). Glucker, John, ‘Cicero’s philosophical affiliations’, in John M. Dillon/A. A. Long (ed.), The Question of “Eclecticism” (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1988) 34–69. Goff, Matthew, ‘Genesis 1–3 in the Wisdom of Solomon and 4QInstruction’, in Géza

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

Secondary Literature

253

G. Xeravits/József Zsengellér (ed.), Studies in the Book of Wisdom, SJSJ, vol. 142 (Leiden: Brill, 2010) 1–21. Goff, Michael J., The Worldly and Heavenly Wisdom of 4QInstruction, STDJ 50 (Leiden: Brill, 2003). – Discerning Wisdom: The Sapiential Literature of the Dead Sea Scrolls, VTSup 116 (Leiden: Brill, 2007). Goodenough, Erwin, R., ‘The Political Philosophy of Hellenistic Kingship’, in Austin M. Harmon (ed.), Yale Classical Studies, vol. 1 (New Haven/London: Yale University Press/Oxford University Press, 1928) 55–102. – An Introduction to Philo Judaeus, (Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 21962). Goodman, Martin, ‘Judaea’, in The Cambridge Ancient History, 14 vol. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1971–2005), x, Alan K. Bowman/Edward Champlin/ Andrew Lintott (ed.), The Augustan Empire, 43 B. C.–A. D. 69, (21996) 737–81. Grabbe, Lester, L., Wisdom of Solomon (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1997). – Judaic Religion in the Second Temple Period: Belief and Practice from the Exile to Yavneh (London: Routledge, 2000). – ‘Scribes and Synagogues’, in J. W. Rogerson/Judith M. Lieu (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Biblical Studies (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006) 362–71. Gray, V. J., ‘Xenophon and Isocrates’, in Christopher Rowe/Malcolm Schofield (ed.), The Cambridge History of Greek and Roman Political Thought (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000) 142–54. Greene, William Chase, Moira: Fate, Good, and Evil in Greek Thought (Cambridge, MA.: Harvard University Press, 1944). Gutzwiller, Kathryn, A Guide to Hellenistic Literature (Oxford: Blackwell, 2007). Hahm, David E., ‘Kings and constitutions: Hellenistic theories’, in Christopher Rowe/Malcolm Schofield (ed.), The Cambridge History of Greek and Roman Political Thought (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000) 457–76. Hankinson, R. J., ‘Determinism and Indeterminism’, in Keimpe Algra and others (ed.), The Cambridge History of Hellenistic Philosophy (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999) 513–41. – ‘Explanation and Causation’, in Keimpe Algra and others (ed.), The Cambridge History of Hellenistic Philosophy (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999) 479–512. Happ, Heinz, Hyle (Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 1971). Harrington, Daniel J., ‘Mystery’, in Lawrence H. Schiffman/James C. VanderKam (ed.), Encyclopedia of the Dead Sea Scrolls (New York: Oxford, 2000) 588–91. ַ ‫צ‬ ָ ṣ ālaḥ ’, in G. Johannes Botterweck/Helmer Ringgren/HeinzHausmann, J., ‘‫לח‬ Josef Fabry (ed.), Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament, 15 vol. (1974–), xii (2003) 382–85. Hengel, Martin, Judaism and Hellenism (London: SCM, 1974). – The Septuagint as Christian Scripture: Its Prehistory and the Problem of the Its Canon, assisted by Roland Deines (Edinbugh: T&T Clark, 2002). Hengel, Martin/Daniel P. Bailey, ‘The Effective History of Isaiah 53 in the PreChristian Period’, in Bernd Janowski/Peter Stuhlmacher (ed.), The Suffering Servant (Cambridge: Eerdmans, 2004) 75–146. van Henten, Jan Willem, ‘The Hasmonean Period’, in Markus Bockmuehl/James Carleton Paget (ed.), Redemption and Resistance (London: T&T Clark, 2007) 15– 28.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

254

Bibliography

Honigman, Sylvie, The Septuagint and Homeric Scholarship in Alexandria: A Study in the Narrative of the Letter of Aristeas (London/New York: Routledge, 2003). – ‘The Narrative Function of the King and the Library in the Letter of Aristeas’, in Tessa Rajak and others (ed.), Jewish Perspectives on Hellenistic Rulers (Berkley: University of California Press, 2007) 128–46. Horbury, William, ‘The Christian Use and Jewish Origins of the Wisdom of Solomon’, in John Day/Robert P. Gordon/H. G. M. Williamson (ed.), Wisdom in Ancient Israel (Cambridge: Cambridge University, 1995) 182–96. – Messianism among Jews and Christians (London: T&T Clark, 2003). van der Horst, Pieter W., Ancient Jewish Epitaphs (Kampen: Kok Pharos, 1991). Inwood, Brad/Pierluigi Donini, ‘Stoic Ethics’, in Keimpe Algra and others (ed.), The Cambridge History of Hellenistic Philosophy (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999) 675–738. Isaacs, Marie E., The Concept of Spirit (London: Heythrop Monographs, 1976). Jaeger, Werner, ‘The Greek Ideas of Immortality’, HTR, vol. 52, no. 3 (1959) 135–47. Jarick, John, ‘Aquila’s Koheleth’, Textus, vol. 15 (1990) 131–39. Jeremias, Joachim, Die Gleichnisse Jesu (Zürich: Zwingli-Verlag, 1947). – The Parables of Jesus (London: SCM, 1954). Kamesar, Adam, ‘Biblical Interpretation in Philo’, in Adam Kamesar (ed.), The Cambridge Companion to Philo (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2009) 65– 91. Kennedy, G. A., ‘The Genres of Rhetoric’, in Stanley E. Porter (ed.), Handbook of Classical Rhetoric in the Hellenistic Period (330 B. C.–A. D. 400) (Leiden: Brill, 1997) 43–50. Kerkeslager, Allen, ‘Maintaining Jewish Identity in the Greek Gymnasium: A “Jewish Load” in CPJ 3.519 (= P. SCHUB. 37 = P. BEROL. 13406)’, JSJ, vol. 28, no. 1 (1997) 12–33. Kleinknecht, H., ‘πνεῦμα in the Greek World’, in Geoffrey W. Bromiley (ed.), Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, 9 vol. (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1933–73), vi (1968), 334–59. Kloppenborg, John S., ‘Isis and Sophia in the Book of Wisdom’, HTR, vol. 75, no. 1 (1982) 58–84. Koch, Klaus, The Rediscovery of Apocalyptic, Studies in Biblical Theology Series 2, no. 22 (London: SCM, 1972). – The Prophets: Volume One, The Assyrian Period (London: SCM, 1982). – The Prophets: Volume Two, The Babylonian and Persian Periods (London: SCM, 1983). Koenen, Ludwig, ‘The Prophecies of a Potter: A Prophecy of World Renewal Becomes an Apocalypse’, in Deborah H. Samuel (ed.), Proceedings of the Twelfth International Congress of Papyrology, American Studies in Papyrology, vol. 7 (Toronto: A. M. Hakkert, 1970) 249–54. – ‘The Ptolemaic King as a Religious Figure’, in Anthony W. Bulloch and others (ed.), Images and Ideologies: Self-Definition in the Hellenistic World (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1993) 25–115 [accessed 19th July 2010]. Kolarcik, Michael, The Ambiguity of Death in the Book of Wisdom 1–6, An. Bib. 127 (Rome: Editrice Pontificio Istituto Biblico, 1991). – ‘Sapiential Values and Apocalyptic Imagery in the Wisdom of Solomon’, in Géza

