"On the Giants" (Lat. De Gigantibus) is an allegorical interpretation of the text found in Genesis 6:1-4. In his treatise, Philo gives an allegorical definition of angels and demons, addresses the nature of God's Spirit, and attempts to justify a life devoted to the search for logos, or the mind of God which is ultimate reason (i.e. the man of God), the futility of secular learning (the heaven-born), and the hopelessness of a life devoted to the pursuit of hedonistic pleasures (the earth- born). While he seems to ramble and appears disorganized, Philo carefully develops his arguments and pays close attention to the text in question.
II. Outline of On The Giants
I. Interpretation of Gen.6:1. Humanity becomes wicked due to pursuit of pleasure.
II. Interpretation of Gen. 6:2. Discussion on spiritual beings who inhabit the air.
III. The origin of angels and demons.
IV. Semantics of "angels" and "souls". Interpretation of Ps. 77:49 (78:49 in A.V.)1
V. Definition of the Spirit of God. Interpretation of Gen. 1:2, 6:3 and Ex. 31:2.
VI. Definition of Moses' Spirit. Interpretation of Num. 11:17.
VII. How the Flesh inhibits the pursuit of Logos
VIII. A life in the pursuit of Reason and Virtue is the nature of the True Man (The Man of God) and a commandment of God. Interpretation of Lev.18:6.
XI. The futility of pursuing worldly possessions, fame, and corporeal strength.
X. Discussion on the polarity of irrational pleasure (earth-born) and Logos.
XI. The Sovereign Mind of God (Logos). Why reason and virtue cannot be separated.
XII. The importance of a life of contemplation. Allegorical interpretation of Ex. 33:7.
XIII. The nature of mankind: The man of God, the heaven-born, and the earth-born.
XIV. Etymology of Abram and Abraham. Discourse on the pursuit of Logos.
XV. The Hopelessness and futility of the Giants (i.e. Nimrod, Babylon, the earth-born)
III. Contents of On the Giants
Philo's primary concern in this work is the justification of his belief that the way to understand the "mind of God" and God's will within the Pentateuch (i.e., ?????) is through Greek philosophy. This is the base of the allegorical methodology that Philo uses to interpret biblical text. In On the Giants, Philo attempts to define human pursuits primarily through the text of Genesis 6:1-3,
"When people began to multiply on the face of the ground, and daughters were born to them, the sons of God saw them that they were fair; and they took wives for themselves f all that they choose. Then the lord said, 'My spirit shall not abide in mortals forever, for they are flesh..." (NRSV).
Philo's cosmology has at it's foundation the assumption of a three tiered universe in which heaven (which symbolizes the noble virtues) is at the top tier, earth, (which symbolizes those virtues which are not quite noble) is at the middle tier, and the netherworld (which symbolizes all of the pursuits which are not noble at all) at the bottom. Therefore, any pursuits other than those which focus on understanding the things of heaven are futile and useless in Philo's opinion. Even worldly knowledge, (college, i.e. the encyclia), is not a end unto itself but must be seen as a stepping stone to get to the pursuit of God's will in the Pentateuch via Hellenistic philosophy.
Philo sees the setup of the universe as a model of the types of people who inhabit it, and in so doing, the universe itself becomes a living breathing allegory of God's will for us. According to Philo there are three types of human beings: The Earth-born, The Heaven-born, and The God-born.2
This text in Genesis to Philo shows the danger of pursuing the pleasures of life, (i.e. pathos) which are feminine characteristics. If men pursue these desires, they demasculinize themselves and become feminine in their character. As a result, Philo argues that a "Philosophical eunuch" (my euphemism) cannot bear masculine children who will pursue noble virtues, but will only father offspring who are intellectual "daughters". These children then will only be concerned with the pursuit of base, primal instincts and will desert the intellect. These people are the descendants of Noah's sons:
"No unjust man in any case, begets male offspring in his soul; instead those whose thoughts are by nature unmanly, emasculate, and effeminate engender females. They plant no tree of virtue, whose fruit must be trueborn and excellent, only trees of vice and passions, whose shoots are feminine. It is on this account that these men are said to have begotten daughters, but none of them a son...".
