Chapter/Verse	What It Says	Keyword	Philo of Alexandria (1st Century)	Jewish tradition	Samaritan tradition	Church Fathers (2nd – 5th century)	other Christian writers (2nd – 4th century)	early Islamic tradition	kabbalah (8th – 20th century)	Commentary
In Hebrew, where the concept first took shape, the word ish refers to “a certain person” — someone not otherwise specified. Later languages adopted their own terms to convey the same idea. In our tables, the rows are color-keyed according to this original Hebrew nuance of ish.	Whenever possible we quote the biblical line itself, anchoring Philo’s often-mystical glosses in the plain words of Scripture. Keeping sight of the verse that first spoke of ish keeps the discussion grounded.	A command of Hebrew, Aramaic, Greek, Latin, or Arabic is not required to follow the argument, yet an awareness of the linguistic bedrock is invaluable. Hebrew remains the cornerstone on which the entire literary structure ultimately rests.	Philo, leader of the Alexandrian Jewish community in the first century, traced his lineage to the exiled Oniad priesthood. The traditions he transmits are as ancient as any preserved in Qumran. In his pages Man emerges as the “second God of Israel,” a figure he names in many ways and whose profile profoundly shaped Paul and the earliest Christian writers.	The oldest surviving Hebrew inscription to the name “Jesus” is אישו. They appear on medals given to converted Jews in the sixteenth century in Rome and have been found all over Europe (Ireland, Poland etc). Sir George Francis Hill (1867–1948), Medals of the Renaissance (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1920),  XX.	John MacDonald’s (University of Leeds) doctoral work uncovered texts in which Moses is hailed as אישו, “His Man,” a title reflecting the northern tradition that Moses encountered the angel Man and was transformed into God’s own Man. This second power named Man stands at the heart of Israel’s earliest faith.	I argue in my new peer reviewed paper that Irenaeus depends on Justin’s etymology when in Adversus Haereses 2.24.2 references a Biblical acronym in Genesis 1:1 (Samaritan Targum) to give the name of the Christian Savior as אישוא. Irenaeus echoes Justin Martyr’s identification of the nomina sacra with the Hebrew word for “Man” and the Greek word for “Savior.”	Aramaic bowls have the name as אישו – “and by the name of אישו who conquered the height and the depth by his Cross” (Moussaieff 163:29; MRLA 2)	Josef van Ess has shown that early Islam, too, preserved bold anthropomorphic images of the divine. Within that milieu, a godlike Man—young, radiant, and enthroned—remained a living idea for many thinkers.	Man appears at the textual margins yet leaves numerical fingerprints: in the genealogy of Genesis fourteen fourteen, in the sign-numbers three hundred ten and three hundred eighteen, and in their reduction to אל, “God,” whose value is thirty-one. These coded hints point to a hidden second deity.	Knowledge of this second god was suppressed as monarchian creeds took hold. Rulers favored a single “Master of the Universe,” and confessing another power became perilous. The truth about Man was obscured, fragmented, and driven underground.
Pentateuch (generally)						(General: Law/Prophecy) Clement repeatedly insists that Christ was active before the Gospel “in the Law and prophets”, teaching and acting allegorically, but does not describe any explicit pre-Gospel physical appearances. (various: see below) Throughout (esp. (Clement of Alexandria Stromateis 6.15.122–126); Pre-Mosaic patriarchs (general) “The Word of God Himself used to converse with the ante-Mosaic patriarchs, in accordance with His divinity and glory”—again, the Logos “Word of God conversed” (Irenaeus, Adversus Haereses 3.11, §8); The Patriarchs The Word of God who chose the patriarchs is the same as the Lord of the Gospel (Irenaeus, Adversus Haereses IV.36.8); General (Patriarchs, Prophets) Tertullian states that the Word (“Verbum”), called the Son, appeared to the patriarchs “in the name of God” and was always heard in the prophets, and later became flesh in the womb of Mary. “varie visum a patriarchis, in prophetis semper auditum, postremo delatum ex spiritu patris Dei et virtute in virginem Mariam, carnem factum in utero eius et ex ea natum egisse Iesum Christum.” (Tertullian, De praescriptione haereticorum XIII.3); Christ as Man—Summary Statement Tertullian describes Jesus as one who lived “in the figure of a man” (hominis figura), hiding divinity beneath humanity, and perfectly exhibiting patience not imitating man’s impatience. “in hominis figura proposuerat latere” (Tertullian, De Patientia, III.10); (Allusion to the Patriarchs) Tertullian claims Christ was already learning to “speak, free, and judge” the human race in flesh before his Gospel birth—he alludes to Christ appearing pre-Gospel in flesh, but not yet subject to mortality. “non eum Christum recipientes qui iam tunc et adloqui et liberare et iudicare humanum genus ediscebat in carnis habitu, non natae adhuc quia nondum moriturae” (Tertullian De Carne Christi VI.8 p. 26); General OT/Patriarchs Tertullian says the Lord (Christ) appeared in flesh before nativity, in contrast to angels who appeared in human form for different reasons. (See above) De Carne Christi VI.7–8); Genesis 1:26; Genesis 3:8; OT Theophanies Tertullian says that the Son (the Word) was already with God at creation and was the one who appeared to the Patriarchs and prophets in the Old Testament, and that the Son was always present, conversing with humans, operating in the world even before the incarnation. “filius ergo visus est semper et filius conversatus est semper et filius operatus est semper” (Tertullian Adversus Praxean 15.10–16.3); Various (OT theophanies) Key Passage: Tertullian says: “We even profess that Christ always acted in the name of the Father, that he, from the beginning, conversed and had dealings with the patriarchs and prophets, the Son of the Creator, his Word, whom he made his Son by producing him from himself, and then placed over every arrangement of his will… from the very beginning he was disposed by the Father for these very things you reproach as human, learning even then to be man, what he was to be in the end. He it is who descended, who questioned, who demanded, who swore.” ab initio conversatum, ipsum congressum cum patriarchis et prophetis, filium creatoris… ab initio… iam inde hominem indutus, id esse quod erat futurus in fine. Ille est qui descendit, ille qui interrogat, ille qui postulat, ille qui iurat (Tertullian, Adversus Marcionem II.27.3–4); Genesis 3:8; Genesis 18:1–2; Genesis 32:24–30 Tertullian elsewhere claims that the God who appeared to the Patriarchs was Christ, alludes to Christ being manifest in the Old Testament via phrases like “semper retro visum” (always seen in former times), specifically in Colossians 1:15 (“imaginem…Christum”) “…filium semper retro visum, si quibus visus est, in dei nomine, ut imaginem ipsius…” (Tertullian, Adv. Marc. 5.19.3);	None explicit (pre-existence myth) Valentinian myth: The “Soter” (Savior), also called Jesus (Man?), is composed by the Aeons from their own spiritual substance as a cosmic figure before gospel events. Iesum, Soterem, Christum, Sermonem (Tertullian Adversus Valentinianos XXI.1; XXII.1; XXIV.1-3; XXVI.1-2)
Genesis 1:1	בקמאותא טלמס אלהה ית שומיה וית ארעה	אישוא (ʾĪšūʾā) an acronym, the name of the (coming) One.		same acronym appears in other Aramaic Targums: מן אוולא ברא אלקים ית שמייא וית ארעא	Gen. 1:1, 2:7 / Noah, Adam Adam, Noah as “foundations” of new humanity Adam/Noah as “second Adam”, not divine תניאן אדם (a second Adam for Noah) (Tibat Marqe IV §§93–108)	Genesis 1:1: The Logos, who is Christ, preexisted creation, made all things, and was present before all; he is called both “God and man.” ὁ λόγος, ὁ μόνος ἄμφω, θεός τε καὶ ἄνθρωπος (Clement of Alexandria, Protrepticus 1.7.1); Genesis 1:1, Jeremiah, John 1 The Son existed before the world; “the Son in the beginning,” “before the morning star I begat thee.” (Irenaeus Dem. 43) (109)	Albert von Le Coq, Türkische Manichaica I (Berlin, 1911), frag. T II D II 169; Yona Sabar, A Jewish Neo‑Aramaic Dictionary (Wiesbaden, 2002), 95; Dan Levene, ‘“…and by the Name of Jesus…” ’, Jewish Studies Quarterly 6 (1999): 295‑307; Shaul Shaked, ‘Jesus in the Magic Bowls’, JSQ 6 (1999): 309‑19.		has a value of 318, the number of the men which accompanied Abraham to conquer his enemies.	the real name of “Jesus”
Genesis 1:2						Genesis 1:2, “Fiat lux” (Let there be light); Isaiah 49:6, 9:2; Psalm 4:6 Tertullian says Christ is the persona of the Creator who said “Let there be light” and is identified as the “light of the nations”—thus identifying Christ as present in creation, and as the one seen by Moses. “persona autem dei Christus dominus. Unde et apostolus supra, Qui est imago, inquit, dei. Igitur si Christus persona (creatoris dicentis, Fiat lux…”(Tertullian Adv. Marc. 5.11.12)		Qur’an 24:35 (“God is the light…”), Hadith, Shi‘ite traditions God as a luminous, beardless youth seen in visionary encounters, e.g. in ascension/mi‘rāj reports and Shi‘ite gnostic apocalypses. nūr (نور, “light”), youth Early reports: Muhammad “saw his Lord as a beardless youth with flowing hair.” Shi‘ite theosophy: God as a young man. (van Ess, Josef. “The Youthful God: Anthropomorphism in Early Islam.” In The Implications of the Qur’anic Conception of God for Anthropomorphic and Anthropopathic Language pp. 12–14)
Genesis 1:26	וַאֲמַר יְיָ נַעֲבֵיד אֲינָשָׁא בְּצַלְמַנָא כִּדְמוּתַנָא (Targum Onqelos)	אֲינָשָׁא (reference to “man” not “Adam”)	Gen 1 : 26‑27 (“Let us make man…” Philo distinguishes two kinds of man: a ‘heavenly’ or noetic Man that is God’s image (an idea, bodiless, immortal) and the later clay Adam) διττὰ ἀνθρώπων γένη· ὁ μὲν γάρ ἐστιν οὐράνιος ἄνθρωπος, ὁ δὲ γήϊνος … ὁ μὲν κατ᾽ εἰκόνα θεοῦ γεγονὼς φθαρτῆς … οὐσίας ἀμέτοχος, ὁ δὲ γήϊνος ἐκ σπορᾶς ὕλης … ἐπάγη. (Legum Allegoriae II §§31‑33 Loeb V 189‑195); ; Gen 2 : 7 + Gen 1 : 26‑27 (creation stories compared. Philo distinguishes the visible composite man from the θεοειδές intelligible Man that is God’s archetype within us) ἄνθρωπον οὐ τὸ σύνκριμα καλῶν … ἀλλὰ τὸ θεοειδὲς ἐκεῖνο δημιοῦργημα (Quod deterius potiori insidiari soleat §§82‑85); Gen 1 : 26‑27 (man made “in the image” The archetypal Man‑according‑to‑the‑image is one of the many honor‑titles of the primal Logos, elder of the angels) ὁ κατ’ εἰκόνα ἄνθρωπος (De Confusione Linguarum §§ 146 – 147); Genesis 1 : 26 (“Let us make man in our image…” The plural “let us make” shows God addressing His own δυνάμεις; the “man” He proposes is the noetic, archetypal Man that exists within God’s intelligible cosmos before the formation of the sense‑perceptible Adam) ποιήσωμεν ἄνθρωπον κατ᾽ εἰκόνα ἡμετέραν καὶ καθ᾽ ὁμοίωσιν (De Confusione Linguarum 169‑170); Gen 1 : 26‑27 (God alone fashions the true man — “ὁ πρὸς ἀλήθειαν ἄνθρωπος,” a pure, formless νοῦς. The mixed, earthly man – made “ἄνευ τοῦ ἄρθρου” – is produced by subordinate powers) ὁ πρὸς ἀλήθειαν ἀνθρώπος, κατ’ ἐξοχήν ἄνθρωπος, τὸν ἀειδῆ καὶ ἄκρατον … λογισμὸν (De Profugis et Inventionibus 70 – 73)	Καὶ εἶπεν ὁ Θεός· Ποιήσωμεν ἄνθρωπον κατ᾿ εἰκόνα ἡμετέραν καὶ καθ᾿ ὁμοίωσιν ἡμετέραν (LXX); also Aquila of Sinope (140 CE) και ειπεν ο Θεος· ποιησωμεν ανθρωπον εν εικονι ημων, [και] καθ’ ομοιωσιν ημων. και επικρατειτωσαν εν ιχθυι της θαλασσης, και εν πετεινω του ουρανου, και εν κτηνεσι, και εν παση τη γη, και (εν παντι) ζωω κινουμενω επι της γης, Symmachus (180 CE) και ειπεν ο Θεος· ποιησωμεν ανθρωπον, ως εικονα ημων, καθ’ ομοιωσιν ημων. Theodotion (180 CE) και ειπεν ο Θεος· ποιησωμεν ανθρωπον εν εικονι ημων, ως εν ομοιωσει ημων.	Genesis 1:26–27 Spiritual/ethical likeness to God, Man in God’s image צורת הלבב (Tibat Marqe II, 1a); Gen. 1:26, 2:7 God created Adam with wisdom (Tibat Marqe II §34), Gen 1:26–27 “In the image of God” Adam/Moses Moses as the renewed “image of God,” recapitulating Adamic perfection Archetype (Tibat Marqe VI, 14 – 27); Genesis 1:26–27 Clement says the Logos is the “image of God” and the true “man,” and that the Logos is “the true light” and the image in which humanity was made, but again, not as a pre-Gospel Christ appearing physically. εἰκὼν μὲν γὰρ τοῦ θεοῦ ὁ λόγος αὐτοῦ (Clement of Alexandria, Protrepticus 98.4)	Genesis 1:26–27 Logos was the second divine being, later became a man ἀνθρώπῳ … εἰς εἰκόνα Θεοῦ (1 Apol. 62.4); Genesis 1:26 The Word/Christ was the one who said, “Let Us make man after Our own image and likeness.” Christ was present at creation, forming Adam (“Let Us make man in Our image”) (Irenaeus Adversus Haereses 3.23.2); Genesis 1:26 (“Let us make man…”) The Word (Son) and Wisdom (Spirit) were present with God creating man; not angels. (Irenaeus, Adversus Haereses 4.20.1–4.20.2); Genesis 1:26–27 The image of God is the Son; the Son appeared to reveal the image is like Himself. (Irenaeus, Dem. 23); Genesis 1:26–27 God says, “Let us make man in our image”; Tertullian identifies “image” as Christ’s future incarnation. ad imaginem dei fecit illum, scilicet Christi VI.4–5 (p.20) The clay/lime from which Adam was formed “already bore the image of Christ to come in the flesh.” imaginem induens Christi futuri in carne (Tertullian De resurrectione carnis VI.5) (p.20); Genesis 1:26–27 / John 1:14 Christ is the Word/Logos who “descended into flesh” and became incarnate, to restore humanity from the sin of Adam. This is not a “pre-gospel appearance” but the standard incarnation motif. at ubi sermo Dei descendit in carnem … et sermo caro factus est (“when the Word of God descended into flesh … and the Word was made flesh”) (Tertullian, De Pudicitia VI.16); Genesis 1:26 (“Let us make man …”) Tertullian says the plural “Let us make man” refers to the Son (the Word), who was with the Father and would become incarnate. “filio quidem qui erat induturus hominem” (Tertullian Adversus Praxean 12.3–12.4); Genesis 1:26 God creates through the Word/Son, not alone. “per quem omnia facta sunt…” (Tertullian, Adversus Hermogenem XVIII.3, XX.4)		Qur’an, Genesis echo; Hadith: “God created Adam in his own image/form” Early tradition interprets Adam as made in God’s bodily form; literal anthropomorphism. ṣūra (form), mithāl (image) Reference to Gen. 1:27. Explicit in early Islamic hadiths (e.g., Muqātil b. Sulaymān) that Adam looks like God. (van Ess, Josef. “The Youthful God: Anthropomorphism in Early Islam.” In The Implications of the Qur’anic Conception of God for Anthropomorphic and Anthropopathic Language, pp. 4–5)		the first Man was not originally named “Adam” but Man. A very early example of textual emendation.
