Parallels to 2 Maccabees 7:28 and Sexual Generation “From Non-Being” in the Works of Plato and Philo

 Robert Doran, in his commentary on 2 Maccabees 7:28, wrote the following:

 

The mother again emphasizes that God is the creator of the cosmos, as can be seen by viewing heaven and earth. The mother states that God fashioned the individual things from previously unformed matter. Note that in LXX Jer 4:23, the Hebrew terms תהו ובהו (the same as in Gen 1:2) are translated by οὐθέν (“nothing”). The Lucianic manuscripts have not οὐκ ἐξ ὄντων but ἐξ οὐκ ὄντων, which could be translated as “from things which do not exist.” A parallel to this phrase is found in Xenophon: “parents made [their children] to be from what did not exist [ἐκ μὲν οὐκ ὄντων)]” (Mem. 2.2.3). (Robert Doran, 2 Maccabees: A Critical Commentary [Hermeneia—A Critical and Historical Commentary on the Bible; Minneapolis, Minn.: Fortress Press, 2012], 161)

 

Here are similar parallels in other Greek texts:

 

Plato, Symposium 205b–c:

 

[B] εἴπερ γε πάντες τῶν αὐτῶν ἐρῶσι καὶ ἀεί, ἀλλά τινάς φαμεν ἐρᾶν, τοὺς δʼ οὔ;

Θαυμάζω, ἦν δʼ ἐγώ, καὶ αὐτός.

Ἀλλὰ μὴ θαύμαζʼ, ἔφη· ἀφελόντες γὰρ τοῦ ἔρωτός τι εἶδος ὀνομάζομεν, τὸ τοῦ ὅλου ἐπιτιθέντες ὄνομα, ἔρωτα, τὰ δὲ ἄλλα ἄλλοις καταχρώμεθα ὀνόμασιν.

Ὥσπερ τί; ἦν δʼ ἐγώ.

Ὥσπερ τόδε. οἶσθʼ ὅτι ποίησίς ἐστί τι πολύ· ἡ γάρ τοι ἐκ τοῦ μὴ ὄντος εἰς τὸ ὂν ἰόντι ὁτῳοῦν αἰτία πᾶσά ἐστι [C] ποίησις, ὥστε καὶ αἱ ὑπὸ πάσαις ταῖς τέχναις ἐργασίαι ποιήσεις εἰσὶ καὶ οἱ τούτων δημιουργοὶ πάντες ποιηταί.

Ἀληθῆ λέγεις.

Ἀλλʼ ὅμως, ἦ δʼ ἥ, οἶσθʼ ὅτι οὐ καλοῦνται ποιηταὶ ἀλλʼ ἄλλα ἔχουσιν ὀνόματα, ἀπὸ δὲ πάσης τῆς ποιήσεως ἓν μόριον ἀφορισθὲν τὸ περὶ τὴν μουσικὴν καὶ τὰ μέτρα τῷ τοῦ ὅλου ὀνόματι προσαγορεύεται. ποίησις γὰρ τοῦτο μόνον καλεῖται, καὶ οἱ ἔχοντες τοῦτο τὸ μόριον τῆς ποιήσεως ποιηταί.

Ἀληθῆ λέγεις, ἔφην. (Plato, “Lysis, Symposium, Gorgias: Greek Text,” ed. Jeffrey Henderson, The Loeb Classical Library [Harvard University Press, 1925], 186)

 

 

[B] “ ‘Well then, Socrates,’ she said, ‘we do not mean that all men love, when we say that all men love the same things always; we mean that some people love and others do not?’

“ ‘I am wondering myself,’ I replied.

“ ‘But you should not wonder,’ she said; ‘for we have singled out a certain form of love, and applying thereto the name of the whole, we call it love; and there are other names that we commonly abuse.’

“ ‘As, for example ——?’ I asked.

“ ‘Take the following: you know that poetry is more than a single thing. For of anything whatever that passes from not being into being the whole cause [C] is composing or poetry; so that the productions of all arts are kinds of poetry, and their craftsmen are all poets.’

“ ‘That is true.’