While Noah and his sons are concerned with noble pursuits and were therefore "saved" from drowning in their own passions like the rest of the world, the descendants of Noah's sons do pursue these earthly passions and Philo refers to them as earth-born people. These people are those who, "...take the pleasures of the body for their quarry, who make it their practice to indulge in them and enjoy them and provide a means by which each of them may be promoted...". The earth-born are the fallen or renegade angels (heb. Nephilim, i.e. Giants) of biblical text, and Nimrod, also descendant of Noah's sons, (according to Philo, Nimrod is translated desertion) who is "...a mighty hunter before the Lord...", (Gen. 10:9 NRSV) is their standard.3
Philo uses the narrative of Abram and Sarai and the process by which God changes their names to illustrate the heaven-born and the God-born. Abram and Sarai, as they are, "...as yet unchanged from Abram [and Sari]..." are considered heaven-born in this state. Why? They have not devoted their lives to the pursuit of passion, but are still only trying to attain knowledge and wisdom, but still do not attempt to reach the nobler pursuits, according to Philo. These heaven-born are in Philo's words:
"...votaries of the arts and of knowledge, the lovers of learning...the heavenly element in us is the mind which pursues the learning of the schools and the other arts one and all, which sharpens and whets itself...and trains and drills itself solid in the contemplation of what is intelligible by mind..."
Philo interprets Abram to mean, "...the uplifted father a name which that mind which surveys on every side the whole compass of the upper world of heaven, called father-mind because this mind which reaches out to the ether and further still is the father of our compound being...". Therefore, the heaven-born are not in the same predicament as those who are earth-born, but they are also have not completed their spiritual journey either.
However, when Abram has reached the point at which he now contemplates on the logos, (i.e., the mind gr." nux" of God) 4, he and Sarai's names are changed from Sarai to Sara, and from Abram, the uplifted father, to Abraham, the elect father of sound, that is, the good man's reasoning...". True reason is the mind of God according to Philo, and is the pursuit of the God-born:"...They always remember God and never forget him so that even in their dreams no images are formed other than the loveliness of divine excellences and powers...".5
Another example of the God-born, or Man of God is Moses the lawgiver, who:
"...begins to worship God, and entering into the dark cloud, the invisible region, abides there while being initiated into the most holy mysteries. He then becomes however, not only an initiate, but also hieroplant and instructor of divine rites, which he will impart to those of pure ear. He then has the divine spirit at his side, leading him in every right way..."
IV. What Scholars are saying about On the Giants
There are three primary sources for Philo text. The Loeb series (Colson/Whitaker, 1929), while seemingly the most dated, is actually seen as the best translation of Philo's text for academic study, while Younge (Hendrickson, 1993), may be more accessible for the beginning student or layperson, and Winston (Paulist 1981), provides quicker accessibility for the academician and aspiring scholar. Loeb is more loyal to the text (and prints the Greek on the adjoining page) and attempts to keep the intangible logos of Philo's text in the translation. On the other hand, Younge, in an attempt to replace Loeb as the flagship text, is more concerned with making Philo's works understandable to a modern readership. Winston (Paulist, 1981), also gives a more up-to-date translation of Philo's text, but while being modern, is still more loyal to the original text and arguably gleans more of Philo's essence than Younge.
Goodenough (Yale,1962) attempts to "organize" Philo's works in a format that the beginning student can ascertain. In an attempt to help beginner's, Goodenough does not give much commentary on De Gigantibus, but gives extensive attention to On Special Laws, De Cherubim, The Contemplative Life and the influence of Plato's Republic on Philo's thinking. Goodenough also gives his advice to aspiring student of Philo's writings on what order to read them in and apparently, which writings to leave out, or avoid.
Goodenough has a well planned, well thought out methodology and is a good book to begin studying Philo, but does not pay attention to a great deal of Philo's treatises which were and are considered to be very important documents. In my opinion, if a student needs to read The Contemplative Life, they also need to read De Gigantibus. In essence, The Contemplative Life is an application of the theory/theology presented in De Gigantibus, but does not replace it.
Sandmel (Oxford, 1979), who was a student of Goodenough, also does not address the De Gigantibus corpus per se, but does give considerable attention to Philo's understanding of Logos, and to the nature of the soul. According to Sandmel, Philo makes a convincing argument for free will and rejects the notion of fate, since Philo's assumes that: "...the higher mind of the gifted man is capable of countering the bodily demands, it is [therefore] capable of choice, being able to counter the bodily demands or to succumb to them. The poorer the quality of a man's mind, the less apt it is to elect to counter the demands...".6 It is interesting to note that even though Goodenough was Sandmel's mentor, it would appear from the title of his work that (Philo of Alexandria) that Sandmel sees Philo primarily as a Greek philosopher, as opposed to Goodenough who saw him primarily as a Hellenistic Jew.
