Deserving comment is Philo
Mos. 2.14’s description of Moses’ laws (νόμῳ), as “firm,” βέβαια, as is 2.15’s
“not even the smallest part, τὸ μικρότατον, of the ordinances—has been
disturbed, ἐκινήθη,” and 2.16’s remark that nothing can “undo,” ἔλυσε, the
Torah. Working in reverse order, Mos. 2.16’s ἔλυσε overlaps etymologically with
Matt 5:17’s καταλῦσαι, usually rendered “abolish,” “destroy.” Mos. 2.15’s τὸ μικρότατον
brings to mind not only Matthew 5:18’s “not an iota, not a dot,” but also
5:19’s “least,” ἐλάχιστος. Perhaps we could also compare Matthew 5:19’s μέγας
with Mos. 2.17’s μέγα: “Yet, though it may be rightly thought a great (μέγα)
matter in itself that the laws should have been guarded securely through all
time, we have not reached the true marvel.”
This leaves us with Mos.
2.14’s “firm,” βέβαια, Mosaic laws. The same term occurs in 2 Peter 1:19,
followed in the previously mentioned v. 20 by a reference to ἐπιλύσεως, a
unique word for “interpretation” in the NT: “And we have the prophetic word (τὸν
προφητικὸν λόγον) made more sure (βεβαιότερον). You will do well to pay
attention to this as to a lamp shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and
the morning star rises in your hearts. First of all you must understand this, that
no prophecy of scripture is a matter of one’s own interpretation (ἐπιλύσεως).”
Now, it just so happens that “the prophetic word” is a Philonic title for Moses
the Lawgiver. In Leg. 3:43 Philo calls Moses ὁ προφητικὸς λόγος, “the prophetic
word”; in Congr. 170 Moses is ὁ προφήτης λόγος, “the prophet-word”; in Migr.
151 Philo writes of Moses’ title τοῦ προφήτου λόγου, “the word of prophecy.”
That 2 Peter 1:19’s
“prophetic word” may actually reflect Philo’s Moses title is indicated first by
the same verse’s βεβαιότερον, which agrees with Philo’s description of Moses’
Torah as βέβαια in Mos. 2.14. Second, Migr. 151’s reference to Moses as τοῦ
προφήτου λόγου is preceded in Migr. 150 by the following: “For at present he is
but a novice in the contemplation and study of things Divine and his principles
are unformed (παλαδᾷ, Yonge, ‘solidity’) and wavering (σαλεύει). By and by they
will have gained consistency (παγέντα, lit., ‘solidity’) and rest (ἱδρυθῇ,
Yonge, ‘are established’) on a firmer foundation (κραταιότερον).” Both 2 Peter
1:19’s βεβαιότερον and Philo’s κραταιότερον are comparative forms.
Third, a reference to Moses
as “the prophetic word” in 2 Peter 1:19 would be congruent with the context,
which alludes to the story of Jesus’ transfiguration, which involved an
appearance by Moses. Fourth, a Mosaic hint may also be present in 2 Peter
1:18’s “the holy mountain”: “we heard this voice borne from heaven, for we were
with him on the holy mountain,” ἐν τῷ ἁγίῳ ὄρει. In Leg. 3.142 Philo calls
Mount Sinai, the site of the matan torah, “the holy mountain” (Loeb), or “the
divine mountain,” ἐν τῷ θείῳ ὄρει. Fifth, and more remotely, 2 Peter 1:5–6’s list
of virtues begins with faith and virtue, ἀρετή, a very rare NT term, but
profuse in Philo, including in Migr. 151. If not direct dependence on Migr.
150–151, 2 Peter 1 seems at least to reflect Philonic influence. (Samuel
Zinner, email to Jeffrey M. Bradshaw, October 22, 2022, repr. Jeffrey M.
Bradshaw, “Understanding the Doctrine of Election: A Closer Look at the
Prophet’s 21 May 1843 Discourse on the ‘More Sure Word of Prophecy’,” in Joseph
Smith: A Life Lived in Crescendo, ed. Jeffrey M. Bradshaw, 2 vols. [Orem,
Utah: The Interpreter Foundation; Salt Lake City: Eborn Books, 2024], 1:239-40
n. 319)
To Support this Blog:
Email for Amazon Gift card: ScripturalMormonism@gmail.com
Email for Logos.com Gift Card: IrishLDS87@gmail.com