Genesis 1:27		“Man” not Adam	Gen 1 :27 (“God made the man in the image of God”) quoted while explaining Bezalel Philo distinguishes three tiers: God → the archetypal Image (Logos) → the ἐν εἰκόνι ἄνθρωπος, the noetic, hidden Man that becomes model for the visible race) καὶ ἐποίησεν ὁ θεὸς τὸν ἄνθρωπον κατ᾿ εἰκόνα θεοῦ (Legum Allegoriae III. § 96–97) Gen 1 : 27 (creation of the first human. God first fashions the archetypal, bisexual, invisible “generic man” and only later molds the individual Ἀδάμ; the hidden, heavenly ἄνθρωπος functions as the divine paradigm for earthly humankind) τὸν γενικὸν ἄνθρωπον … ὕστερον τὸ εἶδος ἀπεργάζεται τὸν Ἀδὰμ (Leg. All. III §12‑14); Gen 1 : 27 (“God made man in His image” Philo says the “man” is the rational soul itself, stamped with the χαρακτήρ of the divine Logos – a living image of God rather than the clay Adam) κατ᾿ εἰκόνα θεοῦ τὸν ἄνθρωπον (Περὶ Φυτουργίας § 19); Gen 1 : 27 (Reading the male‑and‑female text, Philo treats the first Man made in God’s image as an androgynous, intelligible being prior to the bodily Adam) ἐποίησε γὰρ φησὶν ὁ θεὸς τὸν ἄνθρωπον, κατ’ εἰκόνα θεοῦ ἐποίησεν αὐτόν (Quis rerum divinarum heres sit §165); Genesis 1 : 27 (Philo distinguishes three “men”: (i) the heavenly εἰκών of God, (ii) the copy of that image, and (iii) within each of us the rational mind, “which is truly and in reality the man,” thereby positing a divine, supra‑cosmic Man that pre‑exists the earthly one) τὸν καθ’ ἕκαστον ἡμῶν νοῦν, ὃς δὴ κυρίως καὶ πρὸς ἀλήθειαν ἄνθρωπός ἐστι … τὸν μὲν ὑπὲρ ἡμᾶς εἰκόνα θεοῦ, τὸν δὲ καθ’ ἡμᾶς τῆς εἰκόνος ἐκμαγεῖον» (Quis rerum divinarum heres §§ 231‑233);	Καὶ ἐποίησεν ὁ Θεὸς τὸν ἄνθρωπον, κατ᾿ εἰκόνα Θεοῦ ἐποίησεν αὐτόν, ἄρσεν καὶ θῆλυ ἐποίησεν αὐτούς (LXX); Aquila of Sinope: και εκτισεν ο Θεος συν τον ανθρωπον εν εικονι αυτου, εν εικονι Θεου εκτισεν αυτους … Gen 1:27 [Symmachus] και εκτισεν ο Θεος τον ανθρωπον εν εικονι διαφορω, ορθιον ο Θεος εκτισεν αυτον· αρσεν και θηλυ εκτισεν συτους. Theodotion: και εκτισεν ο Θεος τον ανθρωπον εν εικονι αυτου, εν εικονι Θεου εκτισεν αυτους· αρσεν και θηλυ εποιησεν αυτους.	Genesis 1:27, Adam (“image of Adam”) “צורתה דאדם” / “the image of Adam” Creation in God’s image; discussed as four elements (Tibat Marqe IV 324–338), Gen 1:26–27 בצלם אלהים עשה את האדם Adam/Moses Moses as “in the image of God” (midrashic allusion) Moses as new Adam/new Ish (Tibat Marqe Book VI §§1–13)	Genesis 1:27 Adam’s creation & the sixth day He connects the creation of Adam on the sixth day with Christ’s death and resurrection on a “second creation,” (Irenaeus, Adversus Haereses V.23.2)		Qur’an 112 (ṣamad) “Ṣamad” interpreted by early exegetes as “compact, massive”—a bodily being, not hollow. ṣamad (صمد), muṣmat (solid) Cited as key evidence for “corporealist” views (Muqātil, Christian polemic). (van Ess, Josef. “The Youthful God: Anthropomorphism in Early Islam.” In The Implications of the Qur’anic Conception of God for Anthropomorphic and Anthropopathic Language, pp. 6 – 7)		the first Man was androgynous, “male and female he created them” was taken to apply to the Man in his primordial state.
Genesis 1:28					Gen. 1:28; 9:1, “ויחד אדם תניאן” (Adam as second founder) Adam as origin, Noah renews mankind, Adam and Noah parallel (Tibat Marqe IV); Gen. 1:1, 2:7 / Noah, Adam Adam, Noah as “foundations” of new humanity Adam/Noah as “second Adam”, not divine תניאן אדם (a second Adam for Noah) (Tibat Marqe IV §§93–108), Gen 2:8; Deut 30:14 “Garden planted,” “not in heaven… but in your mouth” Torah/Moses Torah as the “garden”; Moses is the prophet “like none from Adam onward” (Tibat Marqe VI 14 – 27)			Qur’an; Heresiography Specific claims about God’s human-like senses and dimensions: eye, ear, height “seven spans.” bodily measures, senses pp. 16–17 Hishām al-Jawālīqī, Hishām b. al-Ḥakam.
Genesis 2:7		The first mention of “Adam”	Gen 2 : 7 (“God formed the man of dust … and breathed…”) Philo explains the earthly man as a composite of “dust‑body + divine breath,” then immediately recalls the noetic Man again to show the contrast. «ἐφύσησεν εἰς τὸ πρόσωπον αὐτοῦ πνοὴν ζωῆς, καὶ ἐγένετο ὁ ἄνθρωπος εἰς ψυχὴν ζῶσαν· διττὰ ἀνθρώπων γένη…» ((Legum Allegoriae II §§31‑33 Loeb V 189‑195)); Gen 2 : 15 (“God put the man in the garden” Adam is set in the garden as νοῦς placed in ἀρετή: Philo’s allegory makes the first man the mind God implants in the soul‑garden) … καὶ ἔθετο ἐκεῖ τὸν ἄνθρωπον ὃν ἔπλασε … γάρ ἐστιν ὁ θεὸς καὶ τὸν νοῦν τίθησιν ἐν τῇ ἀρετῇ». Legum Allegoriae II §47 (Loeb V 213‑215); Gen 2 : 8‑9 (“God planted a garden in Eden” The garden itself = the ruling part of the soul; Adam/man is its resident mind cultivated by God) παράδεισος μὲν … τὴν μετάρσιον σοφίαν … καὶ ἔθετο ἐκεῖ τὸν ἄνθρωπον … ἵνα … τημελῇ (Legum Allegoriae II §§43‑48 Loeb V 209‑215); Gen 2 : 15 (Distinguishes two men in Paradise – the plastos earthly man and the κατ᾿ εἰκόνα man who is set “to till and to guard”) μήποτ᾿ οὖν ἕτερός ἐστιν ἄνθρωπος οὗτος, ὁ κατὰ τὴν εἰκόνα καὶ τὴν ἰδέαν γεγονώς, ὥστε δύο ἀνθρώπους εἰς τὸν παράδεισον εἰσάγεσθαι, τὸν μὲν πεπλασμένον, τὸν δὲ κατ᾿ εἰκόνα (Leg. All. II §§53‑55); Gen 2 : 15 (Returns to the same contrast later, explaining that the plastos man is “more earth‑bound,” while the made/ποιηθείς man is “more spiritual/immaterial”) τοῦ πλασθέντος διαφέρει ὃν ἐποίησεν ὁ θεὸς ἄνθρωπον … ὁ μὲν πλασθεὶς νοῦς γεωδέστερος, ὁ δὲ ποιηθεὶς ἀϋλότερος … (Leg. All. II §§88‑89); Gen 2 : 18 (On “It is not good for the man to be alone”: claims it can’t be good, because only God is truly “one.” Re‑states that there are two kinds of man – (a) the image‑man, (b) the man moulded from earth) δύο γὰρ ἀνθρώπων γένη, τὸ τε κατὰ τὴν εἰκόνα γεγονός καὶ τὸ πεπλασμένον ἐκ γῆς· … οὔτε δὲ τῷ κατ᾿ εἰκόνα ἀνθρώπῳ καλὸν εἶναι μόνῳ … οὔτε τῷ πλαστῷ …» Leg. All. III  §§1‑5); Gen 2 : 24 (“therefore shall a man leave…” Here ἄνθρωπος is the νοῦς itself: when mind becomes enslaved to αἴσθησις it “leaves” God the Father and divine Wisdom the Mother, clings to sensation, and the two melt into one fleshly πάθος) ἕνεκα τούτου καταλείψει ἄνθρωπος τὸν πατέρα καὶ τὴν μητέρα… (Leg. All. III §49‑50); Gen 2 : 7 (The “man” here is no mere clay‑figure but a composite whose true life comes from the divine breath, so the real, inner Man is of heavenly origin) ἐγένετο ὁ ἄνθρωπος εἰς ψυχὴν ζῶσαν (Legum Allegoriae III §161 Loeb vol. I); Gen 2 : 7 (creation of the human being “Man” here is not the two‑fold animal but the highest form of soul—mind and reason—made as God’s image) μίμημα δὲ καὶ ἀπεικόνισμα ἄνθρωπος, … ὃ νοῦς καὶ λόγος κέκληται (Quod deterius potiori insidiari soleat §§ 82 – 84); Gen 2 : 8 (“He placed the man in the garden” Philo says the man placed in Eden is “the man within us,” i.e. the νοῦς, which God plants among the choicest virtues) τὸν ἐν ἡμῖν πρὸς ἀλήθειαν ἄνθρωπον, τουτέστι τὸν νοῦν (Περὶ Φυτουργίας §§ 41‑43); Gen 2 : 8‑9 (two men in Paradise Scripture, Philo notes, does not bring in the “image‑man” but the formed man; the true, image‑man – a heavenly, incorruptible being – remains outside the story) οὐ τὸν κατὰ τὴν εἰκόνα τυπωθέντα ἄνθρωπον, ἀλλὰ τὸν πεπλασμένον (Περὶ Φυτουργίας §§ 44‑45); Gen 2 : 8 (“He placed the man in Eden” The “man” God installs is the inner man – the pure intellect (νοῦς) resident within us, not the historical Adam) τὸν ἐν ἡμῖν πρὸς ἀλήθειαν ἄνθρωπον, τουτέστι τὸν νοῦν (De Plantatione §§ 41‑43); Gen 2 : 8‑9 (entry into Paradise Scripture, Philo notes, does not bring in the divine “image‑man” but only the formed man of clay, showing that a higher, incorruptible Man stands apart from the narrative) οὐ τὸν κατὰ τὴν εἰκόνα τυπωθέντα ἄνθρωπον, ἀλλὰ τὸν πεπλασμένον (De Plantatione § 44); Gen 2 : 7 (Uses the creation‑breath text to split humanity in two: an earthly figure of blood and a hidden, spirit‑in‑breathed Man that mirrors God) ἐνεφύσησε … πνοὴν ζωῆς, καὶ ἐγένετο ὁ ἄνθρωπος εἰς ψυχὴν ζῶσαν (Quis rerum divinarum heres sit §57); Gen 2 : 7 After citing the creation of “the man,” Philo distinguishes two kinds of man—one made in God’s image and animated by divine spirit, the other a clay‑mould living by blood and pleasure—so that the first is a hidden, heavenly Man. «ὥστε διττὸν εἶδος ἀνθρώπων, τὸ μὲν θείῳ πνεύματι λογισμῷ βιούντων, τὸ δὲ αἵματι καὶ σαρκὸς ἡδονῇ ζώντων. (Quis Rerum Divinarum Heres Sit §§56‑58); Gen. 2:7 “And God formed man of the dust…” Two men: (1) corporeal, (2) intelligible, archetype; the second is the Logos, the hidden divine image. (QG 1.4)	“How is it,” asked Rabbi Abraham ben David of Posquières, a contemporary of Maimonides who wrote critical scholia to his Mishnē Tōrā, “that Maimūnī calls somebody a sectarian who says: There is only one God, but He is a body and has a form?” (		Genesis (creation of man) (The Logos, identified with Wisdom, is the creator of humanity, caring for both body and soul as the physician of all humankind) ὁ λόγος τοῦ πατρός, ὁ δημιουργήσας τὸν ἄνθρωπον (Clement, Paedagogus 1.6.3); Genesis 2–3 (Adam) The Lord, wishing again to free Adam, “being enclosed in flesh (σαρκὶ ἐνδεθείς), subdued the serpent (τὸν ὄφιν ἐχειρώσατο)”—describing Christ as physically present and active in Eden. σαρκὶ ἐνδεθείς … τὸν ὄφιν ἐχειρώσατο (Clement of Alexandria, Protrepticus 111.2–3); Christ is the one who “recapitulated in Himself his own handiwork” and “vivifies Adam” (i.e., Christ was present to restore Adam, the first man), but not as a character acting in a specific OT scene—rather as a cosmic agent. (Irenaeus Adversus Haereses 3.23.1, 3.23.7, 3.23.8); Adam’s formation, and God’s hands (Genesis 1–2) The Son and Spirit are God’s “hands” who formed Adam; but there is no statement that Jesus or Christ appears physically in Genesis, only that the Son participates in creation as Word. “hands of God, that is, by the Son and the Holy Spirit” (Irenaeus, Adversus Haereses V.6.1)The healing of the man born blind (John 9) Christ’s action of making clay and healing is said to be a sign of the same “hand of God which formed us at the beginning” (i.e., in Adam). This is typology—not a claim that Jesus appeared in Genesis. (Adversus Haereses V.15.2–V.15.3); The forming of man/Adam (Genesis 2) The “Word of God” forms humans in the womb and “formed the visual power” in the man born blind (John 9). He says, “the Lord who formed the visual powers is He who made the whole man.” No explicit claim of Jesus appearing physically before the incarnation—the Word is always the pre-existent divine agent, not incarnate. “the Word of God forms us in the womb” (Irenaeus, Adversus Haereses V.15.3-V.15.4); Creation/Formation of Man (Genesis 2) Irenaeus says that Christ “comprises in Himself that original man” (Adam), and that “the Lord did perform His command, being made of a woman, by both destroying our adversary, and perfecting man after the image and likeness of God.” (Irenaeus, Adversus Haereses V.21.1–2); Genesis 2–3 (Paradise) The Word of God walked/talked with Adam in Paradise, prefiguring incarnation. (Irenaeus, Dem. 12); Genesis 2 / Incarnation The Lord “summed up” Adam by taking the same entry into flesh—born of Virgin, as Adam was from virgin earth. ἀνακεφαλαιούμενος (Irenaeus, Dem. 32); Genesis 2–3 Adam and Eve are “recapitulated” (summed up) in Christ and Mary—obedience of the Virgin undoes disobedience. ἀνακεφαλαιώσασθαι (Irenaeus, Dem. 33); Genesis 2:7; Genesis 3:19 Christ as “the Word made flesh” is prefigured in the original creation of Adam; Adam’s flesh is already a type of the incarnation. sermo caro quod et terra tunc (Tertullian De resurrectione carnis VI.3) (p.20); Gen 2:7, 3:19 Adam as the first “man” made from earth; Christ as “man from heaven”—both terms refer to a real human being, i.e., flesh. homo…caro…Adam (man…flesh…Adam), terra es et in terram ibis (dust you are…) (Tertullian De resurrectione carnis, XLIX.2–3, LII.18); Genesis 2–3 (Return to Paradise) Humanity will be restored in Christ to paradise “where [he] was at the beginning”; but Tertullian does NOT say Christ was present in Genesis, only that the destiny is restored “in Christ”. totus homo in paradisum revocatur, ubi ab initio fuit (Tertullian, De Monogamia 5.4); Genesis 2–3 (Creation of Adam & Eve) Christ is called the “last Adam” and his unmarriedness is compared to Adam before exile from paradise; novissimus Adam, id est Christus, innuptus in totum, quod etiam primus Adam ante exilium (Tertullian De Monogamia 6.6–6.7); Genesis 2:7, 1 Corinthians 15:45, Isaiah 7:14 Tertullian repeatedly compares Christ as the “second Adam” to the first Adam, who was formed from earth, showing that Christ truly took flesh. “primus homo de terrae limo, secundus homo de caelo” (Tertullian De Carne Christi VIII.5–6, XVII.4 p. 36, 60); Genesis 2:7; Colossians 1:16 All things were created by and in Christ, including Adam and the cosmos—implying Christ’s preexistence and activity before the incarnation. “si non in illo condita sunt universa in caelis et in terris, visibilia et invisibilia…” (Tertullian, Adv. Marc. 5.19.4)
Genesis 2:8			Gen. 2:8 “Planted a garden… put the man whom He had formed.” The moulded man is the soul/body composite; the man in the image is incorporeal, self-taught, divine archetype. (QG 8)
Genesis 2:19			Gen. 2:19–20 “God brought the animals to Adam…” Adam, as primordial man, has the power to name—reflecting the archetypal, ruling mind. (QG 20–22)
Genesis 2:23		מֵאִ֖ישׁ (Because she was taken out of Man)
Genesis 2:24		אִ֔ישׁ(Therefore shall a man leave his father)
Genesis 2:25			Gen. 2:25 “They were both naked…” Nakedness as innocence, reflecting archetypal man’s uncorrupted state. (QG 1.30)
Genesis 3:6	וַתִּתֵּן גַּם-לְאִישָׁהּ עִמָּהּ, וַיֹּאכַל.				Gen. 3:6, Deut. 9:9, Deut. 30:19, אדם (“man”), ברנשה “to nourish the mind of man … Adam ate, prepared death; Moses fasted, prepared life” Contrasts Adam’s choice (death) and Moses’ (life/Torah). “Man” is Adam, (Tibat Marqe IV); Gen. 3:5 (SP) Avoids “like God” reading, makes Adam/Eve like angels“כמלאכיה” (“like angels”) “and you will be like angels” (not אלהים), (Tibat Marqe IV); Gen. 3:6, 3:16–19, שחתו אדם (“they corrupted themselves, Adam & Eve”) “corrupted in their lust, eating what was withheld … deed of Adam, origin of evil” (Tibat Marqe IV), Genesis 3, Adam Adam שבילה דאדם הלך בה (“path of Adam”—death) Adam as prototype of man and mortality (Tibat Marqe V, 5)	Genesis 3 Clement refers to the Lord as the same one “then and now,” judging desire even before the institution of marriage. This can be read as an implication that the same Lord/Christ who speaks in the Gospel also judged in Paradise. ὁ αὐτὸς οὖν ἦν ὁ κύριος καὶ τότε κρίνων τὴν προλαβοῦσαν τὸν γάμον ἐπιθυμίαν (Clement of Alexandria, Stromateis 3.14.95.1); Adam’s fall, restoration The Word sent to the place of Adam’s fall, breaks bonds, manifests resurrection, raises man to the Father. ὁ δημιουργὸς αὐτοῦ λόγος; ἐφάνη τὸ φῶς αὐτοῦ (Irenaeus Dem. 38) (104)
Genesis 3:7			Gen. 3:7 “The eyes of both were opened.” “Eyes” as vision of the soul; the rational “eye” (mind) is counsellor of understanding—a higher power within man. (QG 1.39)
Genesis 3:8			Gen 3 :8 (the voice of God “in the midst of the garden.” Philo contrasts the cosmic Mind (God) with the individual human mind, noting that the one who abandons his “own” mind confesses that nothing in the ἄνθρωπος‑mind has power) τὰ κατὰ τὸν ἀνθρώπινον νοῦν … ὁ δὲ πάλιν ἀποδιδράσκων θεὸν … μόνος ὁ ἀνθρώπινος νοῦς (Leg. All. III § 29–31);			Genesis 3:8–19 The Lord God (understood by Irenaeus as the Word/Christ) is the one who walked in the garden, spoke to Adam and Eve, questioned them, and pronounced the curse (but not directly on Adam). (Irenaeus, Adversus Haereses 3.23.3, 3.23.5); Genesis 3:8 (the Lord calling Adam in Paradise) Irenaeus says, “the Lord came to him [Adam] at eventide, called him forth, and said, ‘Where art thou?’” and that in the last times, “the very same Word of God came to call man, reminding him of his doings…” He makes a typological connection, implying that the same Word (Christ) who called Adam later “calls” mankind in the incarnation, but does not say Christ appeared physically as Jesus to Adam. “the Lord came to him at eventide, called him forth, and said, ‘Where art thou?’ …the very same Word of God came to call man” (Irenaeus, Adversus Haereses V.15.4, V.15.4-V.15.5)		Qur’an 112; Genesis 3:8; Genesis 18:1–2; Genesis 32:24–30 (Biblical echoes) Early Islamic arguments about “theophanies” as God’s visible bodily appearance, paralleling the Bible. “walking,” “appearing,” etc. p. 6, p. 19 Scriptural echo, polemic with Jews/Christians; sometimes identified as Christ in Christian/Islamic discourse.