“ ‘But still, as you are aware,’ said she, ‘they are not called poets: they have other names, while a single section disparted from the whole of poetry—merely the business of music and metres—is entitled with the name of the whole. This and no more is called poetry; those only who possess this branch of the art are poets.’

“ ‘Quite true,’ I said.

“ ‘Well, it is just the same with love. Generically, indeed, (Plato, Lysis, Symposium, Gorgias: English Text, ed. Jeffrey Henderson, trans. W. R. M. Lamb, The Loeb Classical Library [Cambridge, MA; London, England: Harvard University Press, 1925], 185-87)

 

 

 

Plato, Symposium 206b–e:

 

[B] Ὅτε δὴ τούτου ὁ ἔρως ἐστὶν ἀεί, ἦ δʼ ἥ, τῶν τίνα τρόπον διωκόντων αὐτὸ καὶ ἐν τίνι πράξει ἡ σπουδὴ καὶ ἡ σύντασις ἔρως ἂν καλοῖτο; τί τοῦτο τυγχάνει ὂν τὸ ἔργον; ἔχεις εἰπεῖν;

Οὐ μεντἂν σέ, ἔφην ἐγώ, ὦ Διοτίμα, ἐθαύμαζον ἐπὶ σοφίᾳ καὶ ἐφοίτων παρὰ σὲ αὐτὰ τοῦτα μαθησόμενος.

Ἀλλʼ ἐγώ σοι, ἔφη, ἐρῶ. ἔστι γὰρ τοῦτο τόκος ἐν καλῷ καὶ κατὰ τὸ σῶμα καὶ κατὰ τὴν ψυχήν.

Μαντείας, ἦν δʼ ἐγώ, δεῖται ὅ τί ποτε λέγεις, καὶ οὐ μανθάνω.

[C] Ἀλλʼ ἐγώ, ἦ δʼ ἥ, σαφέστερον ἐρῶ. κυοῦσι γάρ, ἔφη, ὦ Σώκρατες, πάντες ἄνθρωποι καὶ κατὰ τὸ σῶμα καὶ κατὰ τὴν ψυχήν, καὶ ἐπειδὰν ἔν τινι ἡλικίᾳ γένωνται, τίκτειν ἐπιθυμεῖ ἡμῶν ἡ φύσις. τίκτειν δὲ ἐν μὲν αἰσχρῷ οὐ δύναται, ἐν δὲ τῷ καλῷ. ἡ γὰρ ἀνδρὸς καὶ γυναικὸς συνουσία τόκος ἐστίν. ἔστι δὲ τοῦτο θεῖον τὸ πρᾶγμα, καὶ τοῦτο ἐν θνητῷ ὄντι τῷ ζῴῳ ἀθάνατον ἔνεστιν, ἡ κύησις καὶ ἡ γέννησις. τὰ δʼ ἐν τῷ ἀναρμόστῳ ἀδύνατον γενέσθαι. [D] ἀνάρμοστον δʼ ἐστὶ τὸ αἰσχρὸν παντὶ τῷ θείῳ, τὸ δὲ καλὸν ἁρμόττον. Μοῖρα οὖν καὶ Εἰλείθυια ἡ Καλλονή ἐστι τῇ γενέσει. διὰ ταῦτα ὅταν μὲν καλῷ προσπελάζῃ τὸ κυοῦν, ἵλεών τε γίγνεται καὶ εὐφραινόμενον διαχεῖται καὶ τίκτει τε καὶ γεννᾷ· ὅταν δὲ αἰσχρῷ, σκυθρωπόν τε καὶ λυπούμενον συσπειρᾶται καἰ ἁποτρέπεται καὶ ἀνείλλεται καὶ οὐ γεννᾷ, ἀλλὰ ἴσχον τὸ κύημα χαλεπῶς φέρει. ὅθεν δὴ τῷ κυοῦντί τε καὶ ἤδη σπαργῶντι πολλὴ ἡ πτοίησις γέγονε [E] περὶ τὸ καλὸν διὰ τὸ μεγάλης ὠδῖνος ἀπολύειν τὸν ἔχοντα. ἔστι γάρ, ὦ Σώκρατες, ἔφη, οὐ τοῦ καλοῦ ὁ ἔρως, ὡς σὺ οἴει.

