The 25th SBL International Meeting will be held this summer in Vienna, Juli 22-26. Due to some other events, I will not be able to attend, but is nevertheless interested in how Philo will be present(ed) at the meeting.
There will be no session exclusively devoted to the works of Philo, but as often is the case, he will be present(ed) in several papers. Here are the papers that - according to my search of their abstracts - Philo will be present(ed):
Elena Narinskaya, Durham University
A Dialogue of Ideas through the Centuries: Ephrem and Philo in Their Approaches to Various Aspects of LifeThere are self-evident differences between the Church Father of the fourth century, St. Ephrem the Syrian, and the Jewish scholar of the first century, Philo of Alexandria. They belonged to different historical periods, they lived in different countries, and they confessed different religious traditions. However, one can identify similar presentations in the writings of the two authors and their comparable ideological perception. The paper will compare writings of the two authors on the various aspects of life including, De Vita Contemplativa, the life of
virtue, the life of nature.. The paper will emphasise the similarities of the two authosrs’ approaches to life and to highlight their shared ideas, which will be presented and sorted out thematically. The presentation will deal with two basic questions: 1) Are there more then just striking similarities between the presentations of the two authors? 2) Are we to give more credit to the interactions between Christian and Jewish Scholarship?
Hindy Najman, University of Toronto
The Authority and Transformation of Mosaic Law in Philo and the Dead Sea ScrollsI will consider the variety of ways in which Mosaic Law is invoked, appropriated and reconceived in both the writings of Philo of Alexandria and some of the scrolls discovered at Qumran. The authority of the Mosaic Torah is essential to comprehending communal self-definition. Similarities and differences will be considered.
In addition, the paper will address the transformation of Mosaic Torah within the context of its appropriation.
24-10
Nicola Hayward, McGill University
Women’s Commensality and Women’s Empowerment in Greco-Roman Banquet SettingsThis paper focuses on women’s commensality in relation to the sensual setting of the banquet. Themes to be engaged include how meals function in the sensual setting of the banquet, the implication for women and male reactions. There is a connection between sexual activity, the belly and the appetites. This is reflected in Philo’s
and Clement of Alexandria’s anxiety about the body. Given this connection between food and sexual appetites, women’s presence at public meals added an element of danger to the context, since women were identified with licentious carnality. The dominant discourse in antiquity presented women who participated in banquets as
sexually promiscuous. This discourse, facilitated by negative perceptions of the female body and the sexualized nature of banquets, elicited criticisms of women from Greco-Roman writers who saw a respectable woman’s participation in them as being unchaste. This discourse has always considered the topic from the male’s perspective.
Recently the theme of meal settings has generated significant interest from scholars, with particular focus on understanding early Christian meal practice, including the importance of dining for males. Previous studies, which focus on women’s commensality, tend to concentrate on private/public distinction, yet the sensual
setting of the banquet and its implication for women, from a woman’s perspective, remains unexplored. I argue that women’s participation in public meals continued to received harsh criticism from the male elite, partly because women were moving from private to public space, but also because women’s commensality provided an environment that empowered women. My contribution considers what forms such empowerment might have taken from the perspectives of the female courtesan and “respectable women.” I will locate my research between Kathleen Corely who articulates female commensality in relation to public/private roles, and Joan Burton
who argues for the loosening of gender and class restrictions in the Hellenistic period.
Markus Tiwald, University of Vienna
Paul: Apostle of Christ and JewThe interpretation of the “Tora” – and all that was included in this very complex expression – was the central topic in early Judaism and was handled in a wide range of different theological concepts. The diversity of these concepts can be highlighted by the differing theology in the scriptures of Qumran, Jewish pseudepigrapha and
the writings of Philo and Josephus. According to these results it can be shown, that the theology of the apostle Paul has to be understood as an inner-Jewish dialogue about the right fulfillment and interpretation of scripture – but not as an “abrogation of the Tora”, as often suggested by some exegetes. Paul was Jew – and he remained Jew also in his Christian times. As a Christian he did not abrogate the Tora, but adopted the position of a liberal Tora-interpretation that was already present in early Judaism.
Ljubica Jovanovic, Vanderbilt University
‘Open His Mouth and His Ears to Hear and Speak with His Tongue in the Revealed
Language’: Jubilees 12:25-27The Hellenistic identification of patriarch Joseph with a scientist of ancient optics who interprets dream images and light reflected on shiny surfaces could explain otherwise problematic biblical reference to his magical use of the silver cup (Gen 44:5.15). It is a major reason for a renewed interest in Joseph of the Hellenistic era and for the outburst of the texts that elaborate on this scientific image, such as historical writings of Josephus, the philosophical writings of Philo, and the ancient play: Ethiopic Joseph. This Joseph as an ancient scientist of optics gains an access to esoteric knowledge, religious experience, and scientific understanding through sight.
Jubilees holds that vision is deceptive and therefore cannot be relied on as a source of divine revelation: sight leads people into sin. Thus, Jubilees gives an alternative depiction of Joseph, rejecting his image as a Hellenistic scientist and systematically suppressing any indication that dreams and visions could be symbolic by expunging all references to them, from Joseph’s youthful dreams to God’s apparition in the form of burning bush. Jubilees further censors any mention of divination by rendering, “I can practise divination?’ (Gen 44:15), with, “A man
takes pleasure in his cup as I do in this cup? (Jub. 43:10). Science and augury are not paths to divine knowledge but “errors of the earth” and impurity (Jub. 11:16-17). For Jubilees, truth lies not in the vision, but in the voice. Its revelations are speeches devoid of imagery or descriptions (e.g. 1:1-27; 32:17. 21-26). Vision leads to magic and to Hellenistic syncretism, which Jubilees rejects. And Joseph is a good Jew, and not a magician. Jubilees’ worldview promotes hearing, not vision, as the only portal to divine communication.