Genesis 3:9			Gen. 3:9 “Where art thou?” “Sovereign and ruling element” (mind/man) as divine, hidden principle; sense (woman) as lower. (QG 1.45)
Genesis 3:12 – 13			Gen. 3:12–13 “The woman gave me… I ate…” The mind (hidden man) is misled by the senses; sense and mind as distinct faculties. (QG 1.46)
Genesis 3:15						Genesis 3:15, Psalm 91:13 The seed of the woman (Christ, born of Mary) would crush the serpent’s head. “Thou shalt tread upon the asp and the basilisk; thou shalt trample down the lion and the dragon.” Christ is implied as the one to fulfill this, so his action is anticipated in the OT… (“Thou shalt tread upon the asp and basilisk…”) (Irenaeus, Adversus Haereses 3.23.7)
Genesis 3:16	וְאֶל-אִישֵׁךְ, תְּשׁוּקָתֵךְ, וְהוּא, יִמְשָׁל-בָּךְ	אִישֵׁךְ֙(Yet your desire will be for your husband)
Genesis 3:17			Gen. 3:17 “Cursed is the earth for thy sake…” Mind is “divine inbreathing”; God curses body/earth, not the hidden mind/divine in man. (QG 1.50)
Genesis 3:19						1 Cor. 15:21–22; Gen. 3:19 Tertullian stresses the resurrection is bodily, “for as by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead,” making Christ a “man” in Adamic parallelism. “per hominem resurrectio … in Christo corpore vivificemur” (Tertullian Adversus Marcionem (Tertullian, Adversus Marcionem V.9.5)
Genesis 3:21			Gen. 3:21 “Tunics of skin…” Allegory: Mind (Adam) and sense (Eve) are divine powers; body is their tunic. (QG 1.53)
Genesis 3:22			Genesis 3 : 22 – “Behold, Adam has become as one of us…” Philo takes the phrase “ὡς εἷς ἡμῶν” to imply more than one divine interlocutor and therefore to hint again at the existence of that same heavenly Man who stands “among us” (God and His powers) and is not identical with the earth‑born Adam. «ἰδοὺ γέγονεν Ἀδὰμ ὡς εἷς ἡμῶν» De Confusione Linguarum 170‑171; Gen. 3:22 “Adam is as one of us…” Divine archetypes in God, likeness in man—the rational part is a reflection of hidden divine powers. (QG 1.54)			Genesis 3:22 “Behold, Adam is become as one of us”—a literal plurality; Christ included. ὡς εἷς ἐξ ἡμῶν (Justin Dial. 129)
Genesis 3:24			Gen. 3:24 “Cherubim and fiery sword…” Cherubim = God’s powers; man’s rational faculty is a participant in these higher powers. (QG 1.57)			Gen 3:24 (Messianic “angel‑man‑captain”; Justin reads Genesis 3:24 typologically to show the Messiah is both “angel and man and captain”) ὁ γὰρ Χριστὸς … ἄγγελος καὶ ἄνθρωπος καὶ ἀρχιστράτηγος … (Justin Martyr, Dial. 34.2)
Genesis 4:1 seminal		אִ֖ישׁ(I have gotten a man from the Lord)	Gen 4 : 1 (Eve’s cry “Ἐκτησάμην ἄνθρωπον διὰ τοῦ θεοῦ” lets Philo read the birth of Cain as the making of a Man that comes “through God,” signaling a higher, God‑wrought ἄνθρωπος distinct from the earthly Adam) Ἐκτησάμην ἄνθρωπον διὰ τοῦ θεοῦ (Περὶ τῶν Χερουβὶμ § 40); Genesis 4 : 1 (Philo rebukes the νοῦς for saying “I have acquired a man,” insisting that only God is the true cause of every birth; here ἄνθρωπος hints at a Man who exists διὰ τοῦ θεοῦ rather than through human possession) ἐκτησάμην ἄνθρωπον διὰ τοῦ θεοῦ (Περὶ Γενέσεως Ἄβελ κ. Ὧν… § 124‑126)			Christians who invented the “Virgin Birth” clearly got their idea from Philo’s interpretation of Genesis 4:1. In other words, the invention of “Man” inseminating Mary and making “Jesus” derives from an original literary understanding of Man inseminating Eve. It seems to start with Matthew 1:18-25. But the reality is that Justin is most associated with the idea even though his only student we know of – Tatian – shares a gospel form with him (the “gospel harmony”) which according to our only reliable testimony, did not have a virgin birth narrative (contra Crawford and others). The writings of Justin were reworked between 192 – 197 CE (cf. Williams), the Virgin birth goes back to Irenaeus’s witness in Book Three. Perhaps it was invented in the second half of the second century which is when the figure of “Jesus” is likely first established in Valentinian circles. late 2nd century (Theophilus of Antioch, Ad Autol. II 28–29) sees “διὰ τοῦ Θεοῦ” as prophetic of the incarnation of a divine “Man-God,” strongly paralleling Philo’s notion of divine causation; late 2nd century (Clement of Alexandria, Strom. III 104; Exc. ex Theod. 54). Eve mistakenly identifies Cain as the promised Lord (κύριος), suggesting divine origin. Similar to Philo in emphasizing divine agency); late 2nd century (Irenaeus, Demonstr. 17; AH III 23.7) Interprets Eve’s statement as believing she bore the Christ, the seed promised by God. Close to Philo’s idea of divine causation; early 3rd century (Tertullian, De monog. 5; Ps-Tertullian, Adv. omn. haer. 2) Explicit Christological reading: “virum Deum peperi” (I have borne a man-God), clearly parallels Philo’s divine causation concept; 3rd Commodianus, Carm. apol. 156 Yes Follows Tertullian closely in reading the verse prophetically of Christ’s divine-human origin. Aligns strongly with Philo’s view; 3rd Origen, Hom. in Gen. I.17; QG Gen. I.58 Yes Strongly emphasizes the Logos as the true “man” begotten through divine rather than human seed. Explicitly resonates with Philo’s divine-generation motif. early 4th Lactantius, Epit. Div. Inst. 4 (= 22) §7 Yes Regards this verse explicitly as the first oracle predicting Christ’s divine birth, closely matching Philo’s divine causation. 4th Athanasius, De incarn. Verbi 35.7 Yes Uses the verse to argue that from the beginning the incarnation (Logos-Man) was expected through divine agency. Very close to Philo’s notion. 4th Didymus the Blind, Comm. in Gen. §§117–119 Yes Interprets the “man” explicitly as the pre-existent Logos assuming flesh through divine rather than human origin. Matches Philo’s interpretation. 4th Basil of Caesarea, Contra Eun. II.20 Yes Claims the verse shows the Only-Begotten (μονογενής) already called “Man,” clearly suggesting divine agency in conception. Aligns strongly with Philo. 4th Gregory of Nyssa, Contra Eun. I.496; De virg. 12.4 Yes “Man” as archetypal Christ and source of new creation; strongly implies divine origin akin to Philo’s interpretation. 4th Gregory Nazianzen, Carmina theol. 2.1 (ll. 448 & 492) Yes Poetic gloss explicitly interpreting Eve’s words as foretelling a “Man-God” (θεάνθρωπος). Matches closely Philo’s divine-agency interpretation. 4th Epiphanius, Panar. 39.4–5 Yes Uses the verse explicitly as prophetic scriptural witness to Christ as God-Man. Strongly aligns with Philo’s emphasis on divine causation. 4th Ambrose, De Cain et Abel I.2; I.10 Yes Reads “virum per Deum” as explicitly prophetic of Christ as divine-human offspring. Aligns with Philo’s divine-generation interpretation. 4th Jerome, Quaest. Hebr. in Gen. 4.1 Yes Prefers LXX “per Deum” explicitly interpreting the phrase prophetically of the future divine birth of Christ. Closely parallels Philo’s concept.
Genesis 4:6						Genesis 4:6–16 The Lord God (again, implied to be the Word/Christ) is the one who counsels and rebukes Cain after Abel’s murder. (Irenaeus Adversus Haereses 3.23.4)
Genesis 4:24						Matt 18:22; Gen 4:24 (Lamech) Christ commands to forgive seventy times seven, as a reversal of vengeance in Genesis (Lamech); he reforms the law for the better. septuagies septies…Genesi…Lamech (Tertullian, De Oratione §7)
Genesis 4:26			Gen 4 : 26 Enosh Because Enosh’s name means “Man,” Philo reads the verse as teaching that Man properly lives by hope in God. Ἐνὼς — ἑρμηνεύεται ἄνθρωπος — ἐλπίς … αὕτη ἡ βίβλος γενέσεως ἀνθρώπων (Quod deterius potiori insidiari soleat §§138‑139); Gen 4 : 26 (Enōs – Philo turns the etymology of Ἐνώς (“Man”) into a doctrine: true ἄνθρωπος is the soul that hopes in God, whereas the hopeless person “is not man at all) Ἐνὼς — ἑρμηνεύεται ἄνθρωπος — ἐλπὶς … αὕτη ἡ βίβλος γενέσεως ἀνθρώπων … ὁ δύσελπις οὐκ ἄνθρωπος (De Agricultura §§138‑140); Gen 4:26 “Enosh is interpreted as ‘man’.” Man as the rational faculty (mind), locus of hope. (QG I.79)
Genesis 5:1			Gen 4 : 26 – 5 : 1 (Enōsh and “This is the book of the generations of men” Philo explains that Scripture reserves the title ἄνθρωπος for Enōsh because he alone lives by hopeful trust in God; anyone without that hope is “a man‑shaped beast,” not truly human) «τὸν πρῶτον ἐλπίδος ἐραστὴν προσεῖπεν ἄνθρωπον» … «ὡς μόνου … ἀνθρώπου πρὸς ἀλήθειαν ὄντος» (On Abraham §§ 7‑10); Gen 5:1 “Generation of men” Man as the being with “extraordinary hope” (a divine trait) (QG I.80)
Genesis 5:22			Gen 5:22–24 “Enoch was pleasing to God…” Man (at highest) is translated to the spiritual realm (QG I.82–86)		Gen. 5:24, Enoch: “חנוך התהלך בריחות אלהה” “Enoch walked with God” Righteous man, cited as example (Tibat Marqe IV)
Genesis 6:3			In §32–33 Philo explicitly introduces an allegorical notion of a “true” or “real” man (ἀληθινὸς ἄνθρωπος), defined by spiritual virtue, set apart from bodily or earthly man. This parallels his treatment of divine causation and spiritual “man” elsewhere, notably similar to his reading in Genesis 4:1. Genesis 6:3 In §§19 and 53–56 Philo further contrasts ordinary humanity (fleshly men) negatively against exceptional humans (like Moses), who represent divine reason and virtue. Here, again, the “real man” closely approximates a Logos-like or divinely enlightened individual; Genesis 6:3 God’s spirit can remain only in one single “species” of men—the stripped‑bare intellect that reaches Him) μόνῳ δὲ ἀνθρώπων εἴδει ἑνί παραγίνεται… γυμνῇ τῇ διανοίᾳ πρὸς θεὸν ἀφίξεται» (De Gig. 53‑54); Gen 6:3 “My spirit shall not remain…” Divine spirit is intelligence/wisdom, can reside in man (QG I.90); Gen 6 : 4 (“οὗτοί εἰσιν οἱ γίγαντες…” Philo ranks mankind in three orders; the third are “men of God,” wholly transferred to the intelligible realm. «οἱ μὲν γῆς… οἱ δὲ οὐρανοῦ… θεοῦ δὲ ἄνθρωποι ἱερεῖς καὶ προφῆται (De Gig. 60‑61); Gen 6:4 “Giants born from angels/women” “Sons of God” = spiritual men; “man” as aspirant to divinity QG I.92			The Alexandrian tradition clearly read Philo and borrowed from him. Clement of Alex. – Strom. VI 84 7 God’s Spirit leaves the σάρκινοι while remaining in the perfect, rational man; life-span text turned into moral allegory. Origen – Quaest. in Gen. I 90; frgs. in catenæ “Spirit” = divine Wisdom; it “remains” only in the stripped-down νοῦς. Ordinary men are merely flesh, the one ‘species of man’ fit for God is spiritual. Didymus the Blind – Comm. in Gen. II §§ 152-157 & passim Repeats Origen almost verbatim; calls the pneumatophoros the πνευματικός ἄνθρωπος.Didymus – De Trinitate II 2-3 Verse proves that the Spirit’s temple is the rational soul, not the fleshly man. Arnobius Siccaensis’ Aduersus nationes (ca. 303–310; apologetics; Clavis 93; Marchesi edition, Arnobii adversus nationes libri VII, Turin 1953; reference at Book 2, p. 150, line 10, BP2) leads into Commodianus’ Carmen apologeticum (or Carmen de duobus populis, ca. 201–500; apologetics; Clavis 1471; Martin I., CCL 128 [1960], pp. 73–113; reference p. 80, line 184, BP2) and Lactantius’ Divinae Institutiones (ca. 304–311; apologetics; Clavis 85; Brandt, CSEL 19 [1890], pp. 1–672; references Book 2 § 23, p. 160, line 9; Book 2 § 3, p. 160, line 23, BP2) followed by his Epitome Divinarum Institutionum (ca. 314–321; apologetics; Clavis 86; same edition; reference Book 22 § 5, p. 695, line 2, BP2). Next is Tertullianus’ De monogamia (ca. 213–217; Christian life; Clavis 28; Dekkers, CCL 2 [1954], pp. 1229–1253; reference § 3, p. 1229, line 23, BP1) and De resurrectione mortuorum (ca. 208–212; undetermined theme; Clavis 19; Borleffs, CCL 2 [1954], pp. 921–1012; reference § 2, p. 933, line 5, BP1). Then Athanasius Alexandrinus’ Epistulae ad Serapionem (ca. 358–360; theology; Clavis 2094; reference § 5, p. 540+, BPH) followed by the possible Homilia adversus Arium, de sancta genetrice Dei Maria (Coptic) (ca. 330–400; dogma; Clavis 2187; Lefort, Turin papyrus edition [1958], pp. 209–239; references p. 226, line 36+ and p. 227, line 2+, BPH). Clemens Alexandrinus’ Stromata (ca. 190–215; faith and reflection; Clavis 1377; Staehelin & Fruechtel GCS 52/17; Book 6 § 7, p. 474, line 1, BP1) is followed by Didymus Alexandrinus with Commentarii in Genesim II (ca. 350–398; exegesis; Clavis 2546; Nautin & Doutreleau SC 244 [1978]; §§ 146 through 157 spanning pp. 12–36, BP7), Commentarii in Zachariam (ca. 387–393; exegesis; Clavis 2549; SC 83–85 [1962]; Book 4 p. 956, line 8+, BP7), Fragmenta in Epistulam secundam ad Corinthios in catenis (ca. 350–398; exegesis; Clavis 2560; Staab Münster 1933, pp. 14–44; p. 36, line 22+, BP7), Fragmenta in Psalmos (two fragments; ca. 350–398; exegesis; Clavis 2551; Muhlenberg 1977; § 929 p. 198, line 20+, § 1152 p. 298, line 20+, BP7), and In epistulas catholicas brevis enarratio (ca. 350–398; exegesis; Clavis 2562; Zoepfl 1914; p. 24, line 8+, BP7). Possibly attributed to him: De trinitate (PG 39) (ca. 350–450; theology; Clavis 2570; PG 39 [1858], pp. 600–992; Book 2 § 20 p. 740, Book 3 § 31 p. 957+, BP7), and De trinitate II, 1–7 (ca. 350–450; theology; same Clavis; Seiler 1975; Book 2 sections p. 18, p. 26, p. 38, p. 54+, BP7). Finally Iulius Africanus’ Chronographiae (ca. 201–250; ecclesiastical history; Clavis 1690; Routh 1846 pp. 238–309; p. 242, line 9, BP2).	Marinus (likely originally Megethius the Marcionite) argues that Genesis 6:3 proves that there is no fleshly resurrection (presumably because “Adam” is used throughout rather than Ish) (Pretty p. 173). Marinus/Megethius’s understanding the same as Philo QG: What is the meaning of the expression, “My spirit shall not always strive with man, because he is but flesh?” (#Ge 6:3). An oracle is here promulgated as if it were a law; for the divine spirit is not a motion of the air, but intellect and wisdom; just as it also flows over the man who with great skill constructed the tabernacle of the Lord, namely upon Bezaleel, when the scripture says, “And he filled him with the divine spirit of wisdom and understanding.” Therefore that spirit comes upon men, but does not abide or persevere in them; and the Lord himself adds the reason, when he says, “Because they are flesh.” For the disposition of the flesh is inconsistent with wisdom, inasmuch as it makes a bond of alliance with desire; on which account it is evident that nothing important can be in the way of incorporeal and light souls, or can be any hindrance to their discerning and comprehending the condition of nature, because a pure disposition is acquired together with constancy.”
