Texts in Conversation
The Christian theologian Alexander of Alexandria uses Sirach as an authoritative source to teach about wisdom and how it represents the foundation of all of creation, quoting Sirach along with other texts from the Hebrew Bible.
Share:
2500 BCE
1000+ CE
Sirach 1:2
Ben Sira, Ecclesiasticus
Deuterocanon
1 All wisdom comes from the Lord, and is with him forever. 2 Who can count the sand of the seas, the drops of rain, and the days of eternity? 3 Who will search out the height of the sky, the breadth of the earth, the deep, and wisdom? 4 Wisdom has been created before all things, and the understanding of prudence from everlasting.
Date: 195–180 BCE (based on scholarly estimates)
Alexander of Alexandria, Epistles on Arianism 1:4
Early Christian
comprehension lies the indescribable hypostasis of the only-begotten God. I do not think those who dare to inquire into these things should be counted among the pious, because of their disobedience to the saying: “Do not seek what is too hard for you, and do not examine what is too high for you.” For if the knowledge of many other things, incomparably less significant than these, is hidden from human understanding (as in Paul: “What eye has not seen, nor ear heard, nor has it entered the heart of man, what God has prepared for those who love him”; and God also says to Abraham that he cannot count the stars; and again, “Who will number the sand of the seas and the drops of rain?”), how could anyone inquire curiously into the hypostasis of the Word of God, unless he were overcome by madness? Concerning it the prophetic Spirit says: “Who will declare his generation?” And our Savior himself, doing good to the pillars of all things in the world, I mean the apostles who speak of God, was eager to relieve them of the burden of knowledge about these things, saying that understanding it lies beyond the nature of any of them, and that the knowledge of this most divine mystery is reserved to the Father alone: “For no one knows who the Son is,” he says, “except the Father, and no one knows the Father except the Son.” Concerning this I think the Father too says: “My mystery is for me.” That it is madness to think that the Son came into being from things that do not exist, having a beginning in time, is shown at once by the phrase “from things that do not exist,” even if the fools do not recognize the madness of their own expression. For the “was not” must be placed either in times or in some interval of an age. If, then, it is true that all things came into being through him, it is clear that every age and time and interval and the “when,” in which the “was not” is found, came into being through him. And how is it not incredible to say that he who made times and ages and seasons, in which the “was not” is mixed up, himself at some time did not exist? For it is senseless and full of all ignorance to say that the cause of something is himself later than its coming into being. For according to them that interval, in which they say the Son had not been begotten by the Father, precedes the Wisdom of God that fashions the universe; and according to them the Scripture that proclaims him “firstborn of all creation” also lies. In agreement with this the Paul too proclaims most forcefully, saying of him:
Date: 320–328 CE (based on scholarly estimates)
Search:
Notes and References
"... The principal method of Nalean’s interpretation is homiletic or kerygmatic. For him it is important that the truths expressed in his works penetrate into the readers’ hearts and change their insight ... His primary aim is to combine Christian spiritual teachings with philosophy and more scientific explanations of life. In many cases he refers to the prophets (e.g. Isaiah, Ezekiel, Jeremiah, Amos), the apostles (e.g. Peter, Paul, James etc.) as well as the holy fathers of the Church (e.g. Cyril of Alexandria, Gregory of Nyssa, Alexander of Alexandria, Augustine, etc.) incorporating along with them references from the most famous Greco-Roman thinkers, e.g. Plato, Aristotle, Pythagoras, Homer, Sophocles, Porphyrios, Seneca, etc ... Throughout his commentary on Sirach, Nalean implicitly shows his concern about the religious decline and social injustice that the Armenian community in Constantinople was facing ..."
Garegin Hambardzumyan, The Book of Sirach in the Armenian Biblical Tradition: Yakob Nalean and His Commentary on Sirach (Berlin: de Gruyter, 2016), 147.
* The use of references are not endorsements of their contents. Please read the entirety of the provided reference(s) to understand the author's full intentions regarding the use of these texts.
Your Feedback:
Leave a Comment
Anonymous comments are welcome. All comments are subject to moderation.
User Comments
,