What, however, is more i
CLEMENT'S VIEWS ON THE ORIGIN AND VALUE determination of these sources enable us to reconstruct a substan- ; (p) they have 'stolen' tial unity and coherence in his thought? own from the Old Testam 2. Why does he dwell at such length on the topic of the theft on Moses; of the Greeks'? Is his insistence due only to his love for erudition ?
(c) philosophy, which Can it not find an explanation in the vehement attack which ; stolen by some inferior p a non-Christian Platonist of the second century A.D. launched
' against Christianity, and which forced Clement to take up the As to the first solution, defence of his own religion? And—what is perhaps more im- : grasp some idea of God portant: in developing his polemic, does Clement resort to ideas bvowxh évvowa, Or 'commo which are also characteristic of his opponent? possess; in Strom, 1. 94.
3. How can Clement's attitude towards the individual philoexplanation as suggeste > e sophical schools be explained? Does it really depend on his éyvoray eaynkevat Tods "E Christian faith, which enables him to judge what is right and voov...3 but in Strom. v. what is wrong in the different philosophical systems?! Is it not own view: Oeod per yap rather due to the philosophical education which he received i maot Tots ed Ppovodar mav before becoming a Christian, and which plays such an important the Stoic origin of this d role even after his conversion?
| Antioch of Ascalon and 4. Why does he sometimes seem to speak as an 'eclectic'?Can What, however, is more i his 'eclecticism' be regarded simply as 'Christian'? Can it not shows a strong inclinati rather be traced back to a doctrine on which one of his explana- { connection with human tions of the origin of Greek philosophy is ultimately based? Is it
\ God. In the section of S g : hi é aan all wise men, owi not also a product of his cultural formation?
Nv to ~ 5. Is it possible to establish a sort of parallelism between the of Goa, i ae ee :
: q ; ' irrational animals also function which, according to Clement, Greek philosophy has | ra a , *, the history of mankind and the role which divine essence, he lays accomplished in the history o Mm pee sae 'bl it still plays in the formation of the perfect Christian who must it would be impossible t re
© attain gnosis? In other words: is the relation between Greek conception' since he al philosophy and Christianity in history analogous to the relation reason, which was bre rm between the study of philosophy on the one hand, and the inter- ! Sce SVF ii. 83, 106, 473 pretation of Scripture and gnosis on the other?
, these xowaé or duecxal évvoww ar tabula rasa—by experience, whe them sometimes mpoAnpets : se + "The solutions which Clement adopts in order to explain
; of Cicero, 213 (the note is conc be Se webb anil hy are substantially | x. 30). This doctrine occurs als the problem of the origin of Greek philosophy Ble with logic and epistemology : ¢ the following: snes alates ee viii ry : ity > ent ae anavres €xopev pvet (Strom. vii (a) the Greek philosophers have discovered some doctrines, reminds us of the words mens e and reached a certain degree of knowledge of some elements of movetur which reproduce the v divine inspirati : lor Antiochus' adoption ofthe ithe -mselves or by means of a divine inspiration; 'hus' adop' truth, either by the Y i Der Eklektizismus ..., 17, and Middle Platonism see, for inst 1 On this point see the Introduction, p. 3 above. ter in Uberweg-Heinze, Grund