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

Secondary Literature

255

G. Xeravits/József Zsengellér (ed.), Studies in the Book of Wisdom, SJSJ, vol. 142 (Leiden: Brill, 2010) 23–36. ָ ‫שׁ‬ ָ ְ ‫ נ‬nešāmâ’, in G. Johannes Botterweck/Helmer RinggLamberty-Zielinski, H., ‘‫מה‬ ren/Heinz-Josef Fabry (ed.), Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament, 15 vol. (1974–), x (1999) 65–70. Laporte, J., ‘Philo in the Tradition of Biblical Wisdom Literature’, in Robert L. Wilken (ed.), Aspects of Wisdom in Judaism and Early Christianity (Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press, 1975) 104–41. Larcher, C., Études sur le Livre de la Sagesse (Paris: Gabalda, 1969). Leonhardt, Jutta, Jewish Worship in Philo of Alexandria, Texts and Studies in Ancient Judaism 84 (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2001). Leonhardt-Balzer, Jutta, ‘Jewish Worship and Universal Identity in Philo of Alexandria’, in Jörg Frey/Daniel R. Schwartz/Stephanie Gripentrog (ed.), Jewish Identity in the Greco-Roman World (Leiden: Brill, 2007) 29–53. – ‘A Case of Psychological Dualism: Philo of Alexandria and the Instruction on the Two Spirits’, in Craig A. Evans/H. Daniel Zacharias (ed.), Early Christian Literature and Intertextuality, Volume 2: Exegetical Studies, Studies in Scripture in Early Judaism and Christianity, vol. 15 (London: T&T Clark, 2009) 27–45. Levison, John R., The Spirit in First Century Judaism, Arbeiten zur Geschichte des antiken Judentums und des Urchristentums 29 (Leiden: Brill, 1997). Lévy, Carlos, ‘Philo’s Ethics’, in Adam Kamesar (ed.), The Cambridge Companion to Philo (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2009) 146–71. Lewis, Naphtali, Life in Egypt under Roman Rule (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1983). Lindblom, J. Prophecy in Ancient Israel (Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1962). Lloyd, Alan B., ‘The Late Period (664–332 BC)’, in Ian Shaw (ed.), The Oxford History of Ancient Egypt (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000) 364–87. – ‘The Ptolemaic Period (332–30 BC)’, in Ian Shaw (ed.), The Oxford History of Ancient Egypt (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000) 388–413. Lloyd, Geoffrey, ‘Pneuma between Body and Soul’, Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute, vol. 13, no. s1 (2007) S135-S146. Long, A. A., Hellenistic Philosophy, (London: Duckworth, 21986). – ‘Socrates in Hellenistic Philosophy’, The Classical Quarterly, n. s., vol. 38, no. 1 (1988) 150–71. – ‘Scepticism about Gods in Hellenistic Philosophy’, in Mark Griffith/Donald J. Mastronarde (ed.), Cabinet of the Muses: essays on classical and comparative literature in honor of Thomas G. Rosenmeyer (Atlanta: American Scholars Press, 1990) 279–91. – ‘Stoic Psychology’, in Keimpe Algra and others (ed.), The Cambridge History of Hellenistic Philosophy (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999) 560–84. – From Epicurus to Epictetus : Studies in Hellenistic and Roman Philosophy (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006). Longrigg. James, Greek Rational Medicine (London: Routledge, 1993). Lund, Helen S., Lysimachus: A Study in Early Hellenistic Kingship (London: Routledge, 1992). Mack, Burton Lee, Logos und Sophia (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1973). – ‘Wisdom Makes a Difference’, in Jacob Neusner/William Scott Green/Ernest S. Frerichs (ed.), Judaisms and Their Messiahs at the Turn of the Christian Era (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1987) 15–48.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

256

Bibliography

Malek, Jaromir, ‘The Old Kingdom’, in Ian Shaw (ed.), The Oxford History of Ancient Egypt (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000) 83–107. Malherbe, Abraham J., Moral Exhortation, A Greco-Roman Sourcebook (Philadelphia: The Westminster Press, 1986). Mansfeld, Jaap, ‘Philosophy in the service of scripture’, in John M. Dillon/A. A. Long (ed.), The Question of “Eclecticism” (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1988) 70–102. – ‘Sources’, in Keimpe Algra and others (ed.), The Cambridge History of Hellenistic Philosophy (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999) 3–30. Mansfield, Jane, ‘Theology’, in Keimpe Algra and others (ed.), The Cambridge History of Hellenistic Philosophy (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999) 452–78. Mattila, Sharon Lea, ‘Ben Sira and the Stoics: A Reexamination of the Evidence’, JBL, vol. 119, no. 3. (2000) 473–501. May, Gerhard, Creation ex Nihilo (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1994). Mazzinghi, Luca, ‘Wis 19:13–17 and the Civil Rights of the Jews of Alexandria’, in The Book of Wisdom in Modern Research, Angelo Passaro/Giuseppe Bellia (ed.), Deuterocanonical and Cognate Literature Yearbook (Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 2005) 53–82. – ‘Law of Nature and Light of the Law’, in Géza G. Xeravits/József Zsengellér (ed.), Studies in the Book of Wisdom, SJSJ, vol. 142 (Leiden: Brill, 2010) 37–59. McGlynn, Moyna, Divine Judgement and Divine Benevolence in the Book of Wisdom, Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament, 2 Reihe (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2001). – ‘Solomon, Wisdom and The Philosopher-Kings’, in Géza G. Xeravits/József Zsengellér (ed.), Studies in the Book of Wisdom, SJSJ, vol. 142 (Leiden: Brill, 2010) 61– 81. Mitchell, David. C., ‘A Dying and Rising Josephite Messiah in 4Q372’, JSP, vol. 18, no. 3 (2009) 181–205. Modrzejewski, Joseph Mélèze, The Jews of Egypt (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1995). Montague, George T., The Holy Spirit: Growth of a Biblical Tradition (New York, Paulist, 1976). Morgan, Teresa, Literate Education in Hellenistic and Roman Worlds (Cambridge: Cambridge university Press, 1998). Murphy, R. E., ‘To Know Your Might is the Root of Immortality (Wisdom 15, 3)’, CBQ, vol. 25 (1963) 88–93. – The Tree of Life: An Exploration of Biblical Literature (Cambridge: William B. Eerdmans, 32002). Murray, Oswyn, ‘Aristeas and Ptolemaic Kingship’, Journal of Theological Studies, vol. 18, no. 2 (1967) 337–71. – ‘Hecataeus of Abdera and Pharaonic Kingship’, The Journal of Egyptian Archaeology, vol. 56 (1970) 141–71. – ‘The Letter of Aristeas’, in B. Virgilio (ed.), Studi ellenistici II (Pisa: Giardini, 1987) 15–29. – ‘Philosophy and Monarchy in the Hellenistic World’, in Tessa Rajak and others (ed.), Jewish Perspectives on Hellenistic Rulers (Berkley: University of California Press, 2007) 13–28. Nickelsburg, George, W. E., ‘Salvation without and with a Messiah: Developing Beliefs in Writings Ascribed to Enoch’, in Jacob Neusner/William Scott Green/

