23; xii. 5, 11; xviii. 19; xx. 1; xxi. 20; xxiv. 18, 19; xxvi. 5, 14, 18; xxviii. 7,9, 11, 13, 20,

21, 22, 25, 27, 28, 35, 48, 49, 59, 61, 63, 68; xxix. 2, 4; xxx. 3, 4, 5, 7; xxxi. 5, 8, 23;

xxxii. 6, 9, 12, 36; xxxiii. 29; xxxiv. 1, 5, 10, 11.

Class II. Fair : Gen. v. 24; xv. 6; xvi. 1, 13; xviii. 17; xxii. 16; xxix. 31; xxx. 22; xlvi. 4;

Ex. ii. 23; iii. 8, 17, 19; iv. 12; vi. 8, xii. 27; xiii. 5, 17; xxxii. 13; xxxiii. 12, 22; Lev.

xxvi. 44; Numb. xiv. 30; xx. 12, 21; xxii. 9, 20; xxiv. 4, 16, 23; Deut. viii. 3; xi. 12; xxix.

23; xxxi. 2, 7; xxxii. 18, 23, 26,38, 39, 43, 48, 50, 51; xxxiii. 3, 27; xxxiv. 6.

Class III. Doubtful : Gen. iv. 3, 6 (bis); viii. 1, 21; xxii. 18; xxvi. 5 (bis); Ex. iv. 15; v. 2;

ix. 20, 21; x. 29; xiv. 7; xv. 2, 8; xix. 5; xxv. 22; Lev. xviii. 30; xxii. 9; xxvi. 40; Numb.

vi. 27; ix. 8; xii. 6; xiv. 11, 22, 35;xv. 34; xx. 24; xxiii. 19; xxvii. 14; xxxiii. 2. 38; xxxvi.

5; Deut. i. 26, 32; iv. 30; v. 5; viii. 20; ix. 23; xi. 1; xiii. 18; xv. 5; xix. 15; xxv. 18; xxvi.

17; xxvii. 10; xxviii. 1, 15, 45, 62; xxx. 2, 8, 9, 10; xxxi. 12; xxxiii. 9.

(Ad vol. i. p. 53, note 4.) Only one illustration of Philo's peculiar method of interpreting

the Old Testament can here be given. It will at the same time show how he found

confirmation for his philosop hical speculations in the Old Testament, and further

illustrate his system of moral theology in its most interesting, but also most difficult,

point. The question is, how the soul was to pass from its state of sensuousness and sin to

one of devotion to rea son, which was religion and righteousness. It will be remarked that

the change from the one state to the other is said to be accomplished in one of three ways:

by study, by practice, or through a good natural disposition

(µαθησις, ασκησις, ευφυια ) exactly as Aristotle put it. But Philo found a symbol for

each, and for a preparatory state in each, in Scripture. The three Patriarchs represented

this threefold mode of reaching the supersensuous: Abraham, study; Jacob, practice;

Isaac, a good disposition; while Enos, Enoch, and Noah, represented the respective

preparatory stages. Enos (hope), the first real ancestor of our race, represented the mind

awakening to the existence of a better life. Abraham (study) received command to leave

'the land' (sensuousness). But all study was threefold. It was, first, physical - Abram in

the land of Ur, contemplating the starry sky, but not knowing God. Next to the physical

was that 'intermediate' (µεση) study, which embraced the ordinary 'cycle of knowledge'

(εγκυκλιος παιδεια ). This was Abram after he left Haran, and that knowledge was

symbolised by his union with Hagar, who tarried (intermediately) between Kadesh and

Bered. But this stage also was insufficient, and the soul must reach the third and highest

stage, that of Divine philosophy (truly, the love of wisdom, φιλοσοφια ) where eternal

truth was the subject of contemplation. Accordingly, Abram left Lot, he became

Abraham, and he was truly united to Sarah, no longer Sarai. Onwards and ever upwards

would the soul now rise to the knowledge of virtue. of heavenly realities, nay, of the

nature of God Himself.

But there was yet another method than 'study,' by which the soul might rise - that of

askesis, discipline, practice, of which Scripture speaks in Enoch and Jacob. Enoch -

whom 'God took, and he was not' (Gen. v. 24) - meant the soul turning from the lower to

the higher, so that it was no longer found in its former place of evil. From Enoch, as the