Genesis 6:7			Gen 6:7 “I am angry I made them” Only “man” can misuse rational/divine image (QG I.95)
Genesis 6:9		אִישׁ (Noah was in his generations a righteous man)	Gen 6 : 9 (“Noah, a righteous man, perfect in his generation” By calling Noah ἄνθρωπος, Philo makes “man” the badge of the righteous mind: only the just person deserves the name, whereas the unjust are merely man‑like animals) «Νῶε ἄνθρωπος δίκαιος» … «νῦν ἄνθρωπον οὐ κοινῷ τύπῳ … καλεῖ, τὸν μὲντοι κατ᾽ ἐξοχήν» (De Abrahamo §§ 32‑34); Gen 6:9 “Noah was righteous…” True “man” is soul/virtue; virtues = real generation (QG I.97)		Genesis 6:9, Noah “נח איש צדיק ותמים” / “Noah was a righteous man and perfect” (Tibat Marqe IV: 324–338)	Didymus the Blind, Comm. in Gen. II §§ 163-198; Comm. in Zach. 4 (p. 942); catena-frg. § 645 — reiterates the Origen-Philo line that the title ἄνθρωπος belongs only to the soul perfected in justice, calling the lawless mere man-shaped beasts and treating the name “man” as an honorific of virtue. Origen, Hom. in Gen. 2; Fragm. in Gen. B; Comm. Rom. 5 § 1; Comm. Joh. 20 § 12; Comm. Philem. and related passages — consistently allegorises Gen 6:9 in the Philonic manner: Noah is called ἄνθρωπος κατ’ ἐξοχήν because his rational soul “found grace,” whereas the unjust do not yet deserve the name “man.”Pseudo‑Cyprian (Carthaginiensis), Adversus Iudaeos, Book 2 § 2, p. 266, line 8 (CCL 4). Cyprian of Carthage, De lapsis, section 19, p. 232, line 386 (CCL 4). Lactantius, Divinae Institutiones, Book 2 § 11, p. 149, line 1 (CSEL 19). Athanasius Alexandrinus, Orationes contra Arianos, Book 2 § 51, p. 256 (PG 26). Athanasius Alexandrinus, Sermo de patientia, § 4, p. 1301 (PG 26). Didymus Alexandrinus, Commentarii in Genesim II, §§ 163–198, pp. 50–134 (SC 244). Didymus Alexandrinus, Commentarii in Zachariam, Book 4 p. 942, line 3 (SC 83–85). Didymus Alexandrinus, Fragmenta e catenis in Genesim 4–11, § 645, p. 91, line 5 (Traditio exegetica graeca 2). Iulius Africanus, Chronographiae, p. 242, line 14 (Routh, Reliquiae sacrae). Origen, Commentarii in epistulam ad Romanos, p. 198, line 5 (PG 14). Origen, Commentarii in Iohannem, Book 20 § 12, p. 329, line 29 (GCS 10). Origen, Commentarii in Romanos A, Book 5 § 1, p. 1012 (PG 14). Origen, Commentarius in Philemonem, p. 592 (PG 17). Origen, Fragmenta e catenis in Genesim B, p. 104 (PG 12). Origen, Fragmenta e catenis in Ieremiam, p. 231, line 8 (GCS 6). Origen, In Ezechielem homiliae XIV, Book 4 p. 364, line 16; p. 365, line 19 (GCS 33). Origen, In Genesim homiliae XVI, Book 2 p. 30, line 16 (GCS 29). Origen, In Iesu Nave homiliae XXVI, Book 1 p. 288, line 7 (GCS 30). Origen, In Numeros homiliae XXVIII, Book 9 p. 56, line 1 (GCS 30). Origen, Fragmenta e catenis in Proverbia, p. 217 (PG 17). Anonyma, Oracula Sibyllina, Book 1 p. 12, line 125 (GCS 8). John Chrysostom, De eos qui scandalizati sunt vel de providentia Dei, p. 192, line 25 (SC 79). John Chrysostom, Ad Stagirium libri 1–3, p. 454, line 46 (PG 47). John Chrysostom, De diabolo tentatore homiliae 1–3, p. 265, line 54 (PG 49). John Chrysostom, De laudibus sancti Pauli apostoli homiliae 1–7, p. 474, line 27 (PG 50). John Chrysostom, De uirginitate, p. 388, line 14 (SC 125). John Chrysostom, Expositiones in Psalmos, p. 144, line 42 (PG 55). John Chrysostom, In epistulam ad Hebraeos homiliae 1–34, p. 205, line 49 (PG 63). John Chrysostom, In epistulam primam ad Corinthios homiliae 1–44, p. 336, line 58 (PG 61). John Chrysostom, In epistulam primam ad Thessalonicenses homiliae 1–11, p. 398, line 43 (PG 62). John Chrysostom, In Genesim homiliae 1–67, pp. 185–364, various lines (PG 53–54). John Chrysostom, In Iohannem homiliae 1–88, p. 388, line 34 (PG 59). John Chrysostom, Sermo 9 in Genesim, p. 628, line 38 (PG 54).
Genesis 6:12			Gen 6:12 “All flesh corrupted his way” “Way of the Father” corrupted—man as divine channel (QG I.99)
Genesis 6:17			Genesis 6:17 “There shall be a flood to destroy all flesh in which there is living breath under heaven.” “Living breath under heaven” means the vital spirit in man comes from heaven, which itself is living. Heaven is a “wonderful divine living being” that grants earthly creatures a share in its vital power. (QG II.8); Genesis 6:17 “Whatever is on earth shall die.” Man is the “ruling head” of creation; if the head (man) is destroyed, all else perishes. Allegorically, when the soul is submerged in passion, the “earthy parts” (the body) must die with it. The life of evil is called “death”; the senses die when used unjustly. (QG II.9)			The Flood (Gen 6–8) The Lord who brought the deluge in Noah’s time is the same Lord who will bring final judgment (the same Christ as in the Gospels) “one and the same Lord, who in the times of Noah…” (Irenaeus, Adversus Haereses IV.36.3–4)
Genesis 7:1			Genesis 7:1 “I have seen thee righteous before me in this generation.” Deeper meaning: When God saves the sovereign mind (master of the soul), He saves the whole household—meaning all parts and faculties, just as the mind is in the soul and the soul in the body. (QG II.11)
Genesis 7:2	מִכֹּל הַבְּהֵמָה הַטְּהוֹרָה, תִּקַּח-לְךָ שִׁבְעָה שִׁבְעָה–אִישׁ וְאִשְׁתּוֹ; וּמִן-הַבְּהֵמָה אֲשֶׁר לֹא טְהֹרָה הִוא, שְׁנַיִם–אִישׁ וְאִשְׁתּוֹ	אִ֥ישׁ (a male and his female)	Genesis 7:2–3 Command to bring into the ark seven of the clean beasts, and two of the unclean. Allegory: The irrational/unintelligent part of the soul is divided into seven (five senses, speech, reproduction); these are pure in the virtuous. In the wicked, evil produces “twins,” making the man “of two minds,” defiling healthy thoughts with deadly ones. (QG II.12)		מכל הבהמה הטהרה תקח לך שבעה שבעה זכר ונקבה ומן הבהמה אשר לא טהרה היא שנים שנים זכר ונקבה					The Samaritan text is more original. It has “male” (זכר). Why does the Masoretic have אִישׁ? It’s almost as if someone was trying to dilute the meaning of “Man.”
Genesis 7:4, 10			Genesis 7:4, 10 After entering the ark, seven days passed, then the flood came. Seven days recalls the world’s genesis. The “Father” (God) is Creator: “I am both the creator of the world and He who brings into being non-existent things, and now I am about to destroy the world by a great flood.” (QG II.13)
Genesis 7:11			Genesis 7:11 “In the six-hundredth (year) of Noah’s life was the flood, in the seventh month, on the twenty-seventh of the month.” “At this time came into being the first earthborn man, whom the divine oracles call Adam.” Fitting that the ancestor of the human race should be formed at the vernal equinox, when the earth is full of fruit. (QG II.17)
Genesis 7:18			Genesis 7:18 “All the fountains of the abyss broke forth and the cataracts of heaven were opened.” Allegory: Heaven = the human mind; earth = sense-perception and body. The “great flood” happens when both are overwhelmed—mind by folly, desire, etc.; body by pleasure, drunkenness, etc. (QG II.18)
Genesis 8:1			Genesis 8:1 “He brought a spirit over the earth and the water ceased.” The “spirit of the Deity,” which secures all things, is God’s invisible power. The immense flood was accomplished by this power. (QG II.28)
Genesis 8:4			Genesis 8:4–6 “The window of the ark…” The senses are like windows of the body, admitting perceptions into the mind. Sight is especially related to the soul and initiates philosophy; by seeing celestial phenomena, the mind reasons about creation and providence. (QG II.34)
Genesis 8:13			Gen 8:13 “The water ceased from the earth in the six hundred and first year of Noah’s life, in the first (month) on the first of the month…” “First” here allegorizes the righteous man as a cosmic principle: Noah is “first” in both virtue and order, and is a spiritual archetype—‘Noah’ in Hebrew, ‘righteous’ in Greek—embodying God’s power in the world. (QG II.45); Gen 8:13 (Opening the Ark) “Noah opened the covering of the ark…” The ark is the body; its “covering” is what protects it (pleasure). The mind, struck by divine pleasure, seeks to ascend, casting off base pleasures, to bring perception to “naked and incorporeal natures.” Man as mind seeks to rise to the divine. QG II.46
Genesis 8:18 – 19			Gen 8:18–19 “Noah went out, and his wife, and his sons, and his sons’ wives with him…” Allegory: the rational soul (mind, νοῦς) joins with thoughts (“sons”) and makes the senses (“female”) manly and virtuous. Man is the generative, ruling mind within the soul. (QG II.49)
Genesis 8:24			Gen 8:21 “The thought of man is resolutely turned toward evils from his youth…” “God” and “man” are ontological categories: God is unlike man, sun, or world. Man is a rational, godlike—but lesser—power. (QG II.54)
Genesis 9:1			Gen 9:1–2 “Increase and multiply and fill the earth and dominate it. And let the terror and fear of you be upon the beasts…” God, after the Flood, reissues to Noah the same dominion as Adam; Noah is the “beginning of a second genesis of man.” Philo allegorizes this kingship as belonging not to earthy man but to “the one who was in the form and likeness of the truly incorporeal Being.” Man’s true dominion is the soul shaped by virtue, which rules the body and passions. (QG II.56)		Gen. 1:28; 9:1, “ויחד אדם תניאן” (Adam as second founder) Adam as origin, Noah renews mankind, Adam and Noah parallel (Tibat Marqe IV)
Genesis 9:4			Gen 9:4 “Flesh in the blood of the life you shall not eat.” Distinguishes three parts of the soul: nutritive, sense-perceptive/vital, and rational (λογικόν). The “true man” is the rational, God-derived soul, not the animal part. (QG II.59)
Genesis 9:5	מִיַּד כָּל-חַיָּה אֶדְרְשֶׁנּוּ; וּמִיַּד הָאָדָם, מִיַּד אִישׁ אָחִיו	אִישׁ (And surely your blood of your lives will I require; at the hand of every beast will I require it; and at the hand of man); Genesis 9:5 “…of man, of his brother…” “Man”/“brother” allegorized as rational faculties and thoughts—powers within the soul, not literal individuals. QG II.60	Genesis 9:5 “…of man, of his brother…” “Man”/“brother” allegorized as rational faculties and thoughts—powers within the soul, not literal individuals. (QG II.60)
Genesis 9:6			Genesis 9:6 (1:27) “In the image of God He made man.” “Man” is the image of the Logos (the ‘second God’), not of the supreme God; our mind is a divine, rational imprint. (QG II.62)
Genesis 9:13			Genesis 9:13–17 “I set my bow in the clouds…” The “bow” is the invisible, hidden power of God governing the cosmos, not just a rainbow. (QG II.64)
Genesis 9:20	וַיָּחֶל נֹחַ, אִישׁ הָאֲדָמָה; וַיִּטַּע, כָּרֶם	אִישׁ (And Noah the husbandman began …)	Gen 9 : 20‑21 (“Noah began to be a farmer…” Inside every person the true Man is the ruling intellect (νοῦς) that harvests the fruits of virtue, not the outward mortal) ἄνθρωπος δὲ ὁ ἐν ἑκάστῳ ἡμῶν τίς ἂν εἴη πλὴν ὁ νοῦς (De Agric. § 9); Gen 9 : 20 (“Noah began to be a husbandman” Here “Noah‑man” is an emblem of the mind that only begins the toil of cultivating virtue – a half‑formed inner man, not the patriarch of history) ἤρξατο Νῶε ἄνθρωπος εἶναι γεωργός (Περὶ Νώε Γεωργοῦ/De Agric. § 125); Gen 9 : 20‑21 (Noah began to be a husbandman” Philo reads “Noah‑man” as the wise mind that deliberately cultivates the vine of sober joy, not a literal vintner; “man” here signals the God‑taught farmer of the soul) ἤρξατο Νῶε ἄνθρωπος εἶναι γεωργὸς γῆς (De Plantatione §§ 140‑141); Genesis 9:20 “Noah began to be a husbandman…” Noah as “earthy man” is an archetype; “man” symbolizes universal humanity, origin of order after chaos. (QG II.66)
Genesis 9:23			Genesis 9:23 “Covered the nakedness of their father…” “Man” is the mind, a hidden, overseeing, protecting faculty; the “wise one, not man but mind.” (QG II.72)
Genesis 10:5		אִישׁ (every one after his tongue)
						Genesis 3:8 (“God walking in the garden”), Genesis 11 (Tower of Babel), Genesis 19:24 (Sodom and Gomorrah), etc. Tertullian identifies the Son as the one who conversed with Adam, judged at Babel, punished the world by flood, rained fire on Sodom and Gomorrah. “filius itaque est qui ab initio iudicavit … pluens super Sodomam et Gomorram ignem et sulphurem dominus a domino.” 16.2–16.3, (Tertullian Adversus Praxean 13.4)
Genesis 12:2-3						Gen 12:2–3 (context around Messiah as “angel, man, captain” – interpreting prophetic promise to Abraham about the Messiah’s triple role) ὁ γὰρ Χριστὸς …ἄγγελος καὶ ἄνθρωπος καὶ ἀρχιστράτηγος … (Justin Martyr, Dialogue 34.2); Genesis 12; Acts 7:3 God appeared to Abraham “by the Word, as by a beam of light.” (Irenaeus, Dem. 24)
Genesis 13:16		אִישׁ (And I will make thy seed as the dust of the earth; so that if a man can number the dust of the earth, then shall thy seed also be numbered)
Genesis 14						Genesis 14 (Melchizedek) Clement interprets Melchizedek (“king of Salem, priest of God Most High”) as our Savior, “the King of Peace,” who gives the sanctified bread and wine as a type of the eucharist. This is the closest he comes to implying Christ is present in the Genesis narrative. ὁ σωτὴρ ἡμῶν ἀναγράφεται βασιλεὺς, ὅν φησι Μωυσῆς, “Μελχισεδὲκ βασιλεὺς Σαλὴμ ὁ ἱερεὺς τοῦ θεοῦ τοῦ ὑψίστου,” ὁ τὸν οἶνον καὶ τὸν ἄρτον τὴν ἡγιασμένην διδοὺς τροφήν εἰς τύπον εὐχαριστίας. (Clement of Alexandria Stromateis 4.25.161)
Genesis 14:14				Targum Pseudo-Jonathan’s Aramaic Genesis 14:14 there is the acronymic sequence וזיין ית עולמויי דחניך לקרבא מרבייני ביתיה ולא צבו למהלכא עמיה “And he armed his young men who were trained for battle, born in his house, and not conscripted to the king with him” whose initials add up 358 – ו 6, י 10, ע 70, ד 4, ל 30, מ 40, ב 2, ו 6, צ 90, ל 30, ע 70- It is well known 358 is gematria for “Messiah.” The existence of gematria is hinted in the explicit translation of the material too: “He selected from among them Eliezer, the son of Nimrod, who was as mighty as all of them combined—three hundred and eighteen …”	Genesis 14 Abraham קטל מלכים ותבר צלמיהון Human agent of righteousness	Genesis 14 (Rescue of Lot) Clement allegorizes Abraham’s victory with 318 men as a type of the Lord (κυριακὸν σημεῖον), but does not say Christ was physically present; the reference is purely symbolic (the number 318 = ΙΗ, i.e. Jesus). κυριακοῦ σημείου, τὸ ἰῶτα καὶ τὸ ἦτα (Clement of Alexandria, Stromateis 6.11.84–85)		Qur’an; Early Shi‘ite texts God’s body described as composed of “letters,” limbs; creation as “touch” or direct contact. Letters as limbs; “touch” p. 15 Mystical Shi‘ism, proto-Ismaʿili: God’s heart as locus of wisdom, his name as body.		the Targum identifies 318 as the name of the Messiah.