Ἀλλὰ τί μήν;

Τῆς γεννήσεως καὶ τοῦ τόκου ἐν τῷ καλῷ.

Εἶεν, ἦν δʼ ἐγώ.

Πάνυ μὲν οὖν, ἔφη. τί δὴ οὖν τῆς γεννήσεως; ὅτι ἀειγενές ἐστι καὶ ἀθάνατον ὡς θνητῷ ἡ γέννησις. ἀθανασίας^. (Plato, “Lysis, Symposium, Gorgias: Greek Text,” ed. Jeffrey Henderson, The Loeb Classical Library [Harvard University Press, 1925], 188-92)

 

 

[B] “ ‘Now if love is always for this,’ she proceeded, ‘what is the method of those who pursue it, and what is the behaviour whose eagerness and straining are to be termed love? What actually is this effort? Can you tell me?’

“ ‘Ah, Diotima,’ I said; ‘in that case I should hardly be admiring you and your wisdom, and sitting at your feet to be enlightened on just these questions.’

“ ‘Well, I will tell you,’ said she; ‘it is begetting on a beautiful thing by means of both the body and the soul.’

“ ‘It wants some divination to make out what you mean,’ I said; ‘I do not understand.’

[C] “ ‘Let me put it more clearly,’ she said. ‘All men are pregnant, Socrates, both in body and in soul: on reaching a certain age our nature yearns to beget. This it cannot do upon an ugly person, but only on the beautiful: the conjunction of man and woman is a begetting for both. It is a divine affair, this engendering and bringing to birth, an immortal element in the creature that is mortal; and it cannot occur in the discordant. [D] The ugly is discordant with whatever is divine, whereas the beautiful is accordant. Thus Beauty presides over birth as Fate and Lady of Travail; and hence it is that when the pregnant approaches the beautiful it becomes not only gracious but so exhilarate, that it flows over with begetting and bringing forth; though when it meets the ugly it coils itself close in a sullen dismay: rebuffed and repressed, it brings not forth, but goes in labour with the burden of its young. Therefore when a person is big and teeming-ripe [E] he feels himself in a sore flutter for the beautiful, because its possessor can relieve him of his heavy pangs. For you are wrong, Socrates, in supposing that love is of the beautiful.’

“ ‘What then is it?’

“ ‘It is of engendering and begetting upon the beautiful.’

“ ‘Be it so,’ I said.

“ ‘To be sure it is,’ she went on; ‘and how of engendering? Because this is something ever-existent and immortal in our mortal life.  (Plato, Lysis, Symposium, Gorgias: English Text, ed. Jeffrey Henderson, trans. W. R. M. Lamb, The Loeb Classical Library [Cambridge, MA; London, England: Harvard University Press, 1925], 189-93)

 

 

Philo, De specialibus legibus 2:225:

 

οἱ γὰρ γονεῖς μεταξὺ θείας καὶ ἀνθρωπίνης φύσεώς εἰσι μετέχοντες ἀμφοῖν· ἀνθρωπίνης μέν, ὡς ἔστι δῆλον, ὅτι καὶ γεγόνασι καὶ φθαρήσονται, θείας δ᾽ ὅτι γεγεννήκασι καὶ τὰ μὴ ὄντα εἰς τὸ εἶναι παρήγαγον· ὅπερ γάρ, οἶμαι, θεὸς πρὸς κόσμον, τοῦτο πρὸς τέκνα γονεῖς, ἐπειδὴ ὡς ἐκεῖνος τῷ μὴ ὑπάρχοντι ὕπαρξιν κατειργάσατο, καὶ οὗτοι μιμούμενοι καθ᾽ ὅσον οἷόν τε τὴν ἐκείνου δύναμιν τὸ γένος ἀθανατίζουσιν

 

For parents themselves are something between divine and human nature, partaking of both; of human nature, inasmuch as it is plain that they have been born and that they will die; and of divine nature, because they have engendered other beings, and have brought what did not exist into existence: for, in my opinion, what God is to the world, that parents are to their children; since, just as God gave existence to that which had no existence, they also, in imitation of his power, as far at least as they were able, make the race of mankind everlasting. (Spec. 2:225 PHE)