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

Secondary Literature

257

Ernest S. Frerichs (ed.), Judaisms and Their Messiahs at the Turn of the Christian Era (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1987) 49–68. – Resurrection, Immortality, and Eternal Life in Intertestamental Judaism and Early Christianity, Expanded Edition, Harvard Theological Studies 56 (Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 2006). Nicklas, Tobias, ‘Food of Angels (Wis 16:20)’, in Géza G. Xeravits/József Zsengellér (ed.), Studies in the Book of Wisdom, SJSJ, vol. 142 (Leiden: Brill, 2010) 83–100. Oeming, Manfred, ‘Geist/Heiliger Geist: II. Altes Testament’, in Hans Dieter Betz (ed.), Religion in Geschichte und Gegenwart: Handwörterbuch für Theologie und Religionswissenschaft, 6 vol. (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1998–2003), iii (2000) 564– 65. Olson, Daniel C., “‘Enoch and the Son of Man’ Revisited: Further Reflections on the Text and Translation of 1 Enoch 70.1–2”, JSP, vol. 18, no. 3 (2009) 233–240. Orlinsky, H. M., ‘The Septuagint as Holy Writ and the Philosophy of the Translators’, Hebrew Union College Annual 46 (1975) 89–114. Passaro, Angelo, ‘Cosmology and Music. Wis 19:18 and the Concept of Creation in the Book of Wisdom’, in Géza G. Xeravits/József Zsengellér (ed.), Studies in the Book of Wisdom, SJSJ, vol. 142 (Leiden: Brill, 2010) 101–23. Peacock, David, ‘The Roman Period (30 BC-AD 395)’, Ian Shaw (ed) The Oxford History of Ancient Egypt (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000) 422–45. Péter, Réne, ‘L’Imposition des Mains dans l’Ancien Testament’, Vetus Testamentum, vol. 27, no. 1 (1977) 48–55. Pistone, Rosario, ‘The Lyre and the Creation. Music Theory and Persuasive Strategy in Wisdom’, in The Book of Wisdom in Modern Research, Angelo Passaro/Giuseppe Bellia (ed.), Deuterocanonical and Cognate Literature Yearbook (Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 2005), 195–217. Porter, Frank Chamberlin, ‘The Pre-Existence of the Soul in the Book of Wisdom and in the Rabbinical Writings’, The American Journal of Theology, vol. 12, no. 1 (1908) 53–115. von Rad, G., Theologie des Alten Testaments, (Munich: Kaiser Verlag, 41965). Radice, Roberto, ‘Philo’s Theology and Theory of Creation’, in Adam Kamesar (ed.), The Cambridge Companion to Philo (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2009) 124–45. Rajak, Tessa, ‘The Angry Tyrant’, in Tessa Rajak and others (ed.), Jewish Perspectives on Hellenistic Rulers (Berkley: University of California Press, 2007) 110–27. Reese, J. M., ‘Plan and Structure in the Book of Wisdom’, CBQ, vol. 27 (1965) 391– 99. – Hellenistic Influence on the Book of Wisdom and its Consequences, An. Bib. 41 (Rome: Biblical Institute Press, 1970). Reiterer, Friedrich V., ‘Philosophische Lehre und deren Wirkung aus der Sicht eines Weisheitslehrers. Untersuchung von Weish 1:1–15’, in Géza G. Xeravits/József Zsengellér (ed.), Studies in the Book of Wisdom, SJSJ, vol. 142 (Leiden: Brill, 2010), 125–62. Robertson Smith, William, Lectures on the Religion of the Semites (London: Adam and Charles Black, 1894). Rofé, A., ‘Isaiah 59:19 and Trito-Isaiah’s Vision of Redemption’, in J. Vermeylen (ed.), The Book of Isaiah, le Livre d’Isaïe: les oracles et leurs relectures, unité et complexité de l’ouvrage, BETL 81 (Leuven: Leuven University Press, 1989) 407– 10.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

258

Bibliography

van Rooden, Peter T., ‘Die antike Elementarlehre und der Aufbau von Sapientia Salomonis 11–19’, in J. W. Henten and others (ed.), Tradition and Re-interpretation in Jewish and Early Christian Literature Essays in Honour of Jürgen C. H. Lebram, Studia Post-Biblica 36 (Leiden: Brill, 1986) 81–96. Rosenberg, Stephen G., ‘The Jewish Temple at Elephantine’, Near Eastern Archaeology, vol. 67, no. 1 (2004) 4–13. Rowlandson, Jane, ‘The Character of Ptolemaic Aristocracy: Problems of Definition and Evidence’, in Tessa Rajak and others (ed.), Jewish Perspectives on Hellenistic Rulers (Berkley: University of California Press, 2007), 29–49. Royse, James R, ‘The Works of Philo’, in Adam Kamesar (ed.), The Cambridge Companion to Philo (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2009) 32–64. Runia, David T., ‘Philo’s De aeternitae mundi: the problem of its interpretation’, in Exegesis and Philosophy (Aldershot: Variorum, 1990) 105–51 (first publ. in Vigiliae Christianae, vol. 35, no. 2 (June, 1981) 105–51). – Philo of Alexandria and the Timaeus of Plato (Leiden: Brill, 1986). – On the Creation of the Cosmos according to Moses, Philo of Alexandria Commentary Series (Leiden: Brill, 2001). Sambursky, S., The Physical World of the Greeks (London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1960). Schaberg, Jane, ‘Major Midrashic Traditions in Wisdom 1, 1–16, 25’, Journal for the Study of Judaism, vol. 13, no. 1–2 (1982) 75–101. Schams, Christine, Jewish Scribes in the Second-Temple Period, JSOTSup 291 (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1998). Schaper, Joachim, Eschatology in the Greek Psalter, Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament: Reihe 2; 76 (Tübingen: J. C. B. Mohr, 1995). – ‘The Persian Period’, in Markus Bockmuehl/James Carleton Paget (ed.), Redemption and Resistance (London: T&T Clark, 2007) 3–14. – ‘“… denn er ist besser als das, was er anbetet” (Sapientia Salomonis 15:17)’, Michaela Bauks/Kathrin Liess/Peter Riede (ed.), Was ist der Mensch, dass du seiner gedenkst? (Psalm 8:5) (Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener, 2008) 455–64. Schenkeveld, Dirk, M., ‘Philosophical Prose’, in Stanley E. Porter (ed.), Handbook of Classical Rhetoric in the Hellenistic Period (330 B. C.–A. D. 400) (Leiden: Brill, 1997) 195–264. Schmidt-Goering, Greg, ‘Election and Knowledge in the Wisdom of Solomon’, in Géza G. Xeravits/József Zsengellér (ed.), Studies in the Book of Wisdom, SJSJ, vol. 142 (Leiden: Brill, 2010) 163–82. Schofield, Malcolm, The Stoic Idea of the City (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1991; repr. London: University of Chicago Press, 1999). – ‘Social and Political Thought’, in Keimpe Algra and others (ed.), The Cambridge History of Hellenistic Philosophy (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999) 739–70. Schorch, Stefan, ‘Jacob’s Ladder and Aaron’s Vestments: Traces of Mystical and Magical Traditions in the Wisdom of Solomon’, in Géza G. Xeravits/József Zsengellér (ed.), Studies in the Book of Wisdom, SJSJ, vol. 142 (Leiden: Brill, 2010) 183– 95. Schwartz, Daniel R., ‘Philo, His Family, and His Times’, in Adam Kamesar (ed.), The Cambridge Companion to Philo (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2009) 9–31. Schweitzer, A., The Quest of the Historical Jesus (London: A. & C. Black, 1910).

