The specific character, structure and vocabulary of Victorinus'
theological writings show that the texts were strongly influenced by a
Greek philosophical source or sources which are not extant and whose
identity is unknown. In recent years, some researchers have shown that
there are certain parallels between Victorinus' work and Porphyry, or
the anonymous Commentary on the Parmenides, or two anonymous authors mentioned in Proclus' Commentary on the Parmenides,
or the treatises of Platonizing Sethian Gnostics from Nag Hammadi.
However, all existing solutions of the problem of which sources
Victorinus used are questionable. Scholars often misinterpret these
texts in order to adapt them to their own hypotheses. One of the main
mistakes of the researchers dealing with Marius Victorinus consists in
failing to clearly distinguish between different metaphysical schemes
involved in Victorinus' theological writings. A comparative analysis of
individual writings of Victorinus indicates that they make use of three
metaphysical concepts which modify the triad being-life-intelligence in
three different ways. According to this thesis I will argue that
Victorinus used three different but cognate sources stemming from a
common intellectual milieu, which was an alternative to the Neoplatonic
mainstream. Moreover, the different structure of the metaphysical
concepts in Victorinus' theological writings which have certain
parallels in the Gnostic treatises Zostrianos, Allogenes and Three Steles of Seth
indicates that Victorinus' sources solved the problem of the
relationship between the transcendent One and the level of the Intellect
or the intelligible being in different ways.
No comments:
Post a Comment