- This topic has 19,164 replies, 120 voices, and was last updated 1 year ago by
.
- Posts
Nick,
If the all that is true is inspired by God then so is some of Philo’s writing
I said “if” because I do not know. If I was more mature then perhaps I would know.
Hi KW,
Do you equate the veracity of Philo to that of Jesus or John?
Can we quote his words with the same confidence?
Are you mature enough to know the difference?
Hi KW,
The testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy.
My words are spirit and truth.
do you believe this?
Do you have the same confidence in the words of John or Paul?
What about Philo?
Nick,
Truth is truth whatever its source.
I am able to quote Philo where his words are true just as Paul quoted the Greek poets where their words are true.
Do you understand what “test the spirit” means?
Hi KW,
John was an eyewitness along with Matthew, Mark and Luke and their testimonies corroborate each other.
Tell us of the philosopher Philo and his relationship with them.
Tell us why his witness is relevant.
Hi KW,
How are you able to judge the words of Philo?
You say his writing style is similar to that of John.
But is what he says also demonstrably comparable in fact?
Can you align his words with those from the God appointed men we know are true?
Hi KW,
Philo called Jesus the ELDEST OF THE ANGELS, the ARCHANGEL OF MANY NAMES.
Show us where this resonates with the written words of the eyewitnesses and the author of Hebrews.
if it does not then perhaps you should show your loyalty to the Master and admit Philo taught falsehoods?
Nick,
Philos was a Jew who may not have heard of Jesus. He talks about the word of God. He personalized the logos even to saying it was a second God, even though he also admits it is no being at all.
Philo of AlexanderThe Logos has an origin, but as God’s thought it also has eternal generation. It exists as such before everything else all of which are secondary products of God’s thought and therefore it is called the “first-born.”
As you can see it is no actually a being though Wikipedia does say it is. It is like Jesus saying he is the bread from above when he is not literally the mana that came from above.
Hi ED,
Do you stand by your theory that all pre-exist?
Or has your understanding of prophetic word clarified the matter?
Hi Nick,
The bible seems to indicate that all have.
Do you have any evidence that isn’t the case?_______________
God bless
Ed JNick,
Philo is more of what we today would call a theologian than a philosopher because that difference did not exist at that time.
Much of what he states about is true. There is some that I cannot test as I can neither prove it true or false. It deals with interpretation of symbols but I do not see it is relevant to the gospel.
The truth is the truth no matter who utters it. Why are you afraid to seek the truth no matter where it will be found.
Good point kerwin and I agree. Once Jesus was astonished by the words of a centurion.
Why would you boast of your maturity if you give glory to what is of man?
Nick, sometimes men utter truth. It is not the man that you respect so much as the truth. All truth is of God and all lies are of the evil one.
If a man utters the truth, then you can give that glory to God because it is the truth. This is not the same as giving glory to man.
Jesus was a man and he spoke the truth. Glory was given to God. Peter, Paul, John, and Jude spoke the truth too. Glory to God, not to Peter or Paul.
Perhaps your argument on this point is a non-issue?
Hi t8,
Are you familiar with the words of Philo?
Do you agree with them or find them lacking in veracity?
Hi t8,
Is it OK to say JESUS where scripture says JESUS CHRIST?
What difference did the anointing make to the man from Nazareth?
What would the man from Nazareth be able to do or preach without that anointing?
Nick,
Philo is more an evangelist that is explaining Jewish teachings to Gentiles, possibly Greek Stoics. The one error I know is that his teachings seem Gnostic but I could be mistaken since he uses the term demiurge in a non-Gnostic way.
Nick,
Wikipedia article or Adam Kadmon (by translation original man)
The first to use the expression “original man,” or “heavenly man,” was Philo, in whose view the γενικός, or οὐράνιος ἄνθρωπος, “as being born in the image of God, has no participation in any corruptible or earthlike essence; whereas the earthly man is made of loose material, called a lump of clay. The heavenly man, as the perfect image of the Logos, is neither man nor woman, but an incorporeal intelligence purely an idea; while the earthly man, who was created by God later, is perceptible to the senses and partakes of earthly qualities
This sounds a lot like the teaching Paul is using to make a point in 1 Corinthians 15. There is also that seeming of Gnosticism in the idea earth is a corruptible essence.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