 

Philo, De decalogo 111:

 

ἐν δυσὶν οὖν δικαστηρίοις, ἃ δὴ μόνα ἐστὶν ἐν τῇ φύσει, μὴ ἀγνοείτωσαν ἑαλωκότες, ἀσεβείας μὲν ἐν τῷ θείῳ, διότι τοὺς ἐκ τοῦ μὴ ὄντος εἰς τὸ εἶναι παραγαγόντας καὶ κατὰ τοῦτο μιμησαμένους θεὸν οὐ περιέπουσι, μισανθρωπίας δ᾽ ἐν τῷ κατ᾽ ἀνθρώπους.

 

Let them, then, not be ignorant that they are convicted before the two tribunals which are the only ones which exist in nature, of impiety as regards their duty towards God, as not worshipping those who have introduced beings who do not exist into existence, and who, in this respect, have imitated God; and as regards their duty towards men, of misanthropy and cruelty.

 

 

Philo, De specialibus legibus 2:2:

 

πρῶτον δ᾽ ἐστὶ τῶν τριῶν τὸ μὴ θεοῦ ὄνομα λαμβάνειν ἐπὶ ματαίῳ. ὁ γὰρ τοῦ σπουδαίου, φησί, λόγος ὅρκος ἔστω, βέβαιος, ἀκλινής, ἀψευδέστατος, ἐρηρεισμένος ἀληθείᾳ. κἂν εἰ ὀμνύναι μέντοι βιάζοιντο αἱ χρεῖαι, πατρὸς ἢ μητρὸς ζώντων μὲν ὑγείαν καὶ εὐετηρίαν, τετελευτηκότων δὲ τὴν μνήμην ὅρκον ποιητέον· ἀπεικονίσματα γὰρ οὗτοί γε καὶ μιμήματα θείας δυνάμεώς εἰσι, τοὺς μὴ ὄντας εἰς τὸ εἶναι παραγαγόντες.

 

And the first of these other commandments is not to take the name of God in vain; for the word of the virtuous man, says the law, shall be his oath, firm, unchangeable, which cannot lie, founded steadfastly on truth. And even if particular necessities shall compel him to swear, then he should make the witness to his oath the health or happy old age of his father or mother, if they are alive; or their memory, if they are dead. And, indeed, a man's parents are the copies and imitations of divine power, since they have brought people who had no existence into existence.

 

 

Theodoret of Cyrrhus (393-457) on Isaiah 28:10

  

The expression “yet a little, and yet a little” alludes to the enemy attack that was soon going to materialize. As for the expression “hope upon hope,” it implies the ever-renewed expectation of woes. (Theodoret of Cyrrhus, Commentary on Isaiah [trans. Gerald L. Bray; Ancient Christian Texts; Downers Grove, Ill.: IVP Academic, 2026], 96)

 

Theodoret of Cyrrhus (393-457) on Isaiah 2:2-3 being Fulfilled by the Church

  

These words can be interpreted in two different ways, and we see how each of them has been fulfilled. If we understand the mountain of God to be Jerusalem, we see that it was there that those who have believed have come running. They have come running from everywhere in the world, and those who welcomed the message arrived and claimed the blessing that was first planted there. But if we declare that the churches spread everywhere over land and sea are the house of God—relying on what the divine Paul says; “We are his house”—then in that case also we can state that the prophecy is true because the church of God occupies a prominent position. The Gentiles are abandoning the ungodliness that once ruled over them, are coming near to it, and are being enlightened by it. (Theodoret of Cyrrhus, Commentary on Isaiah [trans. Gerald L. Bray; Ancient Christian Texts; Downers Grove, Ill.: IVP Academic, 2026], 9)

 

Request to Subscribe To, and Become a "Member" of my Youtube Channel

If you have not already done so, please consider "subscribing" to my youtube channel:

Scriptural Mormonism

And if you wish to help support the channel, you can become a member here.

Letter to Brigham Young (April 3, 1877) Querying the Theological Status of Adam

 The following is a transcription of:

 

Anonymous Letter (CHL Call no.: CR 1234 1)

 

Brigham Young. Newfane April 3d 1877

 

Sir. Salt Lake City, Utah.

