Jewish Believers in Jesus and the Mosaic Law: The Opinion of Justin Martyr

Origen mentions Philo by name only three times in his surviving works. More often, he refers to Philo obliquely as “one of our predecessors” or, more literally, “one of those who came before us.” An analysis of Origen’s references to Philo in light of his usage of the terms Jew, Hebrew, Israel, and Ebionite in Contra Celsum and the Commentary on Matthew reveals Origen’s approval of Philo’s allegorical interpretations of biblical narratives. Yet on one occasion, Origen criticizes Philo for failing to interpret the commandments of the Jewish law “according to the spirit” rather than “according to the letter.” Origen charges Philo with committing the same error that he charges against Jews in general, namely, the failure to interpret and observe the commandments of the Mosaic law spiritually rather than literally.

Download Full-text

Cyril of Alexandria

10.1093/oso/9780198824534.003.0004 ◽

2018 ◽

Author(s):

Hauna T. Ondrey

Keyword(s):

Old Testament ◽

Primary Role ◽

Positive Role ◽

Cyril Of Alexandria ◽

Preliminary Comparison ◽

Mosaic Law

Chapter 3, “Cyril of Alexandria: The Twelve within the First Covenant,” identifies the primary role Cyril assigns the Twelve Prophets in their ministry to Old Testament Israel as summoning Israel to adherence to the Mosaic law and educating Israel regarding God’s nature. While Cyril finds the prophetic oracles replete with christological content, a careful reading of his Commentary on the Twelve reveals that he holds the typological value of these oracles only retrospectively accessible. Isolating Cyril’s view of the prophetic ministry to ante Christum Israel limits the prospective christological revelation of the prophets and reveals the positive role Cyril ascribes the Mosaic law prior to Christ’s advent. A preliminary comparison of Chapters 2 and 3 concludes this chapter.

Download Full-text

The Minor Prophets as Christian Scripture in the Commentaries of Theodore of Mopsuestia and Cyril of Alexandria

10.1093/oso/9780198824534.001.0001 ◽

2018 ◽

Cited By ~ 2

Author(s):

Hauna T. Ondrey

Keyword(s):

Old Testament ◽

Full Range ◽

Positive Role ◽

Cyril Of Alexandria ◽

Theodore Of Mopsuestia ◽

Positive Account ◽

Mosaic Law ◽

Recent Tendency ◽

The Church ◽

Minor Prophets

This work compares the Minor Prophets commentaries of Theodore of Mopsuestia and Cyril of Alexandria, isolating the role each interpreter assigns the Twelve Prophets in their ministry to Old Testament Israel and the texts of the Twelve as Christian scripture. It argues that Theodore does acknowledge christological prophecies, as distinct from both retrospective accommodation and typology. A careful reading of Cyril’s Commentary on the Twelve limits the prospective christological revelation he ascribes to the prophets and reveals the positive role he grants the Mosaic law prior to Christ’s advent. Exploring secondly the Christian significance Theodore and Cyril assign to Israel’s exile and restoration reveals that Theodore’s reading of the Twelve Prophets, while not attempting to be christocentric, is nevertheless self-consciously Christian. Cyril, unsurprisingly, offers a robust Christian reading of the Twelve, yet this too must be expanded by his focus on the church and concern to equip the church through the ethical paideusis provided by the plain sense of the prophetic text. Revised descriptions of each interpreter lead to the claim that a recent tendency to distinguish the Old Testament interpretation of Theodore (negatively) and Cyril (positively) on the basis of their “christocentrism” obscures more than it clarifies and polarizes no less than earlier accounts of Antiochene/Alexandrian exegesis. The Conclusion argues against replacing old dichotomies with new and advocates rather for an approach that takes seriously Theodore’s positive account of the unity and telos of the divine economy and the full range of Cyril’s interpretation.

Download Full-text

Baptismal Theology and Practice in Rome as Reflected in Justin Martyr

The ecumenical world of Orthodox civilization ◽

10.1515/9783111396743-002 ◽

1974 ◽

pp. 9-34

Keyword(s):

Justin Martyr

Download Full-text

Whose Ḥaṭṭāʾt? Aaron’s Enigmatic Response to Moses in Lev 10:19

Zeitschrift für die Alttestamentliche Wissenschaft ◽

10.1515/zaw-2021-0007 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 133 (1) ◽

pp. 23-36

Author(s):

Nathan MacDonald

Keyword(s):

Content Type ◽

Mosaic Law

Abstract Aaron’s enigmatic response to Moses’ accusation of cultic malpractice in the disposal of the remains of the ḥaṭṭāt (Lev 10:19) has puzzled exegetes since antiquity. Recent interpreters have concluded that it is not possible to understand Aaron’s reasoning and that his response emphasizes the priesthood’s mystique and its claim to a qualified freedom in interpreting Mosaic law. In contrast, I argue that the crux interpretum can be resolved when we pay particular attention to the pronominal suffixes attached to the word חטאת.

Download Full-text