Genesis 14:18						Genesis 14:18; Ps 110:4 Melchizedek as eternal priest/king; Christ present as Melchizedek, not merely a type. κατὰ τὴν τάξιν Μελχισεδὲκ, αἰώνιος ἱερεύς (Justin, Dial. 113)
Genesis 15:5			Gen 15 :5 (“He led him outside and said: look up at the heavens…” God draws the mind right outside itself toward the immeasurable riches of virtue; fleeing from itself the mind finds refuge in the supreme Man‑God who numbers the stars) ἐξήγαγεν αὐτὸν ἔξω … ὁ νοῦς … ὅπου ὁ ὢν θεός … οὐκ ἔστι κατοικεῖν ἐν σώματι ἀνθρώπου (Leg. All. III. § 39–41);
Genesis 15:10		אִישׁ (And he took him all these, and divided them in the midst, and laid each half over against the other; but the birds divided he not)	Gen. 15.10 “But the birds he did not divide.” The “birds” represent the fifth essence (πέμπτη οὐσία), the indivisible, celestial, and unified nature the ancients attributed to heaven. Unlike the four earthly, divisible elements, this fifth substance is undivided, pure, and more akin to unity—divine and uncuttable. (QG III.6)
Genesis 15:12			Gen. 15.12 “At sunset an ecstasy fell upon Abram, and behold a great dark fear fell upon him.” “Ecstasy” means the mind leaves itself; the prophet becomes possessed by God and is filled with the divine spirit, no longer remaining within himself. The mind, as vessel, becomes a channel for the hidden, divine “man.” (QG II.9)
Genesis 15:13			Gen. 15.13–14 “Thy seed shall be a sojourner in a land not its own…” Allegorically, the soul of the wise comes from above, enters the body (alien soil), and sojourns, alienated from its true divine origin. The Saviour liberates the soul and restores its divine freedom. (QG III.10)
Genesis 15:15			Gen. 15.15 “But thou shalt go to thy fathers in peace, nourished in a good old age.” This passage expresses the soul’s incorruptibility, leaving mortal habitation and returning “as if to the mother-city,” i.e., to the divine world. The “fathers” are incorporeal Logoi—divine powers/angels—so the soul’s kinship is with these higher realities. (QG III.11)		Genesis 15:15, Abraham “בשלמו” / “in perfection (peace)” (Tibat Marqe IV: 324–338)
Genesis 15:17			Gen. 15. 17 “Behold, a smoking furnace and torches of fire, which passed through the midst of the half-pieces.” The “divine words” (θεῖοι λόγοι) and powers are like fiery torches, burning, purifying, and uniting the universe. These are manifestations of hidden divine agency—a cosmic “man” or Logos harmonizing all. (QG III.15)
Genesis 16:1			Gen. 16. 1 “And Sarah… had an Egyptian maidservant, whose name was Hagar.” Allegorically, Hagar is preparatory discipline; Sarah is virtue. The soul of the virtuous is aligned with the “male” principle, striving for “the forgotten and unknown light,” which points to the hidden, divine reality to which the true “man” aspires. (QG III.18)
Genesis 16:7			Gen. 16. 7 “An angel of the Lord found her by a spring of water…” The widely-learned soul (Hagar) is property of virtue (Sarah); the angel (Logos/divine messenger) corrects her wandering. The Logos, as healer, guides the soul back to wisdom, enacting a hidden divine operation. QG III.27–28)
Genesis 17:1			Gen 17 : 1 (Abram’s renaming – When Abram is addressed by God, he becomes a “man of God,” sharing, by grace, in divinity) γίνεται ἄνθρωπος θεοῦ κατὰ τὸ χρησθὲν αὐτῷ λόγιον· ἐγώ εἰμι ὁ θεός σου… (De Gig. 63‑64);		Gen. 17:1, 25:27; 5:24, Jacob/Abraham/Isaac as “men” “התהלך אברהם והתברך”, “יעקב”, “יצחק” Walked “in God’s ways,” righteous, not metaphysical (Tibat Marqe IV, §§19–30)
Genesis 17:3 – 4			Gen 17:3–4 “Behold My covenant is with thee… father of a multitude of peoples.” Covenant = God Himself, archetypal, incorporeal principle; “father of nations” = mind as sovereign over powers/thoughts (QG III.42)
Genesis 17:5			Gen 17:5 “Thy name shall not be called Abram, but Abraham…” Abraham = “elect father of sound” = wise mind; mind as father of the spoken word; definition of wise man as “elect father of sound” (mind as a kind of divine, archetypal “man”) (QG III.43)
Genesis 17:10			Gen 17 : 10 (The covenant of circumcision. Philo ridicules boastful craftsmen who claim they can “make” the supreme living creature—Man—reminding readers that true creative power over the archetypal Man rests only with God) «ζῴων τὸ κάλλιστον, ἄνθρωπον, ηὔχησαν δύνασθαι δημιουργεῖν.» (De Circumcisione §11); Gen 17:10–11 “Every male… circumcised in flesh…” Two circumcisions: flesh (literal) and male (mind/reason); true “male” in us is the mind; circumcision = purification of the mind (making it a priest for God) QG III.46 Gen 17:10 (Circumcision command, spiritualized) The mind is the seeing, hidden “man” in us; its purification (“circumcision”) is a prerequisite for spiritual vision and communion with God QG III.47
Genesis 17:23		בְּאַנְשֵׁ֖י(the men household of Abraham)
Genesis 17:27		אַנְשֵׁ֤י(All the men of his household)
Genesis 18:1			Genesis 18:1–2 “And the Lord appeared to him at the oak of Mamre as he was sitting in the heat of the day at the entrance of his tent; and he lifted up his eyes and saw, and behold, three men were standing over him…” Philo allegorizes the appearing of God as not a direct vision of the incomprehensible God, but a manifestation through a mediating form or radiance, called “form” (εἶδος, μορφή) or “radiance,” and sometimes associated with the Logos or the sum of divine powers. “Man” (the three men/angels) thus represents a visible expression or power, not mere mortals but the manifestation of divine power. This “man” is a hidden power or image of God, through which the soul may perceive the Existent One. (QG IV.1,2)		Genesis 18, 19, 41 (angelic visitations) “The angels who appeared to the righteous came for one moment only. Three of them appeared to Abraham, and once they announced news to him they departed on the same day. Two of them appeared to Lot towards the evening and did what they had to do and leL the same night.” All biblical theophanies/angelic encounters are fleeting, never God Himself, always for a moment’s mission. מלאכה קרי ומשה שמע וארתת (“He called it angel, Moses heard and trembled”) (Tibat Marqe, Book I, §2)	Genesis 18–19 God appeared to Abraham, destroyed Sodom (Logos/Christ) “ὁ θεὸς ὀφθεὶς τῷ Ἀβραὰμ…” (Justin Dial. 60.1–3); Genesis 18–19 (Abraham, Sodom) The “Lord”/“God” who appeared to Abraham at the oak of Mamre and judged Sodom was Christ, present as a visible man. ὤφθη ὁ θεὸς πρὸς τῇ δρυῒ τῇ Μαμβρῆ; τρεῖς ἄνδρες Justin Dial. 126, 127, 128) Genesis 18–19: The “Lord” who appeared to Abraham, walked, ate, spoke, and destroyed Sodom—identified as Christ the Lord. ὤφθη τῷ Ἀβραὰμ … ἐγὼ εἰμι ὁ θεός σου … καὶ ὁ κύριος ἐπ’ Αβραὰμ.(Clement of Alexandria Paedagogus 1.56.3–5); Genesis 18:1–8 Abraham hosts “three men” at Mamre—Clement recounts Abraham feeding them under the tree and standing by as they ate. “Ἀβραὰμ τοῖς τρισὶν ἄριστον ὑπὸ τὸ δένδρον καὶ παρέστη ἐσθίουσιν αὐτοῖς” (Clement of Alexandria, Paedagogus 3.52.2), Genesis (Abraham, Cain, etc.) Discussion of Abraham standing before the Lord, Cain leaving the Lord’s presence, Lot’s wife, but never explicitly identifying Jesus/Christ as present in those scenes. Ἀβραὰμ ἑστὼς ἦν ἀπέναντι κυρίου (Clement of Alexandria, Stromateis 2.11.52; 2.11.51.4); Genesis 18–19 (Abraham, Sodom) The God of glory appeared to Abraham, spoke to him, and was with the patriarchs and Moses; Irenaeus identifies this as Christ (the Word/Logos, “God of glory appeared”, “spoke” (Irenaeus, Adversus Haereses 3.12, §10); Genesis 18–19 (Mamre) The Son of God appeared as one of the three men to Abraham, conversed and judged Sodom. (Irenaeus Dem. 44) (110); Genesis 18–19 (Abraham & the angels, Sodom) Tertullian argues that angels of the Creator appeared to Abraham and Lot in true human flesh—if they could do this, so could Christ; he explicitly says the Lord himself also appeared to Abraham “without nativity,” i.e., not born but present in flesh. “atquin tunc quoque inter angelos illos ipse dominus apparuit Abrahae sine nativitate, cum carne scilicet, pro eadem causae diversitate” (Tertullian De Carne Christi De Carne Christi VI.7–8 (p. 25–26)); Genesis 18:1–2 (Abraham), Exodus 33–34 (Moses), Daniel 3 (Fiery Furnace), other theophanies Tertullian argues that it was the Son (Christ) who appeared to Abraham, Jacob, Moses, the three youths in Babylon, etc., in visible form, even though not yet incarnate in flesh, but in a form humans could see. “ediscebat autem ut nobis fidem sterneret, ut facilius crederemus filium dei descendisse in saeculum si et retro tale quid gestum cognosceremus” (Tertullian Adversus Praxean 16.3–16.6; 14.2–14.7)		Qur’an (various verses); Hadith God described as a “body” with flesh, blood, hair, limbs, but unlike man in being “massive” and “not hollow.” jism (جسم), bodily terms Muqātil, Dāwūd al-Jawāribī: God is physically “like” a human, but of superior matter. (van Ess, Josef. “The Youthful God: Anthropomorphism in Early Islam.” In The Implications of the Qur’anic Conception of God for Anthropomorphic and Anthropopathic Language p. 8)
Genesis 18:2		אֲנָשִׁ֔ים(three men were standing)	Genesis 18:2 (Philo openly concedes that Scripture sometimes lets God “be imagined as a man – ὡς ἄνθρωπος … putting on voice, face, hands, coming and going”, not because God has a body, but to educate “dull natures who cannot conceive a bodiless Deity” “Ταῖς μὲν οὖν ἀσωμάτοις…” (De Somnis § 232‑236); Genesis 18 (Cites the “old tale” that a god in human shape goes round the cities, investigating injustice. Philo again stresses the pedagogical value of picturing the Invisible in human terms) (De Somnis § 233‑235); Gen 18 : 2‑3 (the three visitors – The visitors are bodiless beings who “mould themselves into the form of men,” so the visible ἄνθρωποι veil a divine reality. Philo later calls the central figure the true Being). ἀσωμάτους ὄντας … εἰς ἰδέαν ἀνθρώπων μεμορφῶσθαι (De Abrahamo §§114‑118; excerpt lines 118‑123) phantasma reference τότε μοι δοκεῖ πρῶτον οὐκέθ’ ὁμοίαν τῶν ὁρωμένων λαβεῖν φαντασίαν, ἀλλὰ σεμνοτέραν ἢ προφητῶν ἢ ἀγγέλων μεταβαλόντων ἀπὸ πνευματικῆς καὶ ψυχοειδοῦς οὐσίας εἰς ἀνθρωπόμορφον ἰδέαν (De Abrahamo117);			Gen 18:1 (pre‑incarnate “man not of men” – debate follows on whether the “man” Abraham saw is merely human) ἄνθρωπον … καὶ ὅτι οὐκ ἄνθρωπος ἐξ ἀνθρώπου (Justin Martyr, Dial. 48.1); Gen 18:2 (The three visitors – Justin cites LXX: “And behold, three men stood” Abraham encounters the Angel of the Lord) καὶ ἰδοὺ τρεῖς ἄνδρες εἱστήκεισαν ἐπάνω αὐτοῦ (Justin Martyr, Dial. 56.4) Gen 18:2–3 (one of the three is God – He interprets one of the three men as directly divine) τῶν τριῶν ἀνδρῶν, ὧν εἷς ἦν ὁ Θεός … (Justin Martyr, Dial. 56.6) Gen 18 – 19 (“Lord‑angel‑man”; Justin uses the travellers at Mamre/Sodom to prove the pre‑existent Christ was Lord and God, yet already appeared as a man and as an angel) κύριος ὢν ὁ Χριστὸς … πρὸτερον ὡς ἀνὴρ καὶ ἄγγελος …» (Justin Martyr, Dial. 128.1)
Genesis 18:22		הָֽאֲנָשִׁ֔ים(turned there the men and went Sodom)
Genesis 18:23			Gen 18:23 “And Abraham approached and said, ‘Will you destroy the righteous with the impious, and shall the righteous be as the unrighteous?’” Philo says man is said to be close to God “figuratively but not in the proper sense”—God is far from the body, but the sovereign part of the soul (the mind) can be close to God and travel with Him. Thus, “man” here is not just a human, but the mind or noûs, the power within the soul capable of approaching God. (QG IV.26)
Genesis 18:33			Gen 18:33 “The Lord went away as He ceased to speak with Abraham. And Abraham returned to his place.” The one who is begotten is not always God-possessed, but after being divinely inspired, he returns to himself. The most pure and luminous mind is mixed with the mortal element for necessary uses. This is linked to the idea that the mind/noûs, as the highest part of man, sometimes participates in divine realities but returns to the ordinary state. (QG IV.29)
