t Strom. iv. 3.
+=PISTIS, GNOSIS, COSMOLOGY, AND THEOLOGY PISTIS, GNOSIS, C origin of the world must, in his opinion, precede that on theology:
He does not, however, l 1) yoov Kara Tov Tis dAnGelas Kavdva yrworiKis mapaddcews puato~ book, but ome e oyia, paov Sé éromreta, ex Tod epi Koopoyovias HprnTat Aéyou, his teacher and model. evb8e dvaBaivovoa emi 76 Deodoyixdy elSos. SOev elkdtws THv
| Jewish author gives in dpyiy ris wapaddcews ard THs mpodyrevfeians momodpueba yeve- | Legum Allegoriarum, and cews (Strom. iv. 3. 2-3, vol. ii. 249. 11-15). It is the study on the | the same interpretation origin of the world that represents the puxpd pvorripia which of the fifth, as well as must precede the peydAa puoripia or theology. Unfortunately
; the Stromateis. Clement's .
Pr (Ceanesis rr we do not possess a systematic account of Clement's views on the i| of Genesis shows also h origin of the world: he probably never wrote the work at which the world are related to .
DP) - 3" o he hints at the beginning of the fourth book of the Stromateis.?
Platonism of his time.
There are, however, in the Stromateis, a few scattered passages The pom on. tn which can enable us to reconstruct his thought on this question.3
{ and some exponents of The starting-point of Clement's speculations on the origin of are the following: the world is of course represented by the beginning of Genesis.
| 1. the distinction bet \ world, based on the Adyos SiSaaxadtxds, the second by the Stromateis, a second work dealing with i of the sensible thin duovodoyia, and a third work on theology), see. Volker's criticism, P. 29 0. 3.
2. the doctrine of matt t Strom. iv. 3.
(ii. 249. 8), Ta puxpad mpd Td peydAwy punBévres pvornpir, cf. é Strom. i. 15. 3 (i. 11. 21), dydy xal mpoaydy kal puoripia rd mpd pvornpiwv, and 3. the doctrine accordi Strom. v. 71.
(ii. 374. 1-3). C. Bigg, 92 n., is not quite right in identifying the but not in time. puxpa pvorjpia with the teaching of the Paedagogus. The Paedagogus does not deal with the study of gnosis, to which the pxpa jvoripra also belong. In the meaning
' as which Clement attaches to the expressions puxpd pvorjpia and peydAa pvoripia 1. In Strom. v. 94-5 (ii he is most probably under the influence of Philo, who had identified the puxpa
1. 1-3, év apy émo peoripia with the indirect knowledge of God, ie. with that knowledge which yi av ddparos ... Kat eire man receives from his works and the peydAa pvoripea with the direct knowledge of A, oF hi | him. This is the idea which underlies the passage of Leg. Alleg. iii. 100 (i. 135.
According to him, the o .
13-16) : see Wolfson, Philo i. 47. Clement's sentence 74 pupa mpé rv peyddev punber= mentioned in this passage : tes puornplwv, Strom, iv. 3. 1 (ii. 249. 8), is also worth comparing with Albinus, Did. the sensible earth, and t 182. 8, ef pédMe ra peilw pvetcbar paljpara, and with Plato, Gorgias 497 ¢ 3-4. bi ws hey 2 Clement may have dealt in detail with the question of the origin of the world gipie patterns 3 in other w also in his lost work 'Ymorumdces, in which he most probably gave an allegorical
Before quoting the words interpretation also of Genesis. larnow obpavoy ddpatov K 3 To Clement's views on the origin of the world modern scholars have paid
. 'en 86 p almost no attention. E. W. Miller, 506-35, does not examine Clement's depen945, Vol, Ul. 3
8. 1-2). dence upon Philo and Middle Platonism in the question of the origin of the he follows Philo very cl world. A. de La Barre, DThC iii, col. 155, limits himself to saying: 'La doctrine heaven, the earth, and t de Clément sur la création est généralement correcte en dépit de quelques réintelligible ides ae miniscences ou imitations platoniciennes ou philoniennes' (de La Barre's further intelligible ideas, mpairov remark, 'Clément veut trouver dans Platon la doctrine de la création é« jut) évros',
Kau ynv ddparov ... kal ém nese taapee investigation on the meaning of theeepreulen oh ie, wae "oe Opif. M. 29 (i. 9: 4 ff.). not hint at the creatio ex nihilo: see p. 195 below). b; . say much more than 'Bei Clemens Alexandrinus dagegen begegnen noch Spuren Both for Clement and | der Weltbildungstheorien der griechisch-hellenistischen Uberlieferung' (p. 154)of the sensible world onl
The close relationship between Clement and Philo has been pointed out only by 1O .
Heinisch, 154-5, 157-8, and 159; however, he has not examined the close agree- 'even n the identity between th ment between Clement, Philo, and Middle Platonism. n Clement and in Philo see p.