Home About Network of subjects Linked subjects heatmap Book indices included Search by subject Search by reference Browse subjects Browse texts

Tiresias: The Ancient Mediterranean Religions Source Database



8341
Numenius Of Apamea, Fragments, 16.9
NaN


Intertexts (texts cited often on the same page as the searched text):

9 results
1. Plato, Republic, None (5th cent. BCE - 4th cent. BCE)

2. Clement of Alexandria, Miscellanies, (2nd cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)

3. Numenius of Apamea, Fragments, 2.16, 11.11-11.13, 12.13, 16.8, 16.10, 19.12-19.13, 20.4-20.7, 20.10-20.12 (2nd cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE)

4. Numenius of Apamea, Fragments, 2.16, 11.11-11.13, 12.13, 16.8-16.10, 19.12-19.13, 20.4-20.7, 20.10-20.12 (2nd cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE)

5. Eusebius of Caesarea, Preparation For The Gospel, 11.22, 11.22.3-11.22.5 (3rd cent. CE - 4th cent. CE)

6. Origen, Against Celsus, 5.25, 5.39 (3rd cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)

5.25. Let us next notice the statements of Celsus, which follow the preceding, and which are as follow: As the Jews, then, became a peculiar people, and enacted laws in keeping with the customs of their country, and maintain them up to the present time, and observe a mode of worship which, whatever be its nature, is yet derived from their fathers, they act in these respects like other men, because each nation retains its ancestral customs, whatever they are, if they happen to be established among them. And such an arrangement appears to be advantageous, not only because it has occurred to the mind of other nations to decide some things differently, but also because it is a duty to protect what has been established for the public advantage; and also because, in all probability, the various quarters of the earth were from the beginning allotted to different superintending spirits, and were thus distributed among certain governing powers, and in this manner the administration of the world is carried on. And whatever is done among each nation in this way would be rightly done, wherever it was agreeable to the wishes (of the superintending powers), while it would be an act of impiety to get rid of the institutions established from the beginning in the various places. By these words Celsus shows that the Jews, who were formerly Egyptians, subsequently became a peculiar people, and enacted laws which they carefully preserve. And not to repeat his statements, which have been already before us, he says that it is advantageous to the Jews to observe their ancestral worship, as other nations carefully attend to theirs. And he further states a deeper reason why it is of advantage to the Jews to cultivate their ancestral customs, in hinting dimly that those to whom was allotted the office of superintending the country which was being legislated for, enacted the laws of each land in co-operation with its legislators. He appears, then, to indicate that both the country of the Jews, and the nation which inhabits it, are superintended by one or more beings, who, whether they were one or more, co-operated with Moses, and enacted the laws of the Jews. 5.39. We must therefore inquire what may be fittingly eaten or not by the rational and gentle animal, which acts always in conformity with reason; and not worship at random, sheep, or goats, or cattle; to abstain from which is an act of moderation, for much advantage is derived by men from these animals. Whereas, is it not the most foolish of all things to spare crocodiles, and to treat them as sacred to some fabulous divinity or other? For it is a mark of exceeding stupidity to spare those animals which do not spare us, and to bestow care on those which make a prey of human beings. But Celsus approves of those who, in keeping with the laws of their country, worship and tend crocodiles, and not a word does he say against them, while the Christians appear deserving of censure, who have been taught to loath evil, and to turn away from wicked works, and to reverence and honour virtue as being generated by God, and as being His Son. For we must not, on account of their feminine name and nature, regard wisdom and righteousness as females; for these things are in our view the Son of God, as His genuine disciple has shown, when he said of Him, Who of God is made to us wisdom, and righteousness, and sanctification, and redemption. And although we may call Him a second God, let men know that by the term second God we mean nothing else than a virtue capable of including all other virtues, and a reason capable of containing all reason whatsoever which exists in all things, which have arisen naturally, directly, and for the general advantage, and which reason, we say, dwelt in the soul of Jesus, and was united to Him in a degree far above all other souls, seeing He alone was enabled completely to receive the highest share in the absolute reason, and the absolute wisdom, and the absolute righteousness.
7. Origen, On First Principles, 1.2.2-1.2.4, 2.2.2 (3rd cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)