Genesis 19:1			Gen 19:1 “Three appeared to Abraham at midday, two to Lot at evening.” Philo draws a contrast: Abraham (the perfect man) perceives the full triad—the Father and His two chief powers; Lot (the progressive man) perceives only the servant-powers, without the Father. Here, “man” (in the form of the three men/angels) is a symbol of powers and the triad of divine manifestation, not just human beings. (QG IV.30) Gen 19:1 “Lot sitting at the gate of Sodom.” Sodom represents blindness/sterility, and sitting at the gate represents the progressive man: not entirely within virtue, not outside it. This is an allegory for the state of the soul—a mediator between vice and virtue. (QG IV.31)			Genesis 19 (Lot, Sodom) Lot was saved by the Lord who sent angels, the Lord being present “Λὼτ ἀπερίτμητος… τῶν ἀγγέλων αὐτὸν καὶ τοῦ κυρίου προπεμψάντων” (Justin, Dial. 19.5); Gen 19:1 et seq. (Sodom destruction – Suggests the Lord who destroyed Sodom appeared also to Abraham) τῶν δύο ἀγγέλων κατελθόντων εἰς Σόδομα … (Justin Martyr, Dial. 56.13); Genesis 19 via Amos 4:11: “I overthrew you as God overthrew Sodom and Gomorrah”—the Logos/Christ as agent. κατέστρεψα ὑμᾶς καθὼς κατέστρεψεν ὁ θεὸς Σόδομα. (Clement of Alexandria, Paedagogus 1.69.3); Sodom and Gomorrah (Gen 19) The same Lord rained fire in Lot’s day; this is the Son who now judges “who also in the days of Lot rained fire…” (Irenaeus, Adversus Haereses IV.36.3–4)
Genesis 19:5		הָאֲנָשִׁ֛ים (where are the men who came)	Gen 19:4–5 “The Sodomites surround his house.” / “Bring them out to us that we may know them.” The literal sense is immorality; the deeper sense: the traits of soul that are blind/unproductive (called Sodomites) surround the body (the soul’s home). The “man” is thus an inner power or configuration of the soul, embattled by lower impulses. (QG IV.36–37)
Genesis 19:8		אִ֔ישׁ(have not had relations with man)לָֽאֲנָשִׁ֤ים(to these men)	Gen 19:7–8 “I have two daughters who have not known a man…” In the soul of the progressive man there are masculine (rational, virtuous) and feminine (bodily, passionate) thoughts; he wishes to save all, but if he must, he will sacrifice the lesser. “Man” is allegorized as the rational principle, not just a male human. Questions & Answers on Genesis IV.38 Gen 19:17 “Escape to the mountain lest thou be seized among them.” The mind (noûs) begins to take the higher road and progresses, leaving behind the earth-bound and low things. Ascent is called “mountain”—its true name is “wisdom.” Thus “man” here is the mind, an aspirational divine faculty within. (QG IV.46)
Genesis 19:10		הָֽאֲנָשִׁים֙(But the men reached out their hands)
Genesis 19:11		הָאֲנָשִׁ֞ים(They struck the men)
Genesis 19:12		הָאֲנָשִׁ֜ים(Then the two men said to Lot)
Genesis 19:16		הָאֲנָשִׁ֜ים(So the men seized)
Genesis 19:17			Gen 19:17 “Escape to the mountain lest thou be seized among them.” The mind (noûs) begins to take the higher road and progresses, leaving behind the earth-bound and low things. Ascent is called “mountain”—its true name is “wisdom.” Thus “man” here is the mind, an aspirational divine faculty within. (QG IV.46)
Genesis 19:23			Genesis 19:23–24 “And the sun was risen upon the earth when Lot entered into Zoar. Then the Lord rained upon Sodom and Gomorrah brimstone and fire…” Philo explains that natural forces (sun, rain, fire) are not causes themselves, but are governed by “the power of the Father,” who rules as charioteer over the universe and directs the elements at will. The true “cause” behind the world’s workings is this hidden divine power, not the visible elements. (QG IV.51)			Genesis 19:24 (Sodom destruction) The Lord who rained fire on Sodom is Christ, the visible Lord distinct from the Father. κύριος ἔβρεξεν ἐπὶ Σόδομα πῦρ καὶ θεῖον παρὰ κυρίου (Justin, Dial. 127); Genesis 19:24; 18:21 Justin two “Lords”: one on earth (who visited Abraham/Sodom) and one in heaven; the one on earth is Christ. ἐπὶ γῆς ὤν … ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς ὑπάρχων (Justin, Dail. 129)
Genesis 19:27 – 28			Genesis 19:27–28 “And Abraham got up early… and looked toward Sodom… and, lo, the smoke of the country went up as the smoke of a furnace.” On a deeper level, “Abraham” is the mind (νοῦς), made firm like the One God. When the mind is thus established, it sees all sense-perceptible things as fleeting—like smoke. The wise mind participates in this divine, immovable nature, distinguishing it from ordinary mortals. (QG IV.53)
Genesis 19:30			Genesis 19:30 “And Lot went up out of Zoar, and dwelt in the mountain, and his two daughters with him.” Allegorically, “the progressive mind” becomes purer as it leaves behind vice. The mind’s “daughters” are “counsel” and “consent”—powers generated from the divine rational soul. Here “man” is the rational, progressing power separated from evil, ascending towards God. (QG IV.55)
Genesis 19:31		וְאִ֨ישׁ (and there is not a man on earth)
Genesis 19:32			Gen 19:32 “He arose, hastened toward them and bowed with his face to the ground.” The face in man uncovers itself; the soul especially prostrates before appearances before receiving truth. The perfect admires the visible rather than the invisible; the mind (noûs) grasps the invisible before the senses. Thus, the true “man” is the mind. (QG IV.32)
Genesis 20:1 – 2			Genesis 20:1–2 “And Abraham journeyed… and said of Sarah his wife, She is my sister.” The “virtue-loving mind” (νοῦς) calls virtue its “sister” (not wife), signifying an innate, familial connection to divine excellence. The mind (man) is the God-given faculty that can relate to virtue not only as a partner but as kin—hinting at the mind’s divine origin and status. (QG IV.60)
Genesis 20:3			Genesis 20:3 “God came to Abimelech in a dream… Behold, thou art but a dead man, for the woman… is a man’s wife.” The “divine Logos” enters the soul and exposes the “foolish man” who pretends to possess virtue. Only the soul ruled by the divine mind (rational man) truly possesses virtue; the foolish live in darkness, incapable of union with divine things. (QG IV.62)
Genesis 20:7		הָאִישׁ֙(restore the man’s wife)
Genesis 20:12			Genesis 20:12 “And yet indeed she is my sister; she is the daughter of my father, but not… my mother; and she became my wife.” Allegorically, virtue is “motherless”—coming directly from God (the Father). The mind (rational man) is both “brother” and “husband” to virtue, since both derive from God. The union of mind and virtue is a hidden divine reality, distinct from ordinary physical lineage. (QG IV.68)
Genesis 22:6						Genesis 22:6, 22:11–12: The “angel of the Lord” who stops Abraham is Christ; presides over the sacrifice and promise. ἄγγελος κυρίου … μὴ ἐπιβάλῃς … ἐμαυτῷ ὤμοσα λέγει κύριος. (Clement of Alexandria, Paedagogus 1.56.5); Matt 6:13, Luke 11:4; Gen 22 Jesus teaches to pray “lead us not into temptation,” noting that even Abraham was not tested to tempt but to prove his faith. Jesus himself was tempted by the devil. ipse a diabolo temptatus (Tertullian, De Oratione §8)
Genesis 22:17						Gen 22:17–18 (Isaac called “blameless and just Man crucified”) τὸν μόνον ἄμωμον καὶ δίκαιον ἄνθρωπον …(Justin Martyr, Dialogue 17.1)
Genesis 23:5			Gen 23:5–6 “A king from God art thou among us” The truly wise man, a follower of pure wisdom, is not chosen by men but by God. He is called a “king from God,” possessing a hidden, God-given power to rule—not outward force or wealth, but the power of wisdom and virtue implanted by God. Only the wise, God-loving man, even if lacking external resources, is the true king, because there is a divine “kingly art” that is the noblest of all arts. (QG IV.76)
Genesis 23:6			Gen 23:6 “In our choice monuments bury thy dead” The wise man’s soul is dead to bodily passions; his body is a corpse he carries. The “monument” is not the body but mastery over it, for the wise man possesses lordship—an inner spiritual power over the body—rather than being subject to it like the foolish. (QG IV.77)
Genesis 23:8 – 9			Gen 23:8–9 “Let him give me the double cave … for as much silver as it is worth … as a possession of a monument” The “dead body” symbolizes passions; the truly wise person (the “man” in the highest sense) is able to bury these, overcoming passions through the hidden, divine faculty of reason and self-mastery. (QG IV.78)
Genesis 23:9 – 11			Gen 23:9,11 “The double cave” The human body is like a double cave, with one chamber (external) ruled by passions, the other (internal) ruled by reason. The wise man (divinely-inspired mind) rules the body and passions by means of an inner spiritual barrier, receiving holiness and purity—a share in the hidden power of the god-loving mind. (QG IV.80)
Genesis 23:17 – 19			Gen 23:17–19 “The field … in the cave” When the mind (the “man” in the godlike sense) comes to rule the body, the body ceases to be ruled by external things and is instead governed by the mind’s spiritual power. (QG IV.82)
Genesis 24:1			Gen 24:1 “And the Lord blessed Abraham in all things” Old age is not chronological, but signifies consummate virtue and piety. The “old man” is one who has acquired this inner, God-given perfection—a spiritual maturity, a hidden blessing of God. (QG IV.84)
Genesis 24:2			Gen 24:2 “The eldest servant of his house and ruler of all his things” The “servant” is the uttered word, which is ruled by the mind (the true “man” as the hidden divine faculty). This logos is master over external things because it receives authority from the indwelling divine mind. (QG IV.85)
Genesis 24:3 – 4			Gen 24:3–4 “I adjure you by the Lord God of heaven and God of earth” Heaven and earth symbolize the realms of God’s power; heaven is always serving as God’s creative and kingly power. The mind that emulates heaven, serving both as created and as king, reflects this divine, hidden power. (QG IV.87)
Genesis 24:10			Gen 24:10 “Ten camels … of all his goods” The camels represent memory, an inner faculty of the wise soul. The whole life of the wise man is filled with virtue—this fullness is a gift of the hidden, God-derived mind and its power of recollection. (QG IV.92)
Genesis 24:13		אַנְשֵׁ֣י (the daughters of the men of the city)
Genesis 24:15			Gen 24:15 “Rebekah came out … daughter of Bethuel” Rebekah represents constancy and wisdom, the “daughter of God.” This inner spiritual wisdom is the first-born and purest of God’s gifts to the soul—an invisible, divine power at work within the wise. (QG IV.97)
Genesis 24:16		וְאִ֖ישׁ(no man had had relations)	Gen 24:16 “She was a virgin very fair … whom no man had known” The true “man” (in the spiritual sense) is not one who corrupts or defiles the soul, but one who receives the unadulterated seeds of divinity from God—a model of spiritual purity and receptivity to the divine. (QG IV.99)
Genesis 24:21		וְהָאִ֥ישׁ(the man was gazing silence)	Gen. 24:21 “The man examined and studied her and stood silent so as to know whether the Lord God would bring success to him.” “The man” symbolizes the soul that has progressed from boyhood to rational man. The progressive man is a type receptive to the divine Logos speaking within, acting as a conduit for God’s power; he stands silent to give place to the Logos, which guides toward virtue. (QG IV.108)
Genesis 24:22		הָאִישׁ֙(took the man ring)	Gen. 24:22 “After all the camels ceased drinking, the man gave earrings of gold and bracelets to the virgin.” The ten bracelets represent the divine mysteries. The decad (ten) is a symbol of perfection in the world and in man. The divine Logos is the governor of the cosmos and the irrational parts of man, orchestrating harmony. Thus, “man” is a vessel for the Logos—a hidden power organizing human nature, just as it orders the universe. (QG IV.110); Genesis 24:22 (again) “Why earrings of a drachma in weight and bracelets of ten drachmas, not five and five?” The decad (ten) is the sum and perfection of all things in the world and in man. The divine Logos harmonizes both cosmos and human irrational parts. Moses leaves the decad to the Logos as holy. The Logos is a hidden power that unites and orders the nine parts of creation and soul, making “man” the image of divine harmony. (QG IV.110)
Genesis 24:23			Genesis 24:23 “Whose daughter are you? Tell me whether there is to your father a place for us to stay?” Allegorically, the question is whether the virtuous soul is begotten by a mortal or by God. The “Father” is in heaven or is the divine Logos, who is the true begetter of the rational soul. This indicates that the truest “man” is begotten by the divine power above, not merely by mortal men. (QG IV.111)
Genesis 24:26		הָאִ֔ישׁ(Then the man bowed low)
Genesis 24:29		הָאִ֛ישׁ(ran outside to the man at the spring)	Genesis 24:29 “Who is the brother of Rebekah, whose name is Laban?” The soul contains rational (mind) and irrational (sense perception) parts. The mind is likened to a vowel, able to move itself and grasp intelligible things alone. The mind, as a hidden divine power, leads and moves the senses and body, acting as a cause—just as God’s hidden power organizes the world and soul. (QG IV.117)
Genesis 24:30		הָאִ֑ישׁ(This is what the man said, he went to the man)
Genesis 24:32		הָאִישׁ֙(So the man entered the house)
Genesis 24:54		וְהָאֲנָשִׁ֥ים(Then he and the men)
Genesis 24:58		הָאִ֣ישׁ(Will you go with this man?)
