Search Results

This chapter examines the ripple effect of Porphyry of Tyre's arguments against universalism within the branch of the Ammonian community represented by Origen's heirs. In Porphyry's view, both Iamblichaeans and Origenists failed to use appropriately the exegetical tools that were the cornerstone of their shared traditions. Although he was most concerned to set out the proper way of living for those who aspired to be philosophers, Porphyry also justified the pursuit of traditional ethnic cult rituals for ordinary people. This chapter considers the implications of Porphyry's response to what he saw as Origenist deviance and argues that he was concerned not only with Origen but also with the activities of Origen's followers, his contemporaries. It also discusses the writings of Methodius of Olympus to highlight the tensions between Porphyry and Origenists. Finally, it analyzes two profound disagreements that separated Christians like Methodius from Hellenes like Porphyry: their understanding of how divination worked through the world around them, and whether the founding, divinely ordained legislation of a given political community could ever be abrogated.

This chapter examines the rift between Porphyrians and Iamblichaeans, the earliest evidence for which appears in Porphyry of Tyre's treatise On Abstinence. More specifically, it analyzes the debate between Porphyry and Iamblichus over rituals. Porphyry explains in On Abstinence the harmful effects of pollution (especially from eating animal flsh) on the soul of someone striving to live philosophically. Clues in the text suggest that Castricius, to whom the work is dedicated, abandoned Porphyry to pursue the philosophical life with Iamblichus. This chapter first considers issues of common ground and terminology among Platonists before discussing Plotinus's view of rituals. It then establishes what is known about Iamblichus's formation and goes on to explore the points of contact and disagreement between him and Porphyry. It also explains how Porphyry formulated his own theology for the return of the soul in a system that stipulated different practices for different types of souls.

This book has argued that the ideas and networks of a small group of philosophers such as Porphyry of Tyre, Origen, Ammonius Saccas, Plotinus, and Iamblichus of Chalcis strongly influenced the religious and political culture of the Roman Empire in the third and early fourth centuries and led indirectly to the Great Persecution. In this concluding chapter, Porphyry's fragmentary anti-Christian works and his purpose in writing them are examined. After discussing some of the problems complicating the analysis of Porphyry's writings against Christians, the chapter turns to some of his views, including those concerning divination and rituals. It argues that Porphyry's texts led Hellene readers, especially priests and officials close to Ammonian circles, to believe that Christians were a danger to the Roman community.

This chapter examines how Plotinus took Ammonius Saccas's ideas to Rome and how he brought into sharp focus the role that Platonist philosophy played in the third-century public sphere. It first considers the careers of Plotinus and Porphyry of Tyre before discussing the extent to which Plotinus incorporated Ammonius's teaching into his own classroom. It argues that the exegetical practices, charismatic pedagogy, asceticism, and deep commitment to the teachings of Plato so apparent in Plotinus's circle can be attributed to the eleven years he spent as Ammonius's student in Alexandria. It also explores Plotinus's desire to found a community of philosophers in Campania and Porphyry's belief that he ought to help craft imperial legislation that would emulate divine law.

This book traces the origins of the so-called Great Persecution, the Roman Empire's last and longest campaign compelling Christians to uphold traditional religious norms. Executed by the emperor Diocletian in the year 303 and lasting until 313, the Great Persecution seemingly conforms to a stereotype of Romans as persecutors and Christians as victims before the emperor Constantine converted to Christianity in 312. Yet this familiar image is not consistent with the presence of Christian courtiers in Diocletian's entourage. This book challenges the view held by most historians that the Great Persecution was inevitable, noting that Christians and Hellenes had lived, learned, and worked side by side for forty years before they became sharply divided by the turn of the century. It argues that Iamblichus of Chalcis played a key role in this shift, explaining how his dispute with Porphyry of Tyre laid the foundations that supported the Great Persecution.

This chapter examines the “Ammonian community” from its formation under the tutelage of Ammonius Saccas. It considers the role of Ammonius's heirs in the theology and politics of the late third century, and the growing push toward persecution, by establishing his identity and teachings. It argues that one heterodox Ammonius, and not two Ammonii—a “Christian” and a “pagan”—taught philosophy in early third-century Alexandria. It also discusses Porphyry of Tyre's account showing that Ammonius has perfected an approach to philosophy that became definitive of the Plotinian community in Rome, the Origenist communities in Alexandria and Caesarea, and the Iamblichaean community in Syria. Finally, it describes Ammonius's “philosophy without conflicts” as a way for him to achieve the return of his soul to its divine source.

This chapter examines the question of Origen's identity as well as his appropriation of Ammonius Saccas's teachings and how Ammonius's legacy evolved along a Christian path. It considers the testimony of Porphyry of Tyre and Eusebius of Caesarea that Origen the theologian studied with Ammonius Saccas in Alexandria. It also discusses Ammonius's influence on Origen's teaching and thought and contends that Origen adopted Ammonius's way of living and teaching and bequeathed it to his own students. In particular, it analyzes Origen's use of some of Ammonius's techniques for handling texts to set out his own “theology without conflicts.” Origen of Alexandria is therefore key to understanding both the wide-ranging influence of Ammonius's “philosophy without conflicts” and the new pressures that contributed to the Great Persecution two generations later.

chapter 7 explores how Julian clears the contaminating Christian contagion from the Antiochene landscape in order to facilitate Hellenic worship of the gods. The Christian cult of the martyrs and Christian daytime burial practices contaminated Hellenic worshippers who came into contact with the dead. To alleviate the growing threat, Julian employs a type of exegesis common in the city of Antioch that reads scripture in its historical context, employing grammatical acumen he learned in school to alter Christian perceptions of their martyrs. This is the only instance in which Jews are offered as a negative example for Hellenes. Julian also alludes to the recent Christian cult of the Maccabean martyrs changing the wording of Porphyry’s implied praise of the Maccabean martyrs for keeping their Jewish dietary laws to the words of the Apostolic Decree to remind Christians that these were Jews who died for their laws, laws that Peter insisted all Christians keep. By changing perceptions of the Christian cult of the martyrs, Julian redefined martyrdom as dying for one’s ancestral laws rather than belief in a “corpse.” His goal was to clear space for Hellenes to reach their temples in a state of purity and carry out efficacious sacrifice.