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

Secondary Literature

259

Schwenk-Bressler, Udo, Sapientia Salomonis als ein Beispiel frühjüdischer Textauslegung: Die Auslegung des Buches Genesis, Exodus 1–15 and Teilen der Wüstentradition in Sap 10–19, Beiträge zur Erforschung des Alten Testaments und des antiken Judentums 32 (Frankfurt am Main: Lang, 1993). Scott, Alan, Origen and the Life of the Stars. A History of an Idea, Oxford Early Christian Studies (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1991). Sealey, Raphael, A History of the Greek City States ca. 700–338 B. C. (Berkley and Los Angeles: University California Press, 1976). Sedley, David, ‘Hellenistic Physics and Metaphysics’, in Keimpe Algra and others (ed.), The Cambridge History of Hellenistic Philosophy (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999) 355–411. Sekki, Arthur Everett, The Meaning of Rûaḥ at Qumran, SBL Dissertation Series 110 (Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1989). Sellars, John, Stoicism (Berkeley and Los Angeles, California: University of California Press, 2006). Sharples, R. W., Stoics, Epicureans and Sceptics (London: Routledge, 1996). Shields, Christopher John (ed.), The Blackwell Guide to Ancient Philosophy (Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell, 2009). Skehan, Patrick W., ‘Isaias and the Teaching of the Book of Wisdom’, CBQ, vol. 2 (1940) 289–99. – ‘The Text and Structure of the Book of Wisdom’, Traditio 3 (1945) 1–12. – Studies in Israelite Poetry and Wisdom, CBQMS (Washington: Catholic Biblical Association of America, 1971). Smith, R. R. R., ‘Kings and Philosophers’, in Anthony W. Bulloch and others (ed.), Images and Ideologies: Self-Definition in the Hellenistic World (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1993) 202–12 [accessed 19th July 2010]. Sorabji, Richard, ‘Rationality’, in Michael Frede/Gisela Striker (ed.), Rationality in Greek Thought (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1996) 311–34. Stowers, Stanley Kent, The Diatribe and Paul’s Letter to the Romans (Chico, California: Scholars Press, 1981). Suggs, M. Jack, ‘Wisdom of Solomon 2:10–5: A Homily Based on the Fourth Servant Song’, Journal of Biblical Literature, vol. 76, no. 1 (1957) 26–33. Sweet, J. P. M., ‘Miracles in the Wisdom of Solomon’, in C. F. D. Moule (ed.), Miracles (London: A. R. Mowbray, 1965) 113–26. Taylor, Richard J., ‘The Eschatological Meaning of Life and Death in the Book of Wisdom I–V’, Ephemerides Theologicae Lovanienses, vol. 42 (1966) 72–137. Tcherikover, V., Hellenistic Civilization and the Jews (Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society of America, 1959; repr. Peabody: Hendrickson, 1999). ַ ‫ רוּ‬Rûaḥ ’, parts I–VI, in G. Johannes Botterweck/Helmer RinggTengström, S., ‘‫ח‬ ren/Heinz-Josef Fabry (ed.), Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament, 15 vol. (1974–), xiv (2004) 395–96. Termini, Christina, “Philo’s Thought within the Context of Middle Judaism”, in Adam Kamesar (ed.), The Cambridge Companion to Philo (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2009) 95–123. Thompson, Dorothy J., ‘Egypt, 146–31 B. C.’, in The Cambridge Ancient History, 14 vol. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1971–2005), ix, J. A. Crook/ Andrew Lintott/Elizabeth Rawson (ed.), The Last Age of the Roman Republic, 146–43 B. C., (21994) 310–26.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

260

Bibliography

Tobin, Thomas H.,The Creation of Man: Philo and the History of Interpretation, Catholic Biblical Quarterly, Monograph Series, 14 vol. (Washington, DC: Catholic Biblical Association of America, 1983). Vanderlip, Frederika, The Four Greek Hymns of Isidorus and the Cult of Isis, American Studies in Papyrology XII (Toronto, A. M. Hakkert Ltd., 1972). Vernant, Jean-Pierre, The Origins of Greek Thought (London: Methuen, 1982). Walbank, F. W, ‘Monarchies and Monarchic Ideas’, in The Cambridge Ancient History, 14 vol. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1971–2005), vii, F. W. Walbank and others (ed.) The Hellenistic World, Part I, (21984) 62–100. Warren, James, Epicurus and His Critics (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004). – Presocratics (Stocksfield: Acumen, 2007). Watson, Francis, Paul and the Hermeneutics of Faith (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 2004). Weisengoff, John J.,‘Death and Immortality in the Book of Wisdom’, CBQ, vol. 3 (1941) 104–33. Weiss, J., Die Predigt Jesu vom Reiche Gottes (1892). Williams, David S., ‘3 Maccabees: a Defense of Diaspora Judaism?’, JSP, vol. 7, no. 13 (1995) 17–29. Wilson, Robert R., ‘Prophecy and Ecstasy: A Reexamination’, Journal of Biblical Literature, vol. 98, no. 3 (1979) 321–37. – Prophecy and Society in Ancient Israel (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1980). – ‘Early Israelite Prophecy’, in James Luther Mays/Paul J. Achtemeier (ed.), Interpreting the Prophets (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1987) 1–13. van Winden, J. C. M., ‘The World of Ideas in Philo of Alexandria: An Interpretation of De opificio mundi 24–25’, Vigiliae Christianae, vol. 37, no. 3 (1983) 209–17. Winston, David, ‘The Book of Wisdom’s Theory of Cosmogony’, History of Religions, vol. 11, no. 2 (1971) 185–202. – “Philo’s Theory of Eternal Creation: ‘De Prov.’ 1.6–9”, Proceedings of the American Academy for Jewish Research, vol. 46, part 2 (1979–80) 593–606. – Book Review, CBQ, vol. 48 (1986) 525–27. – ‘A Century of Research on the Book of Wisdom’, in The Book of Wisdom in Modern Research, Angelo Passaro/Giuseppe Bellia (ed.), Deuterocanonical and Cognate Literature Yearbook (Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 2005) 1–18. Wright, A. G., ‘The Structure of Wisdom 11–19’, CBQ, vol. 27 (1965) 28–34. – ‘The Literary Genre Midrash (Part Two)’, CBQ, vol. 28 (1966) 417–57. Also published in The Literary Genre Midrash (Staten Island: Alba House, 1967). – ‘Numerical Patterns in the Book of Wisdom’, CBQ, vol. 29 (1967) 524–38. – ‘The Structure of the Book of Wisdom’, Biblica 48 (1967) 165–84. Wright, Benjamin G., ‘Sirach: to the Reader’, in Albert Pietersma/Benjamin G. Wright (ed.), A New English Translation of the Septuagint (Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2007) 715–19. Wright, N. T., The Resurrection of the Son of God, Christian Origins and the Question of God, vol. 3 (London: SPCK, 2003). Ziener, Georg, Die theologische Begriffsprache im Buche der Weisheit, Bonner Biblische Beiträge 11 (Bonn: Peter Hanstein, 1956). Zsengellér, József, ‘“The Taste of Paradise”: Interpretation of Exodus and Manna in the Book of Wisdom’, in Géza G. Xeravits/József Zsengellér (ed.), Studies in the Book of Wisdom, SJSJ, vol. 142 (Leiden: Brill, 2010) 197–216. Zuntz, G., “Aristeas Studies I: ‘The Seven Banquets’”, JSS 4 (1959) 21–36.