Genesis 24:59		אֲנָשָֽׁיו(Abraham’s servant and his men)
Genesis 24:61		הָאִ֑ישׁ(and followed the man)
Genesis 24:62			Gen. 24. 62 “Isaac went through the wilderness by the well of Seeing.” Philo allegorizes Isaac as the inner, God-given, self-taught “man” (νοῦς), who with the “eyes of the soul” contemplates the divine and is a model of “unsorrowing laughter.” This “man” is within, not bodily but an intelligible power, whose wisdom rises above all created things and is filled with God’s inspiration. (QG IV.138)
Genesis 24:63			Gen. 24. 63 “Isaac went out to meditate in the field toward evening, and he lifted his eyes” The “meditation” is interpreted as the soul’s movement away from corporeal, visible things to contemplation of the invisible God alone. Philo says God “speaks without uttering words and talks with someone without audible voice,” indicating the presence of a hidden divine Logos/power conversing with the wise. (QG IV.140)
Genesis 24:65		הָאִ֤ישׁ(Who is that man walking)	Gen 24 : 65 (Rebekkah: “Who is that man coming to meet us?” The solitary figure whom the bride beholds is more than mortal; he images the invisible leader (God) whom even the wise have not yet seen) τίς ὁ ἄνθρωπος οὗτος ὁ πορευόμενος εἰς συνάντησιν ἡμῖν (Quod deterius potiori insidiari soleat §§ 30 – 31); Gen. 24. 64–65 “And Rebekah lifted her eyes, saw Isaac, leapt from the camel… Who is this man…?” Rebekah’s recognition and approach to “this man” is the soul’s approach to the God-given mind, the “self-taught man” (Isaac as νοῦς, the inner Logos). Only a soul that is “God-loving and virtue-loving” can become intimate with this hidden “man,” a power symbolized by Isaac’s wisdom, self-taughtness, and constancy. (QG IV.142–143)
Genesis 24:66 – 67			Gen. 24. 66–67 “He told Isaac all the things he had done… Isaac took Rebekah as wife.” Isaac (the “self-taught man,” symbol of the inner mind/Logos) unites with Rebekah (constancy, perseverance, soul’s virtue). Philo says Abraham and Isaac together symbolize taught virtue and natural virtue; their unity in Isaac is the partnership of the divine power with the soul, not mortal men but “formless types of soul.” (QG IV.144–145)
Genesis 25:7		אַנְשֵׁ֤י(the men of the place)	Gen. 25. 7 “These are the years of the days of the life of Abraham…” Philo interprets the “life of Abraham” as the life of the wise man (the God-inspired νοῦς), whose “days” (not years) are praiseworthy because he lives entirely in virtue, not according to bodily existence but as a receptacle of the divine. This “man” is perfected by the hidden power of God. (QG IV.150)
Genesis 25:8			Gen. 25:8 “And Abraham died in a good old age, old and full of days, and was added to his people.” “The death of the body is the life of the soul”; this “death” is the most glorious life of the “first soul.” The virtuous man is “full not of years but of days,” always arranging time under the divine light. “This the eyes of the body do not see, but the pellucid and pure mind is taught to see.” Points to an inner, divine “man” or soul—the “heavenly man,” visible only to the purified mind; a type of divine power. (QG IV.152)
Genesis 25:11		בָּאִ֥ישׁ(this man or his wife)
Genesis 25:13		הָאִ֑ישׁ(the man became rich)
Genesis 25:24			Gen. 25:24 “And when her days to be delivered were fulfilled, behold, there were twins in her womb.” “The birth of the wise man is not defective … but full and perfect,” consisting of perfect numbers. When the soul is filled with contemplation of wisdom, it gives birth to opposites, discerning between holy and profane. The “wise man” is a spiritual being, an inner principle, “conceived” in the soul—pointing to the concept of a hidden, divine man within. (QG IV.158)
Genesis 25:25 – 26			Gen. 25:25–26 “And the first came out red, all over like a hairy garment; and they called his name Esau. And after that came his brother.” Philo distinguishes “firstborn” (product of matter, earthy, feminine) from “firstbegotten” (product of a higher, masculine, creative power). “Wise and cultivated man” comes from the Cause; the wicked is first-born in matter. “Incorporeal powers are first-begotten … called forms, measures, types”—hidden divine archetypes. True “man” is identified with the heavenly, noetic powers—the divine archetype, not with the material firstborn. (QG IV.160)
Genesis 25:27		אִ֛ישׁ(Esau a skillful hunter, a man of the field, Jacob was a peaceful man)	Gen. 25:27 “Esau was a cunning hunter, a man of the field; and Jacob was a simple man, dwelling in tents.” Jacob is the wise and cultivated man, with “simplicity and domesticity” as symbols of virtue and household/statecraft—a microcosm modeled on the divine archetype. Contrasts bestial “man of the field” (Esau) with true, spiritual “man” (Jacob). The “man” in Jacob is not merely human, but the ideal wise soul, reflecting a higher, divine reality—a power of God. (QG IV.165)		Genesis 25:27, Jacob “יעקב איש תם” /“Jacob was a perfect man” “תם” as virtue; scriptural phrase repeated (Tibat Marqe IV 324–338), Genesis 25:27 Jacob as “a perfect man” הוה גבר שלם (Tibat Marqe §§67–77); Gen. 25:27 Jacob “dwelling in tents” as type of wise man Jacob (see also Joseph, Moses) והוא סעיר במשכנה (Tibat Marqe IV §§93–108), Gen 25:27, Gen 28:20–22 Jacob “Righteous man, dwells in tents”; makes and keeps vows Archetypal righteous man, not divine איש תם; זכותה מסחן (Tibat Marqe VI 28 – 43)
Genesis 25:28			Gen. 25:28 “Isaac loved Esau, because he ate of his venison: but Rebekah loved Jacob.” Virtue “is not loved for any other reason … the good alone is desired for its own sake. The philosopher’s soul is nourished by hunting down passions and keeping vice at bay.” The “wise man” (true “man”) is the soul that loves and seeks divine virtue, reflecting a hidden archetype or divine power. (QG IV.167)		Gen. 25:28 / Exod. 13:19 Joseph as “eldest in his father’s house” Joseph, high status but not a “power” rival אסתבלת גרמיו ביד נביא מהימן … לית כיוסף מלכה (Tibat Marqe IV §§93–108)
Genesis 25:29 – 30			Gen. 25:29–30 “Jacob cooked a stew … Esau said … ‘Let me eat some of that red stew, for I am faint.’” “Literal meaning” is superficial. Only those who look into the “intelligible forms” see the inner meaning. The “wise man” is contrasted with the literalist; true “man” is spiritual, perceived only by those able to look beyond the literal. The “intelligible forms” and “wise man” are higher realities, hidden in scripture, representing the hidden power of God within man. (QG IV.168)
Genesis 25:31		אִ֣ישׁ(they swore to one another)
Genesis 26:1			Gen. 26:1 “There was a famine in the land beside the former famine that was in Abraham’s days.” The body is “an earthy substance” and the virtuous, purified mind dwells in it. Famine here is not hunger for food, but a lack of wrongdoing—the mind that governs the body deprives it of evil, enacting a famine “of wrongdoing.” The true “man” is the mind ruling the passions, a divine power within the earthy body. (QG IV.175)
Genesis 26:2			Gen. 26:2–3 “Do not go down to Egypt. Dwell in the land of which I shall tell you. Sojourn in this land.” “Egypt” symbolizes bodily passions and oppression. The perfected man (Isaac) is urged by the divine word not to descend into passions but to remain in a state of impassivity (apatheia) and spiritual joy. Here, “man” is the sovereign mind that refuses subjection to passions—a hidden power of God. (QG IV.177–178)
Genesis 26:3			Gen. 26:3 “I will be with you and bless you.” God brings “concord and blessing” to man. The worst evil is for the soul to be deprived of “the rational genus, the mind, which is characteristic of it.” Philo directly calls the mind (νοῦς) the “rational genus” of man, essential to his true being—a divine power ruling the soul. (QG IV.179)
Genesis 26:4			Gen. 26:4 “I will multiply your seed as the stars of heaven.” “Seed” here is spiritual: the descendants are like stars—pure, shining, following their leader. The righteous soul, as a type of man, is a cosmic principle—reflecting divine order, the hidden power of God shining through the wise. (QG IV.181); Gen. 26:4 “To your seed I will give all these lands.” The wise man receives dominion over all bodily and earthly things as a king rules his subjects. God gives “all earthly and corporeal substances as if servants subject to a ruler”—the mind or ruling power in man is made king over passions and body. (QG IV.182); Gen. 26:4 “In your seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed.” “All the nations” are allegorically the various senses and passions within a man. These become better when governed by a “governor and overseer and superintendent”—that is, the sovereign mind. When the mind is weak, passions dominate; when the mind rules, the man is truly a manifestation of God’s hidden power. (QG IV.183)
Genesis 26:11		אִ֣ישׁ(Esau is a hairy man and I am a smooth man)
Genesis 26:12			Gen. 26:12 “He sowed and found a hundredfold.” Barley is food for both men and beasts: “in each of us the mind is a man, and sense-perception is a beast.” When the soul is fertile, it receives the “seed of virtue” and God makes it fruitful—the mind as “man” governs and brings increase, a divine principle hidden within. (QG IV.189)
Genesis 26:18			Gen. 26:18 “Isaac dug again the wells … and called them by the same names.” Wells represent education and knowledge—springs in the soul. The mind is the perfect man, already possessing these wells within; the servants (powers of the soul) strive to attain perfection. Foreigners (passions) block the wells with “earthy desires.” The mind, as the true man, strives to remove impediments to wisdom—a divine power at work. (QG IV.191, 193–194)
Genesis 28:12					Gen. 28:12–13, Ladder (Jacob’s dream) “angels ascending and descending” Jacob saw the Lord standing above (Tibat Marqe IV)	Genesis 28:12 (Jacob’s ladder) The Son of God appeared to Jacob “standing on the ladder,” speaks with men, prefigures mediation. (Irenaeus Dem. 45) (111)
Genesis 28:16	Then Jacob awoke from his sleep and said, “Surely the LORD is (יש) in this place, and I did not know it.	יש (Surely the LORD yesh in this place)	For Jacob was roused from his sleep and said, ‘Surely the Lord is in this place, and I did not know it.’ And it would have been better, I suppose, to say: ‘to be ignorant’—or rather—‘to think there is some god,’ (ἔν τινι θεὸν ὑπολαμβάνειν εἶναι) the one who surrounds him on all sides with all things. Therefore, rightly he feared and spoke with wonder: ‘How awe‑inspiring is this place!’ Indeed, of all places explored in natural philosophy, this is the most difficult one—namely, to seek out where even ‘some existent thing’ (ἔν τινι τὸ ὄν) is at all—some say that the whole of what is existent occupies some domain, and grant different others to other domains, whether within the cosmos or beyond it outside the cosmos; but others assert that the ungenerated is like nothing that is generated, but surpasses all of the generated, just as they confess that the quickest intellect is far inferior to comprehension. Wherefore immediately he cried out: ‘This is not that which I thought; that the Lord is in this place’—for he encompasses, but is not encompassed according to the truth of the word. Now that which is shown and visible, this perceptible world—this is nothing else than the house of God, one of the powers of Being (μιᾶς τῶν τοῦ ὄντος δυνάμεων), in which He was good. He called the cosmos house and gateway to the true heaven. What is this? The intelligible cosmos constituted from the ideas, in that one who has been appointed according to divine allotments; there is no way to apprehend it unless by transition through this perceptible and seen thing (De Somnis 183 – 187).
Genesis 28:20					Gen 25:27, Gen 28:20–22 Jacob “Righteous man, dwells in tents”; makes and keeps vows Archetypal righteous man, not divine איש תם; זכותה מסחן (Tibat Marqe VI 28 – 43)
Genesis 29:32		אִישִֽׁי(now my husband will love me)
Genesis 29:34		אִישִׁי֙(this time my husband will be joined)
Genesis 30:18		לְאִישִׁ֑י(my maid to my husband)
Genesis 30:20		אִישִׁ֔י(now my husband will dwell)
Genesis 30:43		הָאִ֖ישׁ(the man increased exceedingly)
Genesis 31:13			Gen 31 :13 (Explains that when the text says “I am the God who appeared to you in the place of God” the apparition is an angelic/Logos “image” that people take as God‑in‑human‑form until they can bear truer knowledge, the “angel of God” who speaks as God) ὡς ἄνθρωπος ὁ θεὸς ἀφικνεῖται καὶ ἐξαναχωρεῖ (De Somnis § 238‑240); Gen 31 : 13 (God’s words at Bethel)
Genesis 31:50		אִ֖ישׁ(no man is with us)
Genesis 32:6		אִ֖ישׁ(four hundred men with him)
Genesis 32:25		אִישׁ(and there wrestled a man with him )				Gen 32:24–30 (Jacob wrestles Angel‑God – Jacob left alone with the Angel‑Lord who asks his name) ὑπελείφθη δὲ Ἰακὼβ μόνος· καὶ ἐπάλαιεν ἄγγελος … Τί τὸ ὄνομά σου ἐστίν (Justin Martyr, Dial. 58.7) Gen 32 (appearance of the Lord‑Angel – Jacob sees the Angel‑God in form of a man wrestling) οὗτος καὶ ἄγγελος καὶ θεὸς καὶ κύριος … παλαίσας (Justin Martyr, Dial. 58.10); Genesis 32:24–30 (Jacob wrestles) The “man” who wrestled with Jacob (whom Jacob called “God”) was Christ, present and physical. ἄνθρωπος ἐπάλαιε; εἶδον θεὸν πρόσωπον πρὸς πρόσωπον (Justin, Dial. 126, 127); Genesis 32:24–32: The “man” who wrestled with Jacob and is later called “God” is Christ appearing in human form. ἐπάλαιεν μετ’ αὐτοῦ ἄνθρωπος … εἶδον γὰρ θεὸν πρόσωπον πρὸς πρόσωπον. (Clement of Alexandria, Paedagogus 1.57.1–2)
Genesis 32:27									318 appears as the acronym/name of the angel wrestling with Jacob in Genesis 32:27 דמלאכי מרומא משבחין למרי עלמא ואנא חד מן מלאכיא משבחייא – “The angels from on high praise the Lord of the world, and I am one of the angels who praise (Him).” As initials ד מ מ ל ע ו ח מ מ מ or ד4 מ40 מ40 ל30 ע70 ו6 ח8 מ40 מ40 מ40 = 318.
Genesis32:28		אֲנָשִׁ֖ים(struggled with God and with men and prevailed)				Genesis 32:28 Angel/God who wrestled with Jacob and renamed him is Christ, appearing “in the form of a man.” ἐν ἰδέᾳ ἀνδρὸς, μετωνομακέναι Ἰακὼβ Ἰσραὴλ, Ἰησοῦς (Justin, Dial. 111, 113); Gen 32 :28 (name‑oracle “Israel = ἄνθρωπος νικῶν Θεόν”; the etymology foretells a Man who overcomes God’s Power—Justin’s midrash on the victorious heavenly Man) Ἰσρα = ἄνθρωπος νικῶν · ἢλ = δύναμις» (Dial. 125.3‑5)
Genesis 33:1		אִ֑ישׁ(four hundred men with him)
Genesis 37:15		אִישׁ,הָאִישׁ(a certain man found him, and, behold, he was wandering in the field. And the man asked him, saying: ‘What seekest thou?’)	Gen 37 : 15 (“A man found Joseph wandering in the field …” The “man” is the true Man, the inner guide who meets a soul that has strayed) ὁ ἀληθινὸς ἄνθρωπος πλανώμενον ἐν τῇ ὁδῷ (Quod deterius potiori insidiari soleat § 10); Gen 37 : 15 (Philo explains that “Man” is the proper and straightest name for the god‑given ruler dwelling in every soul) τοῦ πρὸς ἀλήθειαν ἀνθρώπου … ὄνομα ἐστιν αὐτὸ τοῦτο ἄνθρωπος · οὗτος ὁ ἄνθρωπος ἐν ἑκάστου τῇ ψυχῇ κατοικῶν (Quod deterius potiori insidiari soleat §§ 22 – 24) Gen 37 : 15 (That hidden Man dwells in every soul, sometimes ruling, judging, or silently accusing) οὗτος ὁ ἄνθρωπος ἐν ἑκάστου τῇ ψυχῇ κατοικῶν … ἄρχων καὶ βασιλεὺς εὑρίσκεται (Quod deterius potiori insidiari soleat §23); Gen 37 : 15‑17 — the “unknown man” who meets Joseph in the field That “man” is not a random passer‑by but the inner examiner of the soul, conscience / λόγος itself. Philo explicitly calls him “ὁ ἀληθινὸς ἄνθρωπος, ὁ ἐπὶ ψυχῆς ἔλεγχος.” ὁ ἀληθινὸς ἄνθρωπος (De Profugis et Inventionibus 127- 132);		Gen 37:15. “One of them [angels] appeared briefly to Joseph in the field and showed him the way and never appeared to him again.” (Tal, Tibat Marqe 1.2 note “Joseph was found by “a man” (האיש(, which the Samaritan exegesis, as reflected by MS A of the ST, interprets as angel, מלאכה, in line with TM. Interestingly enough, some MSS of the ST render האיש in this spot as אישה, using the Hebrew word instead of the Aramaic גברה in order to deliberately stress non-human nature, as stated by TM. So also for the “man” who struggled with Jacob: עמה אישה וגשש) ST MS J, Gen. 32:25, var. מלאך(. See below Book III, § 1b. p. 35″
