Pythagorean, Predecessor, and Hebrew: Philo of Alexandria and the Construction of Jewishness in Early Christian Writings Jennifer Otto Faculty of Religious Studies McGill University, Montreal March, 2014 A thesis submitted to McGill University in partial fulfillment of the requirements of the degree of Doctor of Philosophy © Jennifer Otto, 2014 ii Table of Contents Abstracts v Acknowledgements vii Abbreviations viii Introduction 1 Method, Aims and Scope of the Thesis 10 Christians and Jews among the nations 12 Philo and the Wisdom of the Greeks 16 Christianity as Philosophy 19 Moving Forward 24 Part I Chapter 1: Philo in Modern Scholarship 25 Introducing Philo 25 Philo the Jew in modern research 27 Conclusions 48 Chapter 2: Sects and Texts: The Setting of the Christian Encounter with Philo 54 The Earliest Alexandrian Christians 55 The Trajanic Revolt 60 The “Catechetical School” of Alexandria— A Continuous 63 Jewish-Christian Institution? An Alternative Hypothesis: Reading Philo in the Philosophical Schools 65 Conclusions 70 Part II Chapter 3: The Pythagorean: Clement’s Philo 72 1. Introducing Clement 73 1.1 Clement’s Life 73 1.2 Clement’s Corpus 75 1.3 Clement’s Teaching 78 2. Israel, Hebrews, and Jews in Clement’s Writings 80 2.1 Israel 81 2.2 Hebrews 82 2.3 Jews 83 3. Clement’s Reception of Philo: Literature Review 88 4. Clement’s Testimonia to Philo 97 4.1 Situating the Philonic Borrowings in the context of Stromateis 1 97 4.2 Stromateis 1.5.31 102 4.3 Stromateis 1.15.72 106 4.4 Stromateis 1.23.153 109 iii 4.5 Situating the Philonic Borrowings in the context of Stromateis 2 111 4.6 Stromateis 2.19.100 113 5. Pythagoras and Pythagoreans in the Stromateis 117 5.1 Clement’s Pythagoras 117 5.2 Philo the Pythagorean? 120 5.3 Philo: Pythagorean and Jew 124 6. Conclusions 126 Chapter 4: One of Our Predecessors: Origen’s Philo 129 1. Introducing Origen 130 1.1 Origen and the Alexandrian “Catechetical School” 130 1.2 Origen and the Church 132 1.3 Origen’s Teaching 133 2. Origen’s Relationships with Jews 136 2.1 Literature Review 136 2.2 Origen’s Interactions with Jews in Alexandria and Caesarea 143 2.3 Conclusions 146 3. Jews, Hebrews, and Israel in Contra Celsum and the Commentary on Matthew 147 3.1 Contra Celsum 147 3.1.1 Jews 149 3.1.2 Israel 157 3.1.3 Hebrew(s) 159 3.1.4 Ebionites 160 3.2 Commentary on Matthew 163 3.2.1 Jews 164 3.2.2 Israel 165 3.2.3 Hebrew(s) 166 3.2.4 Ebionites 168 3.3 Conclusions 170 4. Origen’s Reception of Philo: Literature Review 173 5. Origen’s Testimonia to Philo 177 5.1 Contra Celsum 4.51 177 5.2 Contra Celsum 6.21 181 5.3 Commentary on Matthew 15.3 185 5.4 “One of our Predecessors” 189 6. Conclusions 197 Chapter 5: Of the Hebrew Race: Eusebius’s Philo 199 1. Introducing Eusebius 201 1.1 Eusebius and the School of Pamphilus 201 1.2 School and Church in Caesarea 204 1.3 Pamphilus’s School among the philosophical schools 205 1.4 Relationships among Jews and Christians in Eusebius’s Caesarea 207 2. Hebrews, Jews, and Christians in Demonstratio Evangelica 1 209 2.1 Hebrews 209 2.2 Jews 210 iv 2.3 Christians 215 3. Eusebius’s Reception of Philo: Literature Review 218 3.1 Eusebius’s Philo in modern research 218 3.2 Philo the “virtual/quasi/honorary/semi-Christian” 218 3.3 Philo the persistent Jew 220 4. Eusebius’s Testimonia to Philo 222 4.1 Philo the Hebrew Theologian 222 4.2 Philo the expert in Jewish law and philosophy 233 4.3 Philo the learned man 243 4.3 Philo the witness to the sufferings of the Jews 250 4.4 Philo the witness to the rise of the Christians 257 5. Conclusions 262 Conclusion 266 Bibliography 273 v Abstract This study investigates the presentation of Philo of Alexandria and his relationship to Jewishness in the works of Clement, Origen and Eusebius, the first three Christians explicitly to name him in their extant writings. None of Philo’s earliest Christian readers openly calls him a Jew. Through a detailed reading of their descriptions of Philo and his relationship to the Hebrew Scriptures, contemporary Judaism, and the Pythagorean-Platonic philosophical tradition, I illuminate the diverse identities that Clement, Origen and Eusebius assign to Philo. I argue that although Philo’s insights into the Jewish scriptures and way of life is emphasized and treasured by his Christian readers, his own Jewish identity remains ambiguous. This ambiguity is due in part to the secondary importance of the literal interpretation of the Jewish scriptures in Philo’s writings. Philo’s Christian readers increasingly define Jews as those who misinterpret the Hebrew Bible by reading its prophecies and commandments “according to the letter.” As an allegorical interpreter who recognizes, to some extent, the esoteric teachings communicated by the Logos through the Hebrew