 

You no doubt will be surprized on the receipt of this letter,
coming as it does from a stranger; but now will be no more so, than
I would have been one month ago at the bare thought of writing you.
Since that time, I have been reading the writings of one who has
been a mormon, and advanced the mormon doctrine for a score of years,
but who, thank God! has forsaken Baal, and his idolatrous worship,
before it was too late. You, who because you will not see, are blind.
Can never know how shocked I was to learn that there was, one
man—perhaps a million—living on this beautiful earth, who
thought the "Sinner," in the garden of Eden, was the Creator of all things.

 

Could he who was formed from the dust of the earth, make
that dust? could he who sinned, be still a God? Sinful man
would be too selfish, to provide a world of beauties for the human
family, unless he could sit enthroned in the midst, and think you,
a Sinful God would do more? I tell you Nay!

 

Sin, mars beauty, and weakens the Strong. Our God is not
less beautiful, or His arm less strong than when, with His
majestic power, He spoke the world into being. We read that
God is every where, and careth for all things. Could Adam in the garden,
with that body of dust, hold the waters in his hand—the Sun and
moon in their places? Could he cause the rains to fall from heaven, or
the grass to grow on the earth? Who drew the mantle down, from the
garden of Eden—who ruled the armies of heaven during his stay on
earth, and who, when Death tightened his first grasp, (for the cold
angel came to Adam) ruled Heaven and Earth?

 

O, wonder, of wonders! that all had not rolled back into Chaos.
Oh! what a thought—what a religion, for a people living in the
nineteenth century, and this is only a part of the great mormon
doctrine, You perhaps, are not the framer of the whole of this
fearful libel, against the God of heaven, and yet, the
partaker is as bad as the thief; but do not think you can if the keys of Heaven are placed in mortal hands, it is woman, that
holds them; but you would lock her out and bar the door with a worse
than heathen rite. You would destroy her happiness in this life, and
her soul in the next. Oh! how dare you call, so vile, loathsome,
and heart-rending a practice—a religion? How can you close your eyes,
& sleep, for fear the Judge of heaven would summon you away from
your false worship, and your field of carnage, with your hands duplicated
in some dark Act. I long to lift my heart in prayer, for such an
one; but I dare not, for God has said, there are those we shall
not pray for, and, if I read my Bible aright, the mormon
Prophet and the mormon worship in Utah for the last
twenty years, is not unlike, that recorded in the seventh
chapter of Jeremiah.

 

If, not for you, I know He will let me pray
for the poor misguided beings, that have shipwrecked
their faith on a delusive sea, and from the wild mountains of
despair, are wandering back to the blessed fold of King
Immanuel. O may they all be gathered in at last.

 

But there are those, beyond the reach of prayer—thousands,
perhaps, who will stand up against you, in that great day
of the Lord. Oh! will you meet them, clad in the filthy rags
of your own self-righteousness—when Jesus died and lives again?
How you will long, on that day, for the cleansing power of
Calvary's precious blood; but Justice, not Mercy will meet
you there—

Prophet of the mormons, you have power, you have
wealth. In addition to all this—if the sands of earth were gold,
also—if Kingdoms were heaped on kingdoms, until they reached
to heaven—if crowns lay at your feet, thick as the leaves of
Autumn, and each and all could be mine, at the word. I
would not speak that word to exchange my humble lot, and
hope of Heaven, through the blood of a crucified and risen
Jesus! No! No! it would be giving wheat for chaff, as gold and gold, for dross.

 

I did not intend to write you so long
a letter when I began. But I have drawn, only a faint outline—
of what the world, and Christian people, think of the
mormon Prophet, and the mormon doctrine—for I can not
command words, to speak as some of them might.

 

Could it be
the pleasure of my heavenly Father, to bless in the least,
what I have written—because I felt it a duty—I have not
lived in vain.