Genesis 37:17		הָאִישׁ֙(then the man said)
Genesis 37:19		אִ֣ישׁ(then they said to one another)
Genesis 37:28		אֲנָשִׁ֨ים(Then some Midianite traders)
Genesis 38:1		אִ֥ישׁ(a certain Adullamite)
Genesis 38:2		אִ֥ישׁ(a daughter of a certain Canaanite)
Genesis 38:11,12		אַנְשֵׁ֤י(the men of the place)
Genesis 39:1		אִ֣ישׁ(the captain of the bodyguard an Egyptian)				Genesis 39 (Joseph in Egypt) Clement notes God was watching Joseph’s ordeal with Potiphar’s wife, mentioning the “Lord” as “working through a human mouth” and “taking flesh.” But he does not claim Christ or Jesus was present in the Old Testament narrative—he only draws a typological connection. “διὰ στόματος ἀνθρωπίνου κύριος ἐνεργῶν· ταύτῃ καὶ σάρκα ἀνείληφεν” (Clement of Alexandria Stromateis 7.11.61.1–2)
Genesis 39:11		אִ֜ישׁ מֵאַנְשֵׁ֥י(of the men of the men of the household)
Genesis 39:14		לְאַנְשֵׁ֣י, אִ֥ישׁ(to the men of the household, to the men)
Genesis 41:11		אִ֛ישׁ(we dreamed each man according to his interpretation)				Genesis 41, Joseph in Egypt Tertullian says the Egyptian god Serapis is actually Joseph, relating the biblical story of Joseph. “Serapis…Ioseph olim dictus fuit”(Tertullian, Ad Nationes VIII.9-15 (p. 110-111 in your text)
Genesis 41:33		אִ֖ישׁ(a man discerning and wise)
Genesis 41:38		אִ֕ישׁ (can we find a man like this whom the Spirit)	Gen 41 38 (Pharaoh’s exclamation. Joseph is hailed as a human unusually filled with “divine spirit,” but Philo is still speaking about Joseph the statesman, not about an archetypal or hidden Man) «τοιοῦτον ἄνθρωπον, ὃς ἔχει πνεῦμα θεῖον ἐν ἑαυτῷ» (De Iosepho § 117); no biblical lemma (Philo’s own comment. Philo insists that the agent who unmasks guilt is not a human at all but “either God, or the Logos, or the divine Law,” explicitly contrasting ἄνθρωπος with the divine; he is not elevating ἄνθρωπος into a god‑like being) «ὁ δὲ ζητῶν οὐκ ἔστιν ἄνθρωπος, ἀλλ’ ἢ θεὸς ἢ λόγος ἢ νόμος θεῖος»(De Iosepho 174)		Gen. 41:38 “Spirit of God in him” as sign of second rank Joseph (parallel to Moses) רוח אלהה בה מלך אתרה (Tibat Marqe IV §§93–108),
Genesis 41:44		אִ֧ישׁ(no one shall rise up)
Genesis 42:11		אִישׁ־(no man had had relations)	Gen 42 : 11 (the brothers: “we are sons of one man” The “one Father” they name is no mortal but God’s own Man, the everlasting Logos who is necessarily incorruptible) ἕνα … ἄνθρωπον θεοῦ, ὃς τοῦ ἀιδίου λόγος ὢν ἐξ ἀνάγκης καὶ αὐτὸς ἄφθαρτος (De Confusione Linguarum §§ 41 – 43)
Genesis 42:13		אִישׁ־(the sons of one man in the land)
Genesis 42:21		אִ֣ישׁ(they said each to one another)
Genesis 42:25		אִ֣ישׁ(to restore everyman’s money)
Genesis 42:28		אִ֤ישׁ(trembling to one another)
Genesis 42:33		הָאִישׁ֙(the man the lord of the land)
Genesis 42:35		אִ֥ישׁ(behold, everyman’s bundle)
Genesis 43:3		הָאִ֤ישׁ(warned the man solemnly)
Genesis 43:5		הָאִ֞ישׁ(for the man said)
Genesis 43:6		לָאִ֔ישׁ(to tell the man whether you still have a brother)
Genesis 43:7		הָ֠אִישׁ(the man asked strictly concerning ourselves)
Genesis 43:13		הָאִֽישׁ(return to the man)
Genesis 43:14		הָאִ֔ישׁ(give you mercy before the man)
Genesis 43:15		הָֽאֲנָשִׁים֙(so the men took the present)
Genesis 43:17		הָאִ֔ישׁ, הָאִ֛ישׁ, הָאֲנָשִׁ֖ים(And the man did as Joseph bade; and the man brought the men into Joseph’s house)
Genesis 43:18		הָֽאֲנָשִׁ֗ים(now the men were afraid)
Genesis 43:19		הָאִ֔ישׁ(And they came near to the steward of Joseph’s household)
Genesis 43:21		אִישׁ֙(each man’s money)
Genesis 43:24		הָאִ֛ישׁ אֶת־ הָאֲנָשִׁ֖ים(then the man brought the men into Joseph’s house)
Genesis 43:33		הָאֲנָשִׁ֖ים אִ֥ישׁ(then the men looked at one another)
Genesis 44:1		הָֽאֲנָשִׁים֙,אִ֖ישׁ(Fill the men’s sacks with food … and put every man’s money in his sack’s mouth)
Genesis 44:4		הָֽאֲנָשִׁ֑ים(follow the men)
Genesis 44:6		לָאִ֔ישׁ(to tell the man whether you still have a brother)
Genesis 44:7		הָ֠אִישׁ(the man asked strictly concerning ourselves)
Genesis 44:11		אִ֥ישׁ,אִ֥ישׁ(and took down every man his sack to the ground, and opened every man his sack)
Genesis 44:13		אִ֣ישׁ(and when each man loaded his ass)
Genesis 44:15		אִ֖ישׁ(that such a man as I)
Genesis 44:17		הָאִ֡ישׁ(but the man in whose hand)
Genesis 44:26		הָאִ֔ישׁ(we may not see the man’s face)
Genesis 45:1		אִ֖ישׁ(Cause every man to go out from me.’ And there stood no man with him, while Joseph made himself known unto his brethren)
Genesis 47:6		אַנְשֵׁי־(capable men among them)
Genesis 49					Genesis 49 “Jacob blessed his sons, each according to his blessing, and Moses blessed the congregation, each tribe according to its blessing. … And this is the blessing with which Moses, the man of God, blessed the sons of Israel before his death.” (Tibat Marqe Book V, 13 p. 483):	Gen 49 (prophecy of special Man‑Christ – Justin criticizes literalist views of a “special” Christ) οἱ λέγοντες ἄνθρωπον γεγονέναι αὐτὸν … (Justin Martyr, Dial. 49.1) Gen 49:11 (“lion’s cub” – Justin reads this as prophecy of Christ’s unique humanity ἡ δὲ προφητεία αὕτη … οὐχ ἔστιν ὁ Χριστὸς ἄνθρωπος ἐξ ἀνθρώπων (Justin Martyr, Dial. 54.2); Genesis 49:10–11 Prophecy about ruler from Judah and “washing his garment in the blood of the grape”; Justin reads as a Messianic prophecy (Christ as the one foretold by Moses). δεσμεύων πρὸς ἄμπελον τὸν πῶλον αὐτοῦ (1 Apology LIV.5); Genesis 49 (Father of the human race, Lot) The Word (Christ) is called the “father of the human race” who imparts spiritual seed (i.e., the Spirit), (Irenaeus, Adversus Haereses 4.31.2)
Genesis 49:6		אִ֔ישׁ(they killed a man)
Exodus						Exodus (creation‑versus‑Creator dispute – Trypho asks for proof of a second “some other” god besides the Creator) ἀποδεῖξαι ὅτι καὶ ἄλλος θεὸς παρα τὸν ποιητὴν τῶν ὅλων (Justin Martyr, Dial. 50.1) Exodus (prophetic confession of “another god” – Trypho challenges Justin to prove that prophetic “another god” isn’t Creator) ἀπόδειξον ἡμῖν ὅτι ἕτερος θεὸς … ὑπὸ τοῦ προφητικοῦ πνεύματος ὡμολόγηται (Justin Martyr, Dial. 55.1); (General, Moses and Prophets) The same Lord who acts in the Gospel “exhorted us always,” and through Moses, Isaiah, and “the whole chorus of prophets” called Israel to repentance, showing a continuity of the saving presence of the Logos. καὶ διὰ Μωσέως τοῦ πανσόφου καὶ τοῦ φιλαλήθους Ἡσαΐα καὶ παντὸς τοῦ προφητικοῦ χοροῦ… αὐτὸς ἐν Ἡσαΐᾳ ὁ κύριος λαλῶν, αὐτὸς ἐν Ἠλίᾳ, ἐν στόματι προφητῶν αὐτός (Clement of Alexandria, Protrepticus 1.8.2–4); Exodus The God who led the people out of Egypt, sent the prophets, and manifested His Son in the last times is the same Lord (Irenaeus, Adversus Haereses IV.35.1; IV.36.1) Moses, Prophets, Law The Word spoke with Moses, is the one proclaimed by the law/prophets, appears in Judea as Jesus. ὁ λόγος τοῦ θεοῦ…ὁ ἐλάλησεν Μωϋσεῖ (Irenaeus, Dem. 40) (106); Exodus (esp. Exod 23:20–21) Tertullian says that the one who spoke with Moses and led Israel—the “Angel” with God’s name—was the Son of God himself (i.e., Christ), who “was always seen.” “ipse erat dei filius qui et semper videbatur; deum enim patrem nemo umquam vidit et vixit.” (Tertullian, Adversus Iudaeos IX.22–23); Exodus (esp. Exod 23:20–21) The “Angel” that led Israel, whom God tells Moses about, is interpreted as the pre-existent Son, not merely an ordinary angel. “Ecce ego mitto angelum meum ante faciem tuam… nomen meum super illum est…” (Adversus Iudaeos IX.23); Exodus (speaking to Moses) The same passage above—Tertullian explicitly says it was the Son who spoke to Moses, not the Father. “ipse erat dei filius qui et semper videbatur” (Tertullian, Adversus Iudaeos IX.22); [General reference to “the one who spoke to Moses”] Christ is “the one who was always seen” (i.e., the visible Yahweh) whenever God appears in the Old Testament. “semper videbatur” (Tertullian, Adversus Iudaeos IX.22)
Ex 2						Exodus 3:2–16 One who appeared in burning bush = Logos/Christ “ὤφθη δὲ αὐτῷ ἄγγελος κυρίου…” Dial. 59.1–3); Exodus 3:2 et seq. Exod 2 :12 (Moses slays the Egyptian. The “Egyptian man” is not a historical person but the sensual, earth‑bound passion that the seeing‑God mind must strike down and bury) ὁρᾷ τὸν Αἰγύπτιον ἄνθρωπον, τὸ ἀνθρώπειον καὶ ἐπίκηρον πάθος (Leg. All. III. § 38); Exod. 2.14 (Burning bush – “The same One … appeared in the bush and spoke to Moses”) ὁ αὐτὸς οὗτος καὶ ἄγγελος καὶ θεὸς καὶ κύριος … (Justin Martyr, Dial. 59.2) Exodus 3 (Moses’ Lord is appeared Angel – The Lord who speaks to Moses is the one revealed to Abraham & Jacob) οὐχ ὁ ποιητὴς τῶν ὅλων ἔσται θεὸς ὁ τῷ Μωυσεί … (Justin Martyr, Dial. 60.2); Exod 2 : 19‑20 (“An Egyptian man rescued us … Where is the man?” Moses, says Philo, is a living interface between the intelligible and the sensible realms. The noun ἄνθρωπος signals what is “contemplated only by the logos,” while “Αἰγύπτιος” stands for the world of sense‑perception. Hence the father’s follow‑up question “Where is the man?” really asks: Where, within you, does the rational form dwell? διὰ μὲν τοῦ ἄνθρωπος τὰ μόνῳ λόγῳ θεωρητά … ποῦ ἐστιν ὁ ἄνθρωπος; ἐν τίνι μέρει … τὸ λογικὸν εἶδος (De mutatione nominum 118 – 119)
1		אִ֖ישׁ(now a man from the house of Levi)
11		אִ֣ישׁ, אִישׁ־(the saw an Egyptian beating a Hebrew)
12		אִ֑ישׁ(there was no man, so he struck)
19		אִ֣ישׁ(an Egyptian delivered us)
20		הָאִ֔ישׁ(you have left the man behind?)
21		הָאִ֑ישׁ(to dwell with the man)
Exodus 3					Exodus 3–4, 33 (Moses and the vision) Moses’ vision is mediated, never direct; “secrets” (רזין) are taught openly, but always by means of forms. רזין בסניה פרסיאת (“secrets taught openly”), דמותה (“form/likeness”) (Tibat Marqe, I, §2), Exod 3; Exod 24:17 “Burning bush; fire on Sinai” Moses encounters God via fire and receives the alphabet, Torah (Tibat Marqe VI, 14 – 27), Macdonald, 53–56, 648, 650 Exodus 3–4; Deut 34 Moses as “Man of God” Moses is repeatedly called man of God and prophet of all the world. Sent by God, intermediary, unique. Supremely unique (The Day of Atonement: Its Interpretation in Samaritan Literature (2 vols.; London: Royal Asiatic Society, 1969), 53–56, 648, 650)	Exodus 3:2 (“the one seen in the bush,” blessing on Joseph) Justin explicitly says the phrase “the one who appeared in the bush” (ὁ ὀφθεὶς ἐν τῇ βάτῳ) is Christ—identifies him as appearing to Moses. “τῷ ὀφθέντι ἐν τῇ βάτῳ” (Justin, Dial. 91.6–7); Exodus (Burning Bush) The Lord who now saves through the Gospel was also present before: “he” exhorted, saved, and performed wonders “in Egypt, in the wilderness, through the bush and the cloud that followed as a handmaid” and spoke “in Isaiah… in Elijah, in the mouth of the prophets, himself.” ὃς καὶ νῦν καὶ ἀεὶ προὔτρεπεν εἰς σωτηρίαν, διὰ τεράτων καὶ σημείων ἐν Αἰγύπτῳ, ἐν ἐρήμῳ διά τε τῆς βάτου καὶ τῆς ἀκολουθούσης χάριτι φιλανθρωπίας… αὐτὸς ἐν Ἡσαΐᾳ ὁ κύριος λαλῶν, αὐτὸς ἐν Ἠλίᾳ, ἐν στόματι προφητῶν αὐτός (Clement of Alexandria, Protrepticus 1.8.4), Exodus 3 (Burning Bush) Moses, the faithful servant, speaks with the Lord from the bush, relaying God’s words to Israel. φωνὴν κυρίου διὰ γλώσσης ἀνθρωπίνης διακονῆσαι (Clement of Alexandria, Stromateis 4.17.106–107); Exodus 3 (Moses at the bush) The God who spoke to Moses is the same as Christ; again, not a physical Jesus but the pre-existent Word “spake with Moses”, “the same God” (Irenaeus, Adversus Haereses 3.12, §10); Exodus (Burning Bush) The Word spoke to Moses from the bush, foretelling that Pharaoh would not let Israel go unless by a mighty hand. (Irenaeus Adversus Haereeses 4.29.2); John 17:6; 17:11; 17:26 The name of God the Father was not revealed before, not even to Moses; but now is revealed by the Son, who says, “I have come in the name of the Father.” Ego veni…Nomen tuum manifestavi hominibus (Tertullian De Oratione §3)
Exodus 3:10
Exodus 3:14					Exodus 3:1–14 (Burning Bush; Name revealed) “The Good One (טובה) does not reveal Himself to any man except according to his nature: the good one according to his goodness, the wicked one according to his wickedness.” cmp. Marcion’s “Good God.” Moses receives the revelation only via mediation (angel/messenger). רבה חילה (“Great Power”), רז מנה לא פלי (“no secret hidden from Him”); עמתה משגר ביד מרה לית על דמותה: “The one sent by the Master (i.e., the angel) is not [identical] to His [God’s] form.” (Emphasizing mediation—no direct vision of God’s essence.); רזין בסניה פרסיאת: “He taught Moses teachings/secrets openly (parrhēsia),” employing a Greek loanword meaning boldness or openness, showing the clear transmission of revelation to Moses, but always mediated.(Tibat Marqe I, §1–2 opening of Book of Wonders)	Exodus 3:2–6 (Burning Bush) The “Angel of the Lord” in the bush, who speaks as God, is Christ—appearing as fire and voice to Moses. πῦρ ποτε γέγονε τῇ πρὸς Μωσέα ὁμιλίᾳ τῇ ἀπὸ τῆς βάτου (Justin, Dial. 127, 128); Exodus 3:2–6: The “angel of the Lord” in the bush is Christ; he identifies himself as God. ἄγγελος κυρίου ἐν φλογὶ πυρὸς … ἐγώ εἰμι ὁ θεὸς τοῦ πατρός σου. (Clement of Alexandria, Paedagogus 1.56.3–4); Exodus 3 (Burning Bush) Clement interprets the Lord (the Logos) who appeared to Moses in the burning bush as the pre-existent Christ, who later is crowned with thorns, drawing a parallel between the burning bush and the crown of thorns. “ὁ διὰ βάτου τὸ πρῶτον ὀφθείς, ὁ λόγος, διὰ τῆς ἀκάνθης ὕστερον ἀναληφθεὶς” (Clement of Alexandria, Paedagogus 2.75.1–2)
Exodus 4:14 – 16
Exodus 4:16					Exodus 4:16. Moses is addressed as “תניאני בעלמה דלרע”—“you are My second in the lower world.” (Tibat Marqe, §20), Exodus 4:16 Moses “next to God” Samaritan tradition: “him who is next to the Compassionate God.” (Macdonald, 54–55)
Exodus 4:22					Exod 4:22; Deut 32:6 Israel as son, God as father בר בכור … לא ידע איקרה … עמי … Israel as “man”/son (Tibat Marqe IV §§78–92)
Exodus 5:1					Exod. 5:1 “Let My people go”—Moses as deliverer Moses as agent of God, שלח עמי כי בדיל פרקנה … נביה רבה משה (Tibat Marqe IV §§93–108)
Exodus 7:1					Exodus 7:1 You will be My second (תניאנותי), and he [Aaron] will be your prophet” (Tibat Marqe I)
Ex 9			Exod 9 : 29 (Philo warns the reader not to imagine the speaker as a composite mortal but as the pure, freed mind itself) μὴ νομίσῃς δὲ τὸν διαλεγόμενον ἄνθρωπον εἶναι… ἀλλὰ νοῦν εἱλικρινέστατον καὶ καθαρώτατον (περι μεθης 101 – 102)
						Exodus 11 (Exodus Plagues) Christ (the Word) is the agent behind the plagues and exodus (Irenaeus, Adversus Haereses 4.30.4)
Exodus 11:3					Exod 11:3 See ס standing before the great prophet Moses, saying: “O faithful one, who wrote the Law, O (you) to whom God gave prophethood, and whom He vested with His name, and whose name He called “His servant” (עבדה) and “His Man” (ואישה) and “the faithful of His House” (ביתה) and “His Good” middle man” and “His honored leader” and “His lawgiver”. (טבה ונגודה יקירה ונומיקה דלtה) Contemplate each of these words. The servant of God (Deut. 34:5) – he trod in the fire and it was like dew under his feet. Man (Exod. 11:3) – the powerful, whose power was manifest in all his deeds (Tibat Marqe VI 28 – 43)
Exodus 11:7			Exod 11 : 7 (“No dog shall bark at man or beast” Philo allegorises “the man” as the ruling mind inside us; this hidden inner ἄνθρωπος is contrasted with the barking beast and the canine tongue) «οὔτε τὸν ἐν ἡμῖν ἄνθρωπον