1.2.2. Let no one, however, imagine that we mean anything impersonal when we call Him the wisdom of God; or suppose, for example, that we understand Him to be, not a living being endowed with wisdom, but something which makes men wise, giving itself to, and implanting itself in, the minds of those who are made capable of receiving His virtues and intelligence. If, then, it is once rightly understood that the only-begotten Son of God is His wisdom hypostatically existing, I know not whether our curiosity ought to advance beyond this, or entertain any suspicion that that ὑπόστασις or substantia contains anything of a bodily nature, since everything that is corporeal is distinguished either by form, or color, or magnitude. And who in his sound senses ever sought for form, or color, or size, in wisdom, in respect of its being wisdom? And who that is capable of entertaining reverential thoughts or feelings regarding God, can suppose or believe that God the Father ever existed, even for a moment of time, without having generated this Wisdom? For in that case he must say either that God was unable to generate Wisdom before He produced her, so that He afterwards called into being her who formerly did not exist, or that He possessed the power indeed, but — what cannot be said of God without impiety — was unwilling to use it; both of which suppositions, it is patent to all, are alike absurd and impious: for they amount to this, either that God advanced from a condition of inability to one of ability, or that, although possessed of the power, He concealed it, and delayed the generation of Wisdom. Wherefore we have always held that God is the Father of His only-begotten Son, who was born indeed of Him, and derives from Him what He is, but without any beginning, not only such as may be measured by any divisions of time, but even that which the mind alone can contemplate within itself, or behold, so to speak, with the naked powers of the understanding. And therefore we must believe that Wisdom was generated before any beginning that can be either comprehended or expressed. And since all the creative power of the coming creation was included in this very existence of Wisdom (whether of those things which have an original or of those which have a derived existence), having been formed beforehand and arranged by the power of foreknowledge; on account of these very creatures which had been described, as it were, and prefigured in Wisdom herself, does Wisdom say, in the words of Solomon, that she was created the beginning of the ways of God, inasmuch as she contained within herself either the beginnings, or forms, or species of all creation. 1.2.3. Now, in the same way in which we have understood that Wisdom was the beginning of the ways of God, and is said to be created, forming beforehand and containing within herself the species and beginnings of all creatures, must we understand her to be the Word of God, because of her disclosing to all other beings, i.e., to universal creation, the nature of the mysteries and secrets which are contained within the divine wisdom; and on this account she is called the Word, because she is, as it were, the interpreter of the secrets of the mind. And therefore that language which is found in the Acts of Paul, where it is said that here is the Word a living being, appears to me to be rightly used. John, however, with more sublimity and propriety, says in the beginning of his Gospel, when defining God by a special definition to be the Word, And God was the Word, and this was in the beginning with God. Let him, then, who assigns a beginning to the Word or Wisdom of God, take care that he be not guilty of impiety against the unbegotten Father Himself, seeing he denies that He had always been a Father, and had generated the Word, and had possessed wisdom in all preceding periods, whether they be called times or ages, or anything else that can be so entitled. 1.2.4. This Son, accordingly, is also the truth and life of all things which exist. And with reason. For how could those things which were created live, unless they derived their being from life? Or how could those things which are, truly exist, unless they came down from the truth? Or how could rational beings exist, unless the Word or reason had previously existed? Or how could they be wise, unless there were wisdom? But since it was to come to pass that some also should fall away from life, and bring death upon themselves by their declension — for death is nothing else than a departure from life — and as it was not to follow that those beings which had once been created by God for the enjoyment of life should utterly perish, it was necessary that, before death, there should be in existence such a power as would destroy the coming death, and that there should be a resurrection, the type of which was in our Lord and Saviour, and that this resurrection should have its ground in the wisdom and word and life of God. And then, in the next place, since some of those who were created were not to be always willing to remain unchangeable and unalterable in the calm and moderate enjoyment of the blessings which they possessed, but, in consequence of the good which was in them being theirs not by nature or essence, but by accident, were to be perverted and changed, and to fall away from their position, therefore was the Word and Wisdom of God made the Way. And it was so termed because it leads to the Father those who walk along it. 2.2.2. If, however, it is impossible for this point to be at all maintained, viz., that any other nature than the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit can live without a body, the necessity of logical reasoning compels us to understand that rational natures were indeed created at the beginning, but that material substance was separated from them only in thought and understanding, and appears to have been formed for them, or after them, and that they never have lived nor do live without it; for an incorporeal life will rightly be considered a prerogative of the Trinity alone. As we have remarked above, therefore, that material substance of this world, possessing a nature admitting of all possible transformations, is, when dragged down to beings of a lower order, moulded into the crasser and more solid condition of a body, so as to distinguish those visible and varying forms of the world; but when it becomes the servant of more perfect and more blessed beings, it shines in the splendour of celestial bodies, and adorns either the angels of God or the sons of the resurrection with the clothing of a spiritual body, out of all which will be filled up the diverse and varying state of the one world. But if any one should desire to discuss these matters more fully, it will be necessary, with all reverence and fear of God, to examine the sacred Scriptures with greater attention and diligence, to ascertain whether the secret and hidden sense within them may perhaps reveal anything regarding these matters; and something may be discovered in their abstruse and mysterious language, through the demonstration of the Holy Spirit to those who are worthy, after many testimonies have been collected on this very point.
8. Proclus, In Platonis Timaeum Commentarii, 1.304.13-1.304.16 (5th cent. CE - 5th cent. CE)