 

A. B. K. April 3d, 1877

 

After perusing this sheet; from the first, I
wish you to remember, that the writer has no personal
acquaintance with you, or your religion, and if any thing
has been said that is unjust and not in accordance
with your teachings, you are at liberty to send explanations
and proof to

 

A. B. K. Newfane
Niagara Co
N. Y.

 

Theodoret of Cyrrhus (393-457) Interpreting Isaiah 1:16 and 1:18 as teaching Baptismal Regeneration

  

1:16 Wash you, be clean;

 

Lest they think that he is prescribing the washings of the law, he has to add:

 

remove your iniquities from your souls before my eyes

 

I know your secret thoughts, and none of your wicked desires escapes me, so purify your souls by the washing of regeneration.

 

cease from your iniquities

 

It is not enough to reject past sins; your must also avoid repeating them in the future.

 

1:17 Learn to do well,

 

It is not enough to abstain from evil to achieve perfection; you must also learn to do good works.

 

diligently seek judgment deliver him that is suffering wrong, plead for the orphan, and obtain justice for the widow. 1:18 And come, let us reason together, saith the Lord.

 

Nevertheless, to prevent them from being frightened by the reproaches they have just heard, he promises an abundance of good things:

 

and through your sins be as purple, I will make them white as snow, and though they be as scarlet, I will make them white as wool.

 

He says, “When I bring you into court, I shall not demand punishments for your outrages, but when I see your repentance I shall do what the dyers do. By the bath of most holy baptism, I shall change the color of blood and I shall not allow you to carry the mark of the stain of murder forever. For my knowledge is not like that of others. Where dyers color fabrics in pink, in yellow in violet, or in purple, I shall turn red into snow white.” (Theodoret of Cyrrhus, Commentary on Isaiah [trans. Gerald L. Bray; Ancient Christian Texts; Downers Grove, Ill.: IVP Academic, 2026], 5-6, emphasis added)

 

The terms translated as “by the washing of regeneration” and “by the bath of most holy baptism” translate the Greek τω λουτρω τοινυν της παλιγγενεσιας and του παναγιου βαπτισματος λουτρω. See the following from Théodoret de. Cyr, Commentaire sur Isaïe, ed. Jean-Noël Guinot, 3 vols. (Sources Chrétiennes 276; Cerf, 1980), 1:172:

 

 

Theodoret of Cyrrhus (393-457) on Isaiah 22:22

  

22:22 And I will give him the glory of David, and he shall rule and there shall be none to speak against him; and I will give him the key of the house of David upon his shoulder, and he shall open and there shall be none to shut, and he shall shut and there shall be none to open.

 

In this passage are prefigured also the realities that are ours:” What you bind on earth,” he says, “will be bound in heaven, and what you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.” (Theodoret of Cyrrhus, Commentary on Isaiah [trans. Gerald L. Bray; Ancient Christian Texts; Downers Grove, Ill.: IVP Academic, 2026], 77-78)

 

The following is taken from Théodoret de. Cyr, Commentaire sur Isaïe, ed. Jean-Noël Guinot, 3 vols. (Sources Chrétiennes 295; Cerf, 1982), 2:166, 168:

 

  

Here is a transcription:

 

²² Καὶ δώσω τὴν δόξαν Δαυὶδ αὐτῷ, καὶ ἄρξει, καὶ οὐκ ἔσται ὁ ἀντιλέγων· καὶ δώσω αὐτῷ τὴν κλεῖδα οἴκου Δαυὶδ ἐπὶ τοῦ ὤμου αὐτοῦ, καὶ ἀνοίξει, καὶ οὐδεὶς κλείσει, ⟨καὶ κλείσει,⟩ καὶ οὐκ ἔσται ὁ ἀνοίγων. Ἐν τούτῳ καὶ τὰ ἡμέτερα προτυποῦται. «Ὃ ἂν δήσητε» γάρ φησιν «ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς, ἔσται δεδεμένον ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς· καὶ ὃ ἐὰν λύσητε ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς, ἔσται λελυμένον ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς.»

 

As one can see, Theodoret is not quoting from Matt 16:19, which uses singulars, but Matt 18:18, which uses plurals:

 

Ἀμὴν λέγω ὑμῖν· ὅσα ἐὰν δήσητε ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς ἔσται δεδεμένα ἐν οὐρανῷ, καὶ ὅσα ἐὰν λύσητε ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς ἔσται λελυμένα ἐν οὐρανῷ.