Exhortation to the Greeks

First page of the Exhortation to the Greeks, from the Arethas Codex (Paris grec 451). The script is Greek minuscule.
For the work with a same English name by Clement of Alexandria, see Protrepticus (Clement).

The Exhortation to the Greeks (Latin: Cohortatio ad Graecos; alternative Latin: Cohortatio ad Gentiles; Ancient Greek: Λόγος παραινέτικος πρὸς Ἕλληνας) is an Ancient Greek Christian paraenetic or protreptic text in thirty-eight chapters.

Author and date

Although the work is anonymous, it was wrongly ascribed to, and included in collections of the works of, Justin Martyr.[1] The actual author is otherwise unknown, and so is now given the name Pseudo-Justin. Pseudo-Justin and Justin Martyr had significantly differing writing styles. Another difference is that the author of Exhortation to the Greeks, while nonetheless using Hellenistic period writers, rejects Greek thought, but Justin Martyr accepted the aspects of Greek philosophy which he felt were not in conflict with the gospels.[2]

Commentators have debated concerning the dating of the work, and there is no consensus among the exact positions taken.[3] Schreckenberg, Buitenwerf, and Hardwick agree that the work was probably from the 4th-century.[4]

Content

Pseudo-Justin identifies Homer as the main source for the theological views of pagans, views which he criticizes.[5] The theories of the pagan Greek thinkers, the author claims, share in this false Homeric heritage.[6] Pseudo-Justin instead offers up Moses as the source of proper theological views. He claims that Moses was more ancient—and thus, more authoritative—than Homer or any other pagan writer.[7][8] He also claims that many of the good ideas which pagan philosophers had were taken from Moses, including claiming that Plato read Moses and the Nevi'im.[9] While Augustine and other ancient writers also espoused theories like this concerning Plato, such a view is in now seen as "ludicrous".[10]

Pseudo-Justin starts his analysis of the pagan thinkers by looking at the teachings of the Milesian school, including Thales, Anaximander, and Anaximenes of Miletus. Together with the Milesians he adds Heraclitus, Hippasus, Anaxagoras, and Archelaus. He briefly mentions their various theories of "principle[s]" or "first cause[s]" (see arche); for example, Thales' theory that all matter comes from water.[11] Next he mentions the theories of Pythagoras, Epicurus, and Empedocles. He concludes that all these Pre-Socratic philosophers and Epicurus (who was not Pre-Socratic) could not agree, and that this lack of agreement shows the weakness of their philosophy altogether.[12] Heraclitus is listed as coming from the same city as Hippasus—Metapontum—although he in fact came from Ephesus.[13]

Next he considers Plato and Aristotle. Despite these two being the most well-regarded of the pagan philosophers, Pseudo-Justin concludes similarly as before: They widely do not agree with each other and are to be criticized for as much. For example, he says that Plato teaches that the human soul has three parts (see Plato's tripartite theory of soul), while Aristotle teaches that the human soul has only one, reasoning aspect (see On the Soul).[14] He also maintains that they contradict themselves as well. For example, he claims that Plato says at one time that there are three first causes, but then at another time that there are four. Again, he claims that Plato says that matter is uncreated, but then later contradicts himself and says that it is created.[15] The modern scholarly views on the relationship between Plato's and Aristotle's philosophies are varied and complex.[16]

In contrast with the disagreements between all the pagan philosophers, Pseudo-Justin commends the Christian teachers, who, he says, did not "contradict or argue with one another. Instead, without strife or quarrel, they passed on to us the knowledge they had received from God."[17] He includes Moses as the oldest Christian teacher, although Christianity is normally understood as beginning after the life of Jesus.[18] Many scholars have identified the text as Jewish in nature, on the basis of Pseudo-Justin's strong debt to Jewish thought. Another theory is that it is a particularly superficial reworking of Jewish material for Christian purposes (see split of early Christianity and Judaism).[19]

Pseudo-Justin also quotes and discusses some Sibylline oracles. He writes that some of these oracles teach the true religion, including monotheism.[20] Pseudo-Justin's quotations and commentary are an important textual source for these oracles.[21]

Editions

There is an edition by Miroslav Marcovich including the text in the original Greek, and a summary and notes in English, published by De Gruyter in 1990.[22] A newer edition by Christoph Riedweg includes the Greek text along with a critical apparatus, and a study of the work in German, published by Friedrich Reinhardt Verlag in 1994.[23] Riedweg's edition represents the first attempt at developing an updated critical text.[24] An English translation by Thomas B. Falls is included in Volume 6 of The Fathers of the Church: A New Translation (Patristic series) by the Catholic University of America Press, first published 1948, last printed 2008.[25]

Notes

  1. ↑ Buitenwerf (2003), p. 78.
  2. ↑ Hardwick (1996), p. 379.
  3. ↑ Hardwick (1989), pp. 38–41. Hardwick (1996), p. 379.
  4. ↑ Schreckenberg (1991), p. 52. Buitenwerf (2003), p. 78. Hardwick (1996), p. 379.
  5. ↑ Hardwick (1996), p. 379.
  6. ↑ Pseudo-Justin, chapter 2, p. 377.
  7. ↑ Pseudo-Justin, chapter 9, p. 384.
  8. ↑ The standard views of contemporary scholarship concerning the dating and authorship of Mosaic literature and Homeric literature are far more complex and reject anything like Pseudo-Justin's theories; see Documentary hypothesis and Homeric question. Coogan (2008), p. 20; Fowler (2004), p. 5.
  9. ↑ Pseudo-Justin, chapter 26, p. 405.
  10. ↑ Droge (1989), p. 63.
  11. ↑ Pseudo-Justin, chapter 3, pp. 377–8.
  12. ↑ Pseudo-Justin, chapter 4, p. 379.
  13. ↑ Guthrie (1962), p. 408.
  14. ↑ Pseudo-Justin, chapter 6, p. 382.
  15. ↑ Pseudo-Justin, chapter 7, p. 382.
  16. ↑ Pellegrin (2006). See also Shields (2006); Anagnostopoulos (2009), pp. 22–25.
  17. ↑ Pseudo-Justin, chapter 8, p. 383.
  18. ↑ Woodhead (2004), p. 1.
  19. ↑ van der Horst (1998), p. 262.
  20. ↑ Pseudo-Justin, chapter 16, pp. 393–4; chapter 37, pp. 422–3.
  21. ↑ Buitenwerf, pp. 65, 78–9.
  22. ↑ Marcovich (1990).
  23. ↑ Riedweg (1994).
  24. ↑ Trapp (1996), p. 15.
  25. ↑ Pseudo-Justin, pp. 369–423.

Bibliography

External links

Wikisource has original text related to this article:
This article is issued from Wikipedia - version of the Saturday, April 09, 2016. The text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution/Share Alike but additional terms may apply for the media files.