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

Indexes Author Aitken, James A. 113, 119, 169, 199, 233 Algra, Keimpe 227 Amir, Yehoshua 149, 150, 151 Annas, Julia E. 64, 65, 83, 85, 137, 142, 228 Armstrong, A. H. 69, 84, 119, 134, 135, 208, 219, 226, 227, 228, 230, 231 Aune, David E. 31, 32, 33, 34, 40 Austin, M. M. 203, 206, 207 Baltzly, Dirk 232 Barclay, John M. G. 203, 213, 214, 215, 216, 217 Barker, Andrew D. 66 Barnes, Jonathan 226, 227 Barnes, T. D. 218 Baslez, Marie-Françoise 25, 26, 27 Baumgärtel, F. 107 Beentjes, C. 118 Blischke, Mareike Verena 155, 157 Bolle, Kees W. 226 Bowman, Alan K. 203, 217, 218 Bremner, Jan 132, 133, 136, 156 Bryan, Betsy M. 207 Bultmann, Rudolf 22 Burkert, Walter 132, 136, 137 Caird, G. B. 22 Cancik, H. 20 Casey, P. M. 164 Centrone, Bruno 212, 213 Cheon, Samuel 153 Clines, David J. A. 98 Collins, J. J. 21–22, 23, 48, 57, 84, 117, 138, 140, 144, 147, 149, 163, 164, 165, 166, 167, 168, 169, 170, 171, 172, 173, 181, 186 Cook, Johann 115, 170 Crenshaw, James L. 116 Davila, James R. 26, 27–28 Delia, Diana 214 Dietrich, B. C. 226

Di Lella, Alexander A. 99, 106, 119 Dillon, John M. 29, 30, 78, 243 Dodd, C. H. 21 Dorandi, Tiziano 30 Drummond, James 77, 125 Dunn, James 185 Edsman, Carl-Martin 226 El-Abbadi, Mostafa 28 Ellis, Walter M. 204, 205 Engel, Helmut 25, 33, 34, 37, 45, 46, 47, 48, 52, 54, 67, 69, 175, 190, 235, 236 Erskine, Andrew 215 Evans, C. A. 180 Fabry, Heinz-Josef 99, 105, 183 Farrar, F. W. 186, 191 Festugière, A. J. 33 Fichtner, Johannes 19, 42, 61, 150, 152, 155, 186, 189, 192, 201 Finan, Thomas 41 Fraser, P. M. 28, 29, 30, 108, 203, 205, 209, 212, 214, 215, 217 Freyne, Sean 180 Frick, Peter 79 Furley, David 85 Gentry, Peter J. 116 Gigante, Marcello 141 Gilbert, Maurice 27, 32 Glotz, G. 202, 203, 208 Glucker, John 29 Goff, Matthew 169, 171 Goff, Michael J. 168, 169, 171, 172 Goodenough, Edwin R. 213, 220 Goodman, Martin 217, 218 Goodrick, A. T. S. 43, 66, 186 Grabbe, Lester 32, 37, 138 Gray, V. J. 207, 219 Gregg, J. A. F. 186, 192 Greene, William Chase 226, 227 Grimm, Carl Ludwig Wilibald 76, 116, 145, 186, 191, 192

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

262

Bibliography

Gutzwiller, Kathryn 28 Hahm, David E. 203, 208, 209, 210 Hankinson, R. J. 31, 228, 229, 230, 231 Happ, Heinz 77 Heinisch, Paul 49 Hengel, Martin 28, 36–37, 138, 173 Hengel, Martin/David P. Bailey 180, 182 van Henten, Jan Willem 181 Honigman, Sylvie 26, 34, 36, 209, 210, 211, 213, 214, 215, 216 Horbury, William 23, 26 Horbury, William/David Noy 155, 157 van der Horst, Pieter W. 138, 156, 218 Inwood, Brad/Pierluigi Donini 196, 230, 231 Isaacs, Marie E. 94, 110, 123 Jaeger, Werner 133, 136 Jarick, John 116 Jeremias, Joachim 22 Kennedy, G. A. 32 Kerkeslager, Allen 217 Kleinknecht, H. 107, 109 Kloppenborg, John S. 33 Koch, Klaus 101, 166 Koenen, Ludwig 21, 206, 207 Kolarcik, Michael 23, 39, 47, 52, 55, 57, 62, 83, 131, 145, 148, 149, 151, 159, 165, 171, 175, 176, 177, 178, 179, 180, 183, 186, 188, 190, 191, 193, 196, 197, 235 Lamberty-Zielinski, H. 112 Laporte, J. 26 Larcher, C. 17, 19, 46, 48, 50, 54, 56, 68, 69, 76, 78, 89, 90, 116, 131, 136, 138, 139, 140, 141, 143, 144, 148, 158, 165, 173, 180, 182, 184, 186, 189, 191, 192, 193, 194, 197, 235, 237, 238, 239 Leonhardt, Jutta 35, 36 Leonhardt-Balzer, Jutta 35, 167 Levison, John R. 52, 88, 122, 123 Lévy, Carlos 222 Lloyd, Alan B. 204, 205 Lloyd, Geoffrey 107–10 Long, A. A. 31, 33, 63, 80, 84, 124, 136, 137, 141, 219, 227, 228, 229 Long, A. A./David Sedley 31, 64, 69, 108, 141, 227, 232, 232