Scriptures, Philo does not match the image of the Jew constructed by his Christian readers. Neither, however, does he fulfill the criteria for being considered a Christian. Philo is thus presented as neither a Christian nor a Jew but as someone outside these two increasingly differentiated identities. Cette thèse traite la représentation de Philon d’Alexandrie par rapport à la judéité dans les œuvres de Clément, Origène et Eusèbe, les trois premiers chrétiens à le mentionner explicitement dans leurs écrits existants. Aucun des premiers lecteurs de Philon chrétiens l’appellent ouvertement un juif. Grâce à une lecture détaillée de leurs descriptions de Philon et sa relation à la Bible hébraïque, le judaïsme contemporain et la tradition philosophique de Pythagore- vi platonicienne, je démontre les identités diverses qu’attribuent Clément, Origène et Eusèbe à Philo. Je soutiens que, malgré la compréhension supérieure des écritures hébraïques et le mode de vie de Philo étaient soulignés et chéris par ses lecteurs chrétiens, son identité y reste ambiguë. Cette ambigüité résulte partiellement de l’importance secondaire de l’interprétation littérale des écritures juives dans les écrits de Philon. Les lecteurs chrétiens de Philon définissent de plus en plus les juifs comme ceux qui interprètent faussement la bible hébraïque en comprenant ses prophéties et ses commandements « selon la lettre ». Étant un interpréteur allégorique qui reconnaît, dans une certaine mesure, les enseignements ésotériques communiqués par les Logos à travers les écritures hébraïques, Philon ne correspond pas à l’image du juif construit par ses premiers lecteurs chrétiens. Pourtant, il ne remplie pas les critères pour être considéré comme un chrétien non plus. Ainsi, il n’est représenté ni comme chrétien, ni comme juif, mais comme quelqu’un en dehors de ces deux identités de plus en plus différenciées. vii Acknowledgements I am greatly indebted to the many teachers who have shaped me as an interpreter of early Christian writings: Christopher Snook, Laura Penny, Christopher Grundke, Wayne Hankey, Paul Friesen, Carly Daniel-Hughes, Patricia Kirkpatrick, Ian H. Henderson, Gerbern Oegema, Fabian Udoh, and my co-supervisors, W.J. Torrance Kirby and Ellen Bradshaw Aitken. I am especially grateful for Ellen’s wise guidance and patient encouragement in helping me to see this project to completion and am deeply saddened by her unexpected death after a brief illness mere weeks after this thesis was defended. I am so thankful that Ellen was able to read this thesis in its final form and will be forever curious about her final comments, comments she was saving for after the defence, which I will never receive. I am grateful for the feedback and encouragement I received at the annual meetings of the North American Patristics Society and the Philo group at the Society of Biblical Literature, where I had the opportunity to test out some of the arguments that appear in this thesis. I would also like to thank the members of the German-English colloquium in the Evangelische Fakultät at the University of Tübingen for the opportunity to present my work, and to acknowledge the helpful advice of Hermann Lichtenberger, Michael Tilly, Beth Langstaff, and Ekaterina Matusova. I gratefully acknowledge the financial support of the Vanier Fellowships and the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada during the preparation of this study. Finally, I would like to thank my husband, Gregory Rabus, for being my sounding board as I worked out my arguments and for his help in preparing the French abstract. This thesis has been completed in spite of many interruptions provided by my son, Alexander; I dedicate it to him. viii Abbreviations Works of Philo Abr. De Abrahamo (On Abraham) Aet. De aeternitate mundi (On the Eternity of the World) Agr. De agricultura (On Husbandry) Anim. De animalibus (On Animals) Cher. De cherubim (On the Cherubim) Conf. De confusione linguarum (On the Confusion of Tongues) Congr. De congressu eruditionis gratia (On Mating with the Preliminary Studies) Contempl. De vita contemplativa (On the Contemplative Life) Decal. De decalogo (On the Decalogue) Det. Quod deterius potiori insidiari soleat (That the Worse is Wont to Attack the Better) Deus Quod Deus sit immutabilis (On the Unchangeableness of God) Ebr. De ebrietate (On Drunkenness) Flacc. In Flaccum (Flaccus) Fug. De fuga et inventione (On Flight and Finding) Gig. De gigantibus (On the Giants) Her. Quis rerum divinarum heres sit (Who Is the Heir of Divine Things?) Hypoth. Hypothetica Jos. De Josepho (On Joseph) Leg. Legum allegoriae (The Allegories of the Laws) Legat. Legatio ad Gaium (Embassy to Gaius) Migr. De migratione Abrahami (On the Migration of Abraham) Mos.