Placher (Westminster, 1983) explains the impact of Philo's theology in De Gigantibus. Unlike Goodenough who titles his work An Introduction to Philo Judaeus, (i.e., Philo the Jew), and spends over half of his book arguing whether Philo was a Hellenistic Jew or a Greek Philosopher who was sympathetic to Judaism, Placher relates Philo's influence to Ancient Christian culture and at least in this work, does not seem to be concerned with where Philo's primary allegiance lies. While Goodenough gives a fundamental methodology, Placher gives the aspiring student a good theological understanding of Philo and does an excellent job giving a working definition of Philo's lofty Logos concept as well as other Platonic and theological terms.7
Wolfson (Harvard, 1947) is a systematic categorization of Philo's writings by subject. There are few of Philo's titles in Wolfson's table of contents, but rather the table is referenced by subject matter as Philo would have described them (i.e. the twofold meaning of the term "Divine Spirit", Philo's description of God as "unnamable, ineffable, and incomprehensible"). Wolfson also gives significant attention to De Gigantibus in a section entitled, "Unbodied Souls or Angels", which at first glance would seem to be preoccupied with De Cherubim, but has more to do with Philo's concept of a three tiered universe in which there beings which inhabit the expanse (air) and some descend into bodies (i.e. angels, demons).8 Much of the section reads as an explanation of sections III and IV of De Gigantibus.
Both Painter (Abingdon, 1991) Pelikan (Yale, 1993) uses Philo (i.e. De Gigantibus) to explain the prologues in the Johannine Gospel, the book of Genesis and the effects of Middle Platonism on Early Christianity. John says that "Logos became flesh and lived among us (i.e. the earth-born)" and "to all who received [Logos] ...he gave power to become children (tekna Theou) of God...".9 The notion of Logos giving the earth-born (i.e. those in darkness) power to become children of God is a direct reference to Philo's God-born, who are "...priests and prophets who have refused to accept membership into the commonwealth of the world...but have been translated into the world of the intelligible...commonwealth of Ideas (i.e. Logos)..." (Loeb p. 475).
Pelikan (Yale, 1993) uses Philo's Logos to explain the "cosmological narrative [ho tes kosmogeneias logos]" of Genesis 1. Here, Logos is the power which does Elohim's bidding and creates the cosmos by coming down into it. In Painter's concept, Logos gives the earth-born power to become (gr. genesthai), but in Pelikan, Logos gives the world itself power to become...(p. 96). This concept can be traced back to Philo's belief that the God-born have to go back and lead others who are earth-born (pathos) or heaven born (ethos) to Logos.
Bruce (Erdman's 1990) is a very scholarly work which catalogs the various influences to the Book of Hebrews. Bruce also pays close attention to the differences and similarities between the author of Hebrews and Philo. Here is an excerpt of one discussion:
We never find in [the author of Hebrews] the least trace of that allegorical exegesis... the specialty of the Alexandrian School and...illustrated so abundantly in the works of Philo, a generation... than [Hebrews]. This contrast is the more marked because of the affinities in thought and language which have otherwise been traced between [Hebrews] author and Philo...There is much in common between the two writers...both for example, emphasize that Melchizedek, King of Salem is "king of righteousness" and "king of peace"...but their basic hermeneutical principles are quite distinct.... 10
Runia (1993), puts Philo's influence and his works on a Christian continuum and discusses Philo's significance and contributions throughout various eras in Church history. In much the same manner that Bruce compares the author of Hebrews to Philo and notes similarities and differences, Runia makes the same discussion with respect to Philo and Paul:
Philo and Paul had much in common because of their shared background of Judaism in a Greek world; their experience and the way it was brought focus in their thought set them far apart...A final subject...is the theme of grace... Once again we find a pattern of similarities and differences. For both thinkers, grace is centered on the relation between God and man. Grace expresses man's utter dependence on God...[but] Philo's views on grace are tied in with his views on creation and man's place therein. For Paul, grace is focused on the cross of Christ, with an apocalyptic-eschatological framework...".11
V. Importance of On the Giants
Why should anyone read the writings of Philo? Who cares what he wrote or what he said? After all, I myself am firmly entrenched within the Christian Tradition, I can see that Augustine makes sense, Luther, Wesley and Gandhi make sense, but Philo? How can Philo help me as a Bible scholar entering the next millenium? The truth is that while Philo was a Hellenistic Jew, who at times seems more concerned about Greek Philosophy that he does about Judaism, he greatly influenced many of the thinkers who have influenced me and have influenced the Christian tradition including the writings of Paul as well as the Gospel and Epistles of John.