Longrigg, James 28, 86 Mack, Burton Lee 33, 51, 61, 150, 153, 154, 155, 196, 223 Malek, Jaromir 207 Malherbe, Abraham J. 31 Mandelkern, Solomon 103, 114, 116, 117 Mansfeld, Jaap 30, 31 Mansfield, Jane 231 Mattila, Sharon Lea 118 May, Gerhard 76 Mazzinghi, Luca 26 McGlynn, Moyna 18, 28, 43, 185, 186 Mitchell, David, C. 181 Modrzejewski, Joseph Mélèze 35, 213, 214, 215, 216, 217, 218 Montague, George T. 96, 100, 101, 102 Morgan, Teresa 37 Murphy, Roland E. 74, 116, 140, 172 Murray, Oswyn 208, 209, 211, 212, 213 Nickelsburg, George W. E. 148, 151, 155, 158, 160, 161, 163, 165, 166, 172, 173, 181, 182, 183, 184, 186, 187, 188, 190, 193 Nicklas, Tobias 141 Oeming, Manfred 99 Passaro, Angelo 67 Peacock, David 217 Péter, Réne 99 Pistone, Rosario 66–67 Porter, Frank Chamberlin 143, 144, 145, 146 von Rad, G. 166 Radice, Roberto 26, 74, 79, 124, 125 Rajak, Tessa 220 Reese, J. M. 17, 32, 35, 39–42, 43–44, 44, 46, 48–49, 53, 54, 56, 91, 139, 140, 141, 154, 155, 162, 163, 221 Reider, Joseph 76, 140, 190 Reiterer, Friedrich V. 176 Rofé, A. 179 van Rooden, Peter T. 65 Royse, James R. 220 Rosenberg, Stephen G. 213 Rowlandson, Jane 205 Runia, David T. 78, 79, 228 Sambursky, S. 65, 226 Schaberg, Jane 158, 162, 163, 165, 188 Schams, Christine 37

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

Subject Scarpat, G. 18 Sharples 31, 137, 218, 229, 230, 235 Schaper, Joachim 87–89, 180, 181 Schenkeveld, Dirk M. 32, 40, 41 Schofield, Malcolm 31, 208, 212, 219, 222 Schorch, Stefan 54 Schwartz, Daniel R. 37, 217, 218 Schweitzer, A. 18 Scott, Alan 137 Sealey, Raphael 202 Sedley, David 31, 64, 65, 84, 85 Sekki, Arthur Everett 95, 96, 99, 105 Sellars, John 30, 31, 84, 124, 137, 196, 218, 219, 229, 230, 232, 237 Shields, Christopher John 19 Skehan, Patrick 39, 116, 118, 119, 158, 160 Smith, R. R. R. 204, 205 Smith, William Robertson 156 Stowers, Stanley Kent 40 Suggs, M. Jack 158, 159 Sweet, J. P. M. 63 Taylor, Richard J. 131, 140, 145, 148, 149 Tcherikover, V. 26, 203, 209, 214, 215, 216, 217

263

Tengström, S. 94, 95, 97, 98, 99, 101 Termini, Christina 122 Tobin, Thomas H. 118 Vernant, Jean-Pierre 226 Walbank, F. W. 204, 205, 206, 207, 208, 209, 212, 213, 221 Warren, James 136, 227 Watson, Francis 26 Weisengoff, John J. 149 Weiss, J. 22 Westermann, Claus 98 Wilson, Robert 100, 101 van Winden, J. C. M. 26 Winston, David 17, 21, 23, 24, 25, 33, 34, 36, 39, 40, 44, 45, 50, 57, 64, 66. 68, 70, 76, 83, 90, 126, 131, 133, 140, 141, 142, 144, 145, 150, 152, 153, 154, 157, 170, 175, 183, 184, 185, 186, 187, 188, 189, 190, 192, 193, 198, 199, 222, 225, 234, 236, 244 Wright, A. G. 39, 40, 44, 45, 47, 53, 62 Wright, Benjamin G. 118 Wright, N. T. 137, 187 Zsengellér, József‚ 142 Ziegler, Joseph 46, 189 Ziener 42, 182, 184, 195 Zuntz, G. 209

Subject Adam 49–50, 152 Alexandria 28–30, 203–07, 211, 214–18, 223 Medicine 86 Angels 54, 104–05, 122, 137–38, 156, 164, 167–68, 170, 172, 187, 193, 243 Anonymity 37, 48, 54, 180, 188, 201 Apocalypticism 166–74 Citizenship 26, 203 City 133–34, 202–03 Creation 73–75, 76–77, 77–79, 79–80, 106, 149–51, 152, 157, 168 Dead Sea Scrolls 168–70, 181 Egyptians 56, 62, 74, 184, 189, 203, 237–38 Epicureanism 91, 136–37, 138, 141–42, 227

Eschatology 20–24 Ethics 144–45, 227–28, 230, 240 Euergetism 214–15, 233 Euhemerism 24, 133, 222 Hymns 48 Immortality 43, 83, 119, 131–38, 139– 47, 148–58, 169, 171–72, 173, 193, 196, 197, 198 Isis 45, 48, 136 Jacob 54 Joseph 55, 103 Judgement 22, 46, 127, 150, 151, 167, 168, 170, 172, 173, 175, 178, 179, 184, 186–200, 238, 240, 243 Kingship 49, 53–57, 139, 162, 164, 172, 174, 179, 182–86, 187–88, 191, 193, 196–200, 201–23, 234–35

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

264

Bibliography

Laographia 26, 27, 214, 217 Law 36, 63, 71, 145, 185, 193, 240 Messianism 179, 180–86, 192, 195, 198– 99, 201 Midrash 42 Music 64–67 Nature 68, 70 Philo 26, 50, 67, 74, 77, 78, 79–80, 87, 120–25, 144, 149, 153, 156, 168, 201– 02, 217, 219–20, 222, 228 Platonism 19, 23, 26, 29, 69, 78, 80, 87, 108, 109, 110, 120–25, 134–136, 143– 47, 186, 199, 207, 227 Middle-Platonism 23, 26, 78, 125, 243 Pneuma 19–20, 61, 63–64, 68, 69, 80, 83, 84–86, 88–91, 92, 107–127, 144, 168, 170, 243, 199, 225, 228, 229, 232, 233–34, 239 Prophecy 99–102, 119–20, 124 Resurrection 22, 137, 152, 173–74, 186–87, 192, 193 Ruler Cult 55 Rûaḥ 94–106, 107, 111 Sabbath 35–37 Sheol 22, 140, 163, 164 Solomon 103–04, 152–53, 186, 196–97, 201 Son of Man 163–66, 174, 181 Sophia 18, 19, 33, 46, 49–50, 54–57, 68, 74–75, 91, 131, 143, 145, 147, 152,

170, 172, 173, 179, 184, 185, 194–96, 199, 201, 220, 222, 225, 233–34, 236, 239, 240, 243 Soul 20, 53, 64, 83, 84–87, 88–91, 92, 108, 111, 114, 119, 120–23, 131–47, 157, 168, 199 Stoic soul 137, 138, 142 World-soul 145 Stoicism Conflagration 21, 64, 80, 137, 228 Cosmos 62–63, 73 Elements 64 Logos 65 Sage 201, 218–20 Sources 29–31 Tension 64–65, 68 Wisdom, The Book of Addressees 35–37 Author 17 Date of Composition 24–28 Exodus-Numbers narrative 19, 43– 44 Flashbacks 42, 48 Genre 31–35, 40–42 Literary Structure 44–47, 159–61, 175–80 Literary unity 39–44 Place of origin 17, 24 Salvation 48–57, 84, 142, 185–86, 188–94, 195, 198–200, 220, 225, 235 Stoicism 62–67, 171, 196–97

