On this page
-
Text (1)
-
Untitled Article
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.
-
-
Transcript
-
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.
Additionally, when viewing full transcripts, extracted text may not be in the same order as the original document.
Untitled Article
than their authors supposed . If m k&attuapr o& tbe Ha 4 c « iisro of Phffo we tnust be understood to ibaiirtam tl ^ he professedly and exclusively addicted himself to Mbe ' Platonic school , against such an opinion arguments scarcely to be resisted might , without much difficulty , be adduced . Indeed , Jhow coultf a Jew attached to his religion , disposed probably to regard as indirectly derived from the writings of his own lawgiver all that seemed excellent in the philosophy of other nations , and obliged to modify into at least apparent
harmony with those writings all the doctrines which he embraced , profess unresisting submission to the dicta of any Pagan master ? It is not to be denied , however , that some of the . most striking peculiarities of the Platonic dbctrihe are adopted by Fhilo , and that , he explains his meaning by phraseology ancP imagery derived from the works of Plato hirnself , and much used among his followers . If we call him an Eclectic , as there is no doubt that
he occasionally quotes with approbation , and adopts without reserve , the sentiments- of philosophers of different schools , still it is not the less manifest that his notions respecting the Divine Nature are Platonic . The later Platonists and Eclectics hardly differed except in name , the latter greatly acfmiring Plato and following him , especially on subjects relating to the fiat ore of God and the mind .
Those who maintain that Philo only adopted the prevailing sentiments of the learned Jews at Alexandria , should recollect that these Jews studied in the schools of philosophy for which that city was celebrated ^ and in which a system , which , if not strictly Platonic , was very nearly allied taPlatonism , was generally taught . It is probable enough that Philo may not have materially differed in * opinion from the more learned of his countrymen in his native city , but it doea not follow that his doctrines are Jewish traditions ; it is rather evident how much the circumstances of their education led them to
accommodate their religion to the wisdom of the age , explaining its simple troths according to the fanciful speculations- of philosophy , and saving its historic details from the contempt with which they would otherwise have been inclined to treat them , by allegorizing them into the mystical expression of obscure and useless dogmas . Those who speak of Philo ' s p hilosophy as his own invention , and represent him rather as the founder of a sect than as a supporter of the doctrines of any former leader , can surely mean no more than that he * made his selection of opinions for himself , that he adopted the
princi ple of the Eclectics ^ but not satisfied with what was" done in their schools , being ; indeed , in 1 a peculiar situation as a JJew , his doctrines did not sufficiently agree with theirs for him to be correctly deacrtbed ^ as belonging to their sect ; all which is not , or * need not be denied By those who call attention to the manifest Bign&of Platonmm in the works of Pfttfo , arid- clearly shew that much ' of nig language ; i < espee « ing thfe 4 nature 1 oT- ' tfte ' DfeHy , is dfe ^ rived , not frow the principles of his own religionv oir ' ttte'tl ^ diUons of his 1
nation , bat front the doctrines of tfte Greeis ; phHofepphefr ^ whteh , however , he has mixed 1 with * opinions derived 1 from vtfrieus fcHtef ' sitortresK , and reduced ' into some sort of agreement with the principles of hisowrt religion . We : cannot hope to understand ; the language of Phifo ; respecting ' the Ibgps , except by considering it in connexmcr with his * whole dbctritte concerning the DtoiireNature . We ought , pferhajssv hatdlytb eaptect perfect 1 consist tency from so' obscure and mystical' & writer , But it witl hefp much tto ' remove of 1
difficulties , if we * keep in mitirt that manjr part ^ his wo rksare ' written popularly ^ according to « that view- of religion- wfiicli \\ & considered * ttt'lte salted to the condition of rtiankind' in general ; whilfet others are designed' tb express the my > re just and sublime sentiments to- Which only tft ^ le « rned > and
Untitled Article
4 f ^ X > r » J . P . Smith ?* Stiripture Te& \ ihon # to the Mtsskth .
-
-
Citation
-
Monthly Repository (1806-1838) and Unitarian Chronicle (1832-1833), July 2, 1831, page 462, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse.ac.uk/periodicals/mruc/issues/vm2-ncseproduct2599/page/30/
-