John's concept of Logos shows that the writer was arguably influenced by Philo's belief that Logos was the ultimate form of reason and intelligence in the commonwealth of ideas which was the Nux, or mind of God. In Genesis, in "The Beginning" when God created the cosmos, He spoke a word, Logos which is the agent through which everything was made that was made...(Jn. 1:3 KJV). In John's Gospel, the Logos is the agent of God who puts on flesh (gr. sarx) and comes down from heaven to deliver humanity:
In the beginning was [Logos], and [Logos] was with God and [Logos] was God All things came into being through him, and without him not one thing came into being. What has come into being in him was life and the life was the light of all people......and Logos became flesh and lived among us, and we have seen his glory, the glory of a father's only son. (Jn 1:1-4, 14. NRSV).
One could contend that John's concept of Christ as Logos who leaves the realm of God and enters the human realm in order to lead others to become Men of God, whom John refers to as "...Children of God...(Jn.1:12 NRSV) is similar to Philo's Man of God who has:
. . . refused to accept membership in the commonwealth of the world and to become citizens therein, but have risen wholly above the sphere of sense perception and have translated into the world of the intelligible and dwell there registered as freemen of the commonwealth of ideas, which are imperishable and incorporeal.12
Paul also shows some influences of Philo's thinking in I Cor.11:10 when he writes: "...for this reason a woman ought to have a symbol of authority on her head because of the angels..."(NRSV). The first question that any reader should have is "What angels?" What is Paul's reference to in this text? It is difficult to find this reference in English translations of Biblical text, but in the LXX13, in Gen. 6:2, some earlier texts say, "Angels of God" instead of the "Sons of God" of most modern English translations.14
Regardless of one's level of understanding of Philo's works, it doesn't take long to see that there is a relationship between Philo's understanding of the Old Testament, Philo's understanding of Logos, and the Early Church's understanding of the OT and of Philo's concepts. I must also add that many of the concepts that Philo expounds on are not his inventions, but are beliefs and ideas that are circulating during his time. A good argument can be made as to whether the Gnostics (both Christian and Hellenistic), Macheans, or Philo are responsible for many of the notions of light/dark, "Divine Logos", and the nature of the soul that are found in NT writings.
Also, since Philo lived during the time of Jesus and died just as Paul was beginning his writings, it is highly unlikely that these two ideologies did not intertwine as well influence each other in some way. Stephen Neill stated it best in his book when he said that, "[...We must remember that the Early Church was a living breathing organism that was influenced by it's surroundings and the New Testament is a result of that interaction]...".15 Dr. Neill, I wholeheartedly agree.
Endnotes
1 Authorized Version, the King James Version, but Ps. 77:49 in LXX.
2 All Philo texts used in this article can be found in the Loeb Classical Library Series, Philo in Ten Volumes and Two Supplemental Volumes, edited by F.H. Colson and G.H. Whitaker, Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press, 1929.
3 Philo refers to Jethro as excessive vanity, since he has all daughters and no sons (Loeb p. 471).
4 Philo also refers to the ?????? (spirit) of God as the mind of God, "...pure knowledge, which every man shares..."
5 Philo, The Contemplative Life, section III, Loeb vol. 9.
6 Sandmel, Samuel, Philo of Alexandria: An Introduction, New York: Oxford Press, 1979, pp. 100-101.
7 Placher, William C., A History of Christian Theology; an introduction, Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1983, p.41.
8 Wolfson, Harry A., Philo; Foundations of Religious Philosophy in Judaism, Christianity and Islam, vol.I, Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1947, pp. 366-385.
9 All Biblical textual references are taken from the Harper Collins Study Bible ,NRSV, Harper Collins, 1989 (Meeks, et al.).
10 Bruce, F.F., The Epistle to The Hebrews, (Revised), Grand Rapids: Erdmans Publishing Co., 1990, p.28.
11 Runia, David T., Philo in Early Christian Literature; A Survey, Compendium Rerum Iudaicarum ad Novum Testamentum Series, Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1993, p.73.
12 On The Giants, Loeb., p. 475.
13 The standard academic abbreviation for the Hebrew Old Testament translated into Greek, the number seventy, LXX representing the number of monks who went into isolated rooms to translate the Hebrew text, who after coming to common agreement on their translations, deemed it an act of God.
14 LXX also references angeloi in place of huioi in Ar .
15 Neill Stephen, Interpretation of The New Testament: 1861-1986, 2nd ed., (ed. by Tom Wright), New York: Oxford University Press, 1988. P. 286.