Biblical Texts Genesis 1–3 1 1: 1–5 1: 1 1: 2 1: 27 2: 7

3: 8

20, 36, 76, 78, 80, 149, 174 169 63, 106, 120 78 75, 235 63, 75, 77, 78, 95, 96, 103, 121, 125 123, 140, 171 87, 91, 96, 97, 98, 99, 112, 114, 116, 120, 121, 123, 171 95

6 6: 2 6: 3 6: 17 7: 15 7: 22 8: 1 8: 22 9: 4–5 13: 15 13: 16 15: 3

172 122 96, 97, 99, 112, 122, 123 96, 112 112 96, 112 95 233, 238 97 56 56 56

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

265

Biblical Texts 15: 5 15: 13 15: 18 16: 10 17: 7 28: 12 37–45 41: 38–39 Exodus

1: 5 7: 1 7: 3 7: 19–24 9: 18–33 9: 24 10: 13 10: 19 10: 23 12 14 14: 8 15: 7 15: 22–27 16: 14 16: 21 17: 1–7 28: 3 31 31: 1–11 31: 2–3 31: 3 35: 30–36: 2 35: 31 Leviticus 2: 1 17: 11 17: 14 18: 24–28 26: 17 26: 25 Numbers 5: 14 5: 30 6: 5 11 11: 7 LXX 11: 16–30

56 56 56 56 56 54 163 103, 118 19, 20, 24, 46, 61, 77, 112, 113, 126, 209 97 121 56 62 64 64 95 95 237 154 61 233 113 62 64 64 62 103, 118, 118 124 99 93 103, 124 99 103 97 121 121 233 233 233 98 98 100 100 64 100

11: 8 11: 17 11: 20 11: 24–27 11: 33 12: 6–8 16: 1–50 21: 4–9 21: 6–9 21: 6 LXX 27: 18 27: 20 Deuteronomy 4: 34 26: 5–9 32: 8–9, 43 34: 9 34: 10 Joshua 5: 13–14 Judges 3: 10 8: 3 9: 23 14: 6 14: 19 15: 14 16: 17 1 Samuel 9: 8–9 10: 6 10: 10 11: 6 16: 14–16 16: 13–14 16: 13 16: 23 18: 10 19: 9 19: 20–23 22: 2 2 Samuel 22: 16 23: 2 1 Kings 3 3: 9 3: 12 10: 5

64 124 154 124 154 100 154 153 62 153 100 100 56 48 105 100, 103, 118 99, 100 22 100 97 98 100 100 100 100 101 100 100, 101 100 105 98 100 105 100, 105 105 101 233 110, 112 99 104 103 103 104

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

266 10: 24 17: 17 18: 12 18: 22 22: 19–24 2 Kings 2: 1 2: 3 2: 9–10 2: 11 2: 15 19: 7 1 Chronicles 21: 15 2 Chronicles 1: 13 9: 4 9: 23 18: 18–23 Nehemiah 9: 7 9: 20 9: 30 9: 31 Job 19: 17 25: 2–3 27: 3 28: 25 32: 8 32: 18 33: 4 34: 19 37: 10 Psalm 1: 4 2 2: 4 2: 6–12 2: 7 2: 8 2: 9 2: 10 18: 8–16 23: 8 25: 17 31: 7 33: 6 34: 19

Bibliography 104 112 101 101 105 101 101 119 101 119 98, 104 154 197 104 104 105 48 101 101 48 96 235 96, 112 63 96, 98, 112 97 96, 112 234 112 95 25, 162, 181, 185 162 195 162, 237 184, 195 162 162 106 154 233 233 96 97

51: 19 62: 10 77: 7 77: 43 78 82: 1 89 89: 39–52 104 104: 29 104: 30 110 145: 9 147: 18 148: 8 Proverbs 1–2 LXX 1: 1 1: 2 1: 7 1: 23 3: 16 3: 19 3: 20–33 8–9: 6 8 8: 21 8: 22–31 8: 22 ff 8: 22 8: 30 LXX 9: 11 9: 13–18 9: 18 10: 1 15: 4 15: 13 16: 2 18: 14 20: 27 24: 12 25: 1 Ecclesiastes 1: 1 1: 14 2: 16–17 3: 19–21 3: 19 5: 15

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

97 95 97 56 48 105 182 195 233 96, 98 90 195 235 96 64, 96 103 115 104 116 116 103, 114 197 169 116 116 106, 114, 158 115 169, 225 147 74 68, 115 147 116 147 104 114 115 97 115 112, 114 114 104 104 95 147 116 96 116

267

Biblical Texts 7: 8 9: 5 9: 7 11: 4 Isaiah 6 8: 18 11 11: 1–2 11: 2 13–14 13: 8 14: 3–21 19: 14 24–27 26: 9 29: 24 30: 1 31: 3 33: 11 40–55 40: 12 40: 13 41: 29 42: 1 42: 4 42: 13 44 45: 13 52–66 52–54 52: 13–53: 12 52: 13 ff 52: 13 52: 14 52: 15 53 53: 4–6 53: 4–5 53: 4 53: 5 53: 6 53: 10 54: 1–8 55: 9–13 55: 19 56: 2–5 56: 6 57: 1–2

116 116 116 116 61, 101, 177 105 56 21, 181 102 103, 113, 118, 119 160 160 190 98 163 97, 104, 111 97 98 98 96 181 63 98 95 102, 160 160 154 26 233 163 163 158, 160, 182, 195 150 160, 162, 164, 182 160 162 113, 160, 182 162 182 160 162 160 162 158 154 159 159 160 159

57: 16 59: 16–19 59: 16–17 59: 17–19 59: 21 60: 1–3 60: 17–22 61: 1–3 61–62: 9 62: 3 62: 10–11 63: 17 65: 9 65: 13 65: 14 65: 15 66: 14 Jeremiah 4: 11–13 5: 13 31: 31–34 33: 15–18 49: 36 51: 17 51: 18 Ezekiel 2: 2 3: 12 3: 14 8: 3 10: 15 10: 20 11: 1 11: 5 11: 19–20 11: 24 13: 13 36: 27 37: 1 37: 5 37: 7 37: 9 37: 14 39: 29 40–48 43: 5 Daniel 2 2: 3

96 179 150 159 102 161 161 102 113 162 162 160 160 160 160 160 160 101 101 102 181 95 95 95 195 101 102 102 102 105 105 102 102 102 102 110 184 102 97 97 97 97, 102 102 163 102 21 117

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

268 3 5: 12 6: 3 6: 18 7 7: 13 7: 22 7: 25 8: 15–27 10: 17 12: 1–3 12: 1 12: 2 12: 3 12: 3 OG 12: 10 Hosea 4: 4–5 Joel 2: 27–29 Amos Jonah 1: 4 Micah 2: 7 3: 5–8 Zechariah 4: 14 6: 5 7: 12 9–14 Sirach 11: 26–28 20: 23 24 29: 6 38: 24–39: 11 38: 34 39: 1 39: 6 39: 28 43: 17 48: 12 48: 24 2 Maccabees 1: 10 7 15: 2 3 Maccabees

