Divine Emotions: 11. Hellenistic philosophers on human

and divine emotions.

2. Anti-anthropomorphic tendencies in the Septuagint.

The God of the Prophets v. the God of the Philosophers

“I [Yahweh] have observed the misery of my people who are in Egypt: I have heard their cry on account of their taskmasters. Indeed, I know their sufferings, and I have come down to deliver them from the Egyptians…” Ex. 3: 7.

Originally published in 1936

Cicero on Providence• Many views are put forward about the outward form of

the gods, their dwelling places and abodes, and mode of life, and these topics are debated with the widest variety of opinion among philosophers; but as to the question upon which the whole issue of the dispute principally turns, whether the gods are entirely idle (nihil agant) and inactive (nihil moliantur), taking no part at all in the direction and government of the world, or whether on the contrary all things both were created and ordered by them at the beginning and are controlled and kept in motion by them throughout eternity, here there is the greatest disagreement of all.

De natura deorum 1. 1. 2-3; 1. 2. 5. Trans. H. Rackham, Cicero (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1933), 3, 5.

Nietzsche: Pity is a Depressant“Christianity is called the religion of pity. — Pity stands in opposition to all the tonic passions that augment the energy of the feeling of aliveness: it is a depressant. A man loses power when he pities… Suffering is made contagious by pity; under certain circumstances it may lead to a total sacrifice of life and living energy — a loss out of all proportion to the magnitude of the cause ( — the case of the death of the Nazarene)… Schopenhauer was hostile to life: which is why he considered pity a virtue . . . ”

--Friedrich Nietzsche, The Anti-Christ, 7.

Cicero against Epicurus:“Epicurus, however, in abolishing divine beneficence (opes) and divine benevolence (gratia), uprooted and exterminated all religion from the human heart. For while asserting the supreme goodness and excellence of the divine nature, he yet denies to god the attribute of benevolence—that is to say, he does away with that which is the most essential element of supreme goodness and excellence. For what can be better or more excellent than kindness and beneficence? Make out god to be devoid of either, and you make him devoid of all love, affection or esteem for any other thing, human or divine (neminem deo nec deum nec hominem carum, neminem ab eo amari, neminem diligi vultis). It follows not merely that the gods do not care for mankind, but that they have no care (neglegantur) for one another. How much more truth there is in the Stoics, whom you censure! They hold that all wise men are friends, even when strangers to each other, since nothing is more lovable than virtue, and he that attains to it will have our esteem in whatever country he dwells. But as for you, what mischief you cause when you reckon kindness (gratificatio) and benevolence (benevolentia) as weakness (imbecillitas)! […] Is there no natural affection (caritas naturalis) between the good?”

--Cicero, De nat. deor. 1. 121-122.

Four main Stoic pathē• distress (lypē), • pleasure (hēdonē) • fear (phobos)• desire (epithymia)

Richard Sorabji, Emotion

Peripatetic Cat facing the Stoic dogs

Metriopatheia v. apatheia

Four main Stoic pathē• distress (lypē), • pleasure (hēdonēe) • fear (phobos)• desire (epithymia)

The Stoic ideal of apatheia (does not exlcude eupatheiai) vs. the Peripatetic metriopatheia.

Divine Repentance• “And the Lord was sorry that he had made

humankind on the earth, and it grieved him to his heart.” Gen. 6: 6.

• “When God saw what they did, how they turned from their evil ways, God changed his mind about the calamity that he had said he would bring upon them; and he did not do it.” Jonah 3: 10.

• Also: Ex. 32: 12-14, Deut. 32: 36, Jg. 2: 18, 1Sam. 15: 11, Ps. 90: 13, 106: 45, 135: 14, Jer. 42: 10, Hos. 11: 8-9, Jon. 4: 2.

Divine “Non-Repentance”• “God is not a human being, that he

should lie, or a mortal, that he should change his mind.” Numbers 23: 19.

• “Moreover, the Glory of Israel will not recant or change his mind; for he is not a mortal, that he should change his mind.” 1 Sam. 15: 29.

LXX softens anthropomorphisms: Ex. 32: 14

• Hebrew: “and Yahweh repented (vayenahem) the evil that he planned to bring on his people.”

• LXX translation: “and the Lord was

moved with compassion”

Divine Anger in Gen 18: 30• Hebrew: “Oh, let not the Lord be angry

(yhar), and I will speak” • LXX: “let it be nothing (mē ti), O Lord, if I

speak.”

Divine Anger in Num. 1: 53. • Hebrew: ‘that there be no wrath (qetsef)

upon the congregation of the children of Israel”

• LXX: ‘that there be no sin among the

children of Israel.”

Isaiah 63: 9• Hebrew (one plausible reconstruction; many

textual problems): “in all their afflictions he [Yahweh] was afflicted (tsar), and the angel of his presence saved them: in his love and in his pity he redeemed them.” (KJV, NAS)

• LXX: “And he [God] became to them deliverance out of all their affliction: not an ambassador, not a messenger, but himself saved them, because he loved them and spared them.”

Conclusion“There appear to be then two streams of anti-anthropomorphic development in Jewish history. One goes its own way through the Old Testament into the rabbinical period, confined to the Hebrew and Aramaic languages and guided by ritualistic and theological developments within Judaism. The other, resulting from contact with Greek thought and idiom, continues until it becomes identified with the abstractions of Alexandrian philosophy.”

--Charles Fritsch, Anti-anthropomorphisms, 65.

Guiding questions for seminar:

• Identify the main components of Lactantius’s theodicy (esp. ch. 13).

• How does Lactantius formulate and answer the problem of divine anger?