Bad World and Demiurge: A ‘Gnostic’ Motif From Parmenides and Empedocles to Lucretius and Philo

Mansfeld, Jaap

doi:10.1163/9789004295698_018

Cited by 19 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, this assumption is not only philosophically questionable, 16 but also, given the argument I present in what follows, alien to Cleanthes' theology. 17 in Mansfeld (1979), 161 and by Long who also agrees with Mansfeld on this particular issue (see Long (1985), 24). Also, as Long has argued elsewhere (Long (1996), 302-4 discussed in Dobbin (1998), 70-1;and Long (2002), 160-2 and 171-2, discussed in Graver (2003)) the idea that god's power is limited is prominent in late Stoicism: see Hierocles ap.…”

Section: Cleanthes' Solution To the Puzzle: Conflagration And Platonimentioning

confidence: 69%

“…An extensive list of other places in which this view occurs is provided by Pease in his commentary on ND 2.40 in Pease (1958). The idea that desiccation yields conflagration is also referred to in connection with the Stoics in DG 469, 12-25 (SVF 2.599), discussed in Mansfeld (1979), 155 and in Long (1985), 26. It is a view that also has its roots in presocratic philosophy.…”

Section: Cleanthes' Solution To the Puzzle: Conflagration And Platonimentioning

confidence: 99%

“…They are mentioned by Cicero further in section 118: ultimately the whole world will take fire (ignesceret) because neither will the earth be able to be nourished, nor will the air circulate, its rising being unable to come about once it has exhausted all the water; thus nothing will remain but fire (ita relinqui nihil praeter ignem). 19 On the reciprocal change of the elements at the cosmogony in Zeno, see Stobaeus,1.152,6 (SVF 1.102), with discussion in Hahm (1977), 57-82 and in Mansfeld (1990). A detailed and extremely helpful comparison between elemental change in Zeno's cosmogony and in Cleanthes' (ap.…”

Section: Cleanthes' Solution To the Puzzle: Conflagration And Platonimentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Our present passage is the argument given in connection with (b2). For discussion of the fragment as a whole, see Chroust (1977) and Mansfeld (1979) at 138-44. 2 See Sandbach (1975), 79, Mansfeld (1999), 467-8, Furley (1999), 439, and Salles (2003, 263-7. 3 It is at least possible that the early Stoics in general did know of the paradox (along with the other Aristotelian arguments against the destructibility of the world in frs.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…19a-c Ross) and that they addressed it in their cosmology. For the view that this is not only possible but likely, see Mansfeld (1979) 138 and 159-72. Long (1985), 25 'wholly agree [s]' with Mansfeld on this particular issue (although not on others, see my section 4 below).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

'Eκπυ´ρωσιζ and the goodness of god in Cleanthes

Salles¹

2005

Phronesis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The §kpÊrvsiw, or world's conflagration, followed by the restoration of an identical world seems to go against the rationality of the Stoic god. The aim of this paper is to show that Cleanthes, the second head of the School, can avoid this paradox. According to Cleanthes, the conflagration is an inevitable side-effect of the necessary means used by god to sustain the world. Given that this side-effect is contrary to god's sustaining activity, but unavoidable, god's rationality requires the restoration of an identical world once the conflagration subsides. The paper also deals with the relation between Cleanthes and other early Stoics on the topic of conflagration. In particular, Cleanthes' position seems to differ from Chrysippus'. For in contrast with the Cleanthean god, who causes the conflagration as a sideeffect only, the Chrysippean god, according to an influential interpretation put forward by Jaap Mansfeld, causes the conflagration as his ultimate cosmological goal.In orthodox Stoic theory, the present world (kÒsmow) will be destroyed by god through a mighty fire or 'conflagration' ( §kpÊrvsiw). Once the conflagration subsides, a restoration occurs, known as the épokatãstasiw. In it, god builds a new world, exactly identical to the present one. But if so, why does the Stoic god destroy the world in the first place? In this paper, I explore one possible answer to this question -that of Cleanthes, the second Head of the Stoic school (331-232 BCE).The idea of a conflagration followed by a restoration poses several philosophical problems. But the one just mentioned affects the rationality and goodness of god. The problem had already been perceived by Aristotle while attacking the notion that the world is perishable (De Philosophia fr. 19c Ross = fr. 21 Rose 3 ).If [the new world] is like [the old], its artificer will have laboured in vain (efi dÉ˜moiow, mataiopÒnow ı texn¤thw), differing in nothing from silly children, who often when playing on the beach make great piles of sand and then undermine them with their hands and pull them down again. (Barnes/Lawrence trans.)

show abstract

Section: Cleanthes' Solution To the Puzzle: Conflagration And Platonimentioning

confidence: 69%

Section: Cleanthes' Solution To the Puzzle: Conflagration And Platonimentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Cleanthes' Solution To the Puzzle: Conflagration And Platonimentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

'Eκπυ´ρωσιζ and the goodness of god in Cleanthes

Salles¹

2005

Phronesis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

The principles of Marcion’s thought and their context I: God

Lieu¹

2015

Marcion and the Making of a Heretic

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Embodied God

Wilson¹

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This book focuses on God’s body in the New Testament. While there are various views in the New Testament regarding God’s body, this work argues that Luke-Acts stands out as an important example of a New Testament text that portrays God as visible and corporeal. According to Luke, God is a visible, concrete being who can take on a variety of different forms, as well as a being who is intimately intertwined with human fleshliness in the form of Jesus. In this way, the God of Israel does not adhere to the incorporeal deity of Platonic philosophy, especially as read through post-Enlightenment eyes. Luke’s portrayal of God instead finds more affinity with Greco-Roman traditions that conceive of the divine in corporeal terms, and above all, with the God found in the pages of Jewish Scripture. Moreover, Luke’s depiction of Jesus as an embodied being has both similarities and dissimilarities with Luke’s depiction of Israel’s God and points ahead to future controversies concerning Jesus’s divinity and humanity in the early church. Indeed, in Luke-Acts and beyond, questions concerning God’s body are intimately intertwined with Christology and shed light on how to understand Jesus’s own visible embodiment in relation to God.

show abstract

Bad World and Demiurge: A ‘Gnostic’ Motif From Parmenides and Empedocles to Lucretius and Philo

Cited by 19 publications

References 0 publications

'Eκπυ´ρωσιζ and the goodness of god in Cleanthes

'Eκπυ´ρωσιζ and the goodness of god in Cleanthes

The principles of Marcion’s thought and their context I: God

The Embodied God

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About