Bibliography 161 117 117 232 21, 48, 164, 181 164 188 164 167 112 173 164 164 21, 138 164 164 101 195 102 101 95 98 101 181 106 101 163 147 185 158 119 119 119 119 119 118 118 119 119 215 173 233 216

2: 3–9 2: 28 3: 12–29 4: 21 5: 30 5: 42 6: 1–15 6: 3 6: 8 4 Maccabees 1: 16–17 Matthew 11: 27 Luke 16: 22 John 5: 24 Acts 27: 41 Romans 1 3: 1 11: 26–27 2 Timothy 3: 1 2 Peter 3: 3 Jude 1: 18

48 217 217 232 232 53 48 237 237 54 180 156 22 22 25 27 26 41 179 20 20 20

Other Jewish Texts Qumran Literature 1Q 26 27 1QS 3: 13–14 11: 3–4 4Q 300 415–18 417 418 423 Letter of Aristeas 12–27 16

168 168 169 168 168 168 169 169 168 34, 36, 209, 213, 215, 221 211 210

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

Biblical Texts 17 30 30–32 38–39 51–82 127 134–37 134–38 139 143–71 211 206–08 208 210 222 224 236 240 253 253–54 262–63 267 282 288–90 310

65 210 209 209 210 211 222 211, 222 210 210 211 221 211 211 211 211 211 211 211 211 211, 222 210 211, 222 211 210

Other Ancient Texts Rhetorica ad Alexandrum 1420a19–27 208 Aeschylus Persians 507 108 Prometheus Bound 515 226 883–84 109 1086 107 Aetius 1.7.33 68, 69, 232 4.21.1–4 124 Alexander (of Aphrodisias) De mixtione 30, 65, 228 216.14–218.6 69 224.14–17 69 Aristotle De caelo 10 79 De generatione animalium 762a18 109

Physica 191a, 10 63 Politica 5.1310bff 202 5.1310b–1311a 202 Rhetorica 1.3.3 31, 32 3.14.6 33 3.14.7, 11 33 Cicero Academica 1.35 29 1.39 84 1.43 29 De fato 28–30 230 39–43 229 De finibus 3.75 218 6 29 De natura deorum I.16 29 I.39 69, 232 I.43–56 141 I.49 141 II.23–25 232 II.28–30 232 II.29–30 124 II.98–153 85 Clement Stromateis 8.9.26.3–4 228 8.9.33.1–9 229 Diogenes Laertius 7.87–89 230 7.121–22 219 7.127 232 7.130 237 7.134 84, 124 7.135–36 65, 69 7.138–39 124 7.138 69 7.139 124 7.142 228 7.148 68 7.156–57 84 7.157 64, 137, 142 7.174–75 30 7.189–202 30

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

269

270

Bibliography

8.4 30 Euripedes Bacchae 128 108 Epicurus Epistula ad Herodotum 63 137 Epistula ad Menoeceus 123 141 Eusebius Praeparatio evangelica 4.3.1 228 6.8.25–29 230 9.2 216 9.18 216 9.23 216 9.27 216 15.20.6 137 Galen De causis continentibus 1.1–2.4 65 Introductio sive medicus 14.726,7–11 108 De placitis Hippocratis et Platonis III.1.10–15 86 Homer The Iliad 2.243 220 4.443 198 5.696 132 8.69–74 226 22.305–04 133 22.362 132 24.209–10 226 Odyssey 3.199–204 133 10.495 132 10.496–574 132 11.83 132 11.206–08 132 Hippolytus Refutatio omnium haeresium 1.21 230 Josephus Antiquitaties Iudaicae 12.8 214 12.12–118 209 14.117 203, 210

Contra Apionem 1.184–89 213 2.35–36 214 Lucretius De rerum natura 2.216–24 141 3.830–911 137 Philo De aeternitate mundi 14–16 79 35 149 De agricultura 97–98 153 De cherubim 110 67 127 74, 79 De vita contemplativa 25 36 De decalogo 96–105 36 Quod deterius potiori insidiari soleat 80 121 83–84 121 Quod Deus sit immutabilis 35 124 45 124 De gigantibus 6–16 138, 156, 168 6–9 144 23 124 27 125 29–31 122 65 65 Quis rerum divinarum heres sit 55–57 121 55 122 56 122 231 140 258–65 123 Hypothetica 7.11–14 36 Legum allegoriae I 18 120 31–32 120 33 121 36 121 40 121 91 121 105–08 149

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

271

Biblical Texts Legum allegoriae II 22–23 124 77–78 153 Legum allegoriae III 161 121 De vita Mosis 1.89 220 1.96 26 1.118 26 1.140–43 26 1.156 26 2.4 220 2.215–16 35, 36 De mutatione nominum 87 64 De opificio mundi 8 79, 185 10 120 13 120 16 120 19 78 20 120 22 77 24–25 26, 74 29–35 120 29 79 69–71 140 89–128 36 135 121 171 79 De plantatione 11–14 144 18–20 123 18 123 26 124 Quod omnis probus liber sit 20 220 31 220 Quaestiones in Exodum 1.23 167 De somniis 1.133–43 144 2.127 36 De specialibus legibus 1.56–70 36 1.328–29 78 2.61–63 35 2.230 37 4.123 121, 122

Plato Cratylus 400b Gorgias 493a 523a–526c Letters 335a Phaedo 62b 64 66b 67bc 67b 70d–71 77a 78d–79 80a 80c–81a 86c 110b–14c 112b 115c 493a Phaedrus 245c–246a 246c 262d Philebus 55e Republic 361e–362a 473d 499b–c Statesman 293c 296 ff 300e–301 Symposium 209a Timaeus 28c 29–30 29 30b 33 34b 41d 42b 47

134 134 134 134 86 134 134 146 134 156 135 144 135 135 135 64 135 107 135 134 134, 135 225 109 63 186 202 208 202 202 202 133 29, 145, 228 79 227 79 232 79 232 135, 138 138 227

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388

272

Bibliography

49–50 63 51 78 52 78 71–72b 109 75 231 Plutarch De communibus notitiis contra Stoicos 30 1063a–b 219 De defectu oraculorum 432d–e 123 437c–d 109 De Stoicorum repugnantiis 30 1044d 231 1050b 63 1050 f 231 1051a–b 231 1052c–d 228 1053b 228 1053 f–1054b 65, 84 De animae procreatione in Timaeo 1013b 29 Porphyry De abstinentia 231 Seneca Epistulae morales 41.2 123

41.5 123 117.2 228 De benificiis 4.34.4 231 Sextus Empiricus Adversus mathematicos 9.71–74 137 9.211 228 Sophocles Oedipus at Colonus 612 109 Stobaeus 30 1.25.3–27.4 30, 231, 235 2.42.7 29 2.75.11– 76.8 230 2.115.5–9 231 4.6.22 212 7.61–62 212 7.63 212 7.64 212 Xenophon Cyropaedia 207 1.1.3 219 Memorabilia 3.9.10 219

© 2012, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ISBN Print: 9783525535387 — ISBN E-Book: 9783647535388