9. Proclus, In Platonis Timaeum Commentarii, 1.304.13-1.304.16 (5th cent. CE - 5th cent. CE)



Subjects of this text:

subject book bibliographic info
celsus Fowler, Plato in the Third Sophistic (2014) 188
clement of alexandria Fowler, Plato in the Third Sophistic (2014) 188
creator, creation Novenson, Monotheism and Christology in Greco-Roman Antiquity (2020) 273
demiurge Albrecht, The Divine Father: Religious and Philosophical Concepts of Divine Parenthood in Antiquity (2014) 63; Erler et al., Authority and Authoritative Texts in the Platonist Tradition (2021) 141; Novenson, Monotheism and Christology in Greco-Roman Antiquity (2020) 273
eusebius Erler et al., Authority and Authoritative Texts in the Platonist Tradition (2021) 141; Fowler, Plato in the Third Sophistic (2014) 188
father, fatherhood Albrecht, The Divine Father: Religious and Philosophical Concepts of Divine Parenthood in Antiquity (2014) 63
father Fowler, Plato in the Third Sophistic (2014) 188; Novenson, Monotheism and Christology in Greco-Roman Antiquity (2020) 273
form/forms/ideas Fowler, Plato in the Third Sophistic (2014) 188
god Erler et al., Authority and Authoritative Texts in the Platonist Tradition (2021) 141; Fowler, Plato in the Third Sophistic (2014) 188
good Fowler, Plato in the Third Sophistic (2014) 188
heaven Novenson, Monotheism and Christology in Greco-Roman Antiquity (2020) 273
intelligible Fowler, Plato in the Third Sophistic (2014) 188
numenius Erler et al., Authority and Authoritative Texts in the Platonist Tradition (2021) 141; Fowler, Plato in the Third Sophistic (2014) 188
one, neoplatonic principle Erler et al., Authority and Authoritative Texts in the Platonist Tradition (2021) 141
origen Fowler, Plato in the Third Sophistic (2014) 188
plato, republic Fowler, Plato in the Third Sophistic (2014) 188
plato, timaeus Fowler, Plato in the Third Sophistic (2014) 188
plato Fowler, Plato in the Third Sophistic (2014) 188
platonic dialogues, parmenides Erler et al., Authority and Authoritative Texts in the Platonist Tradition (2021) 141
platonism, platonists Albrecht, The Divine Father: Religious and Philosophical Concepts of Divine Parenthood in Antiquity (2014) 63
platonism Novenson, Monotheism and Christology in Greco-Roman Antiquity (2020) 273
platonist Fowler, Plato in the Third Sophistic (2014) 188
plutarch Erler et al., Authority and Authoritative Texts in the Platonist Tradition (2021) 141
porphyry Fowler, Plato in the Third Sophistic (2014) 188
proclus Erler et al., Authority and Authoritative Texts in the Platonist Tradition (2021) 141
theology, of numenios' Albrecht, The Divine Father: Religious and Philosophical Concepts of Divine Parenthood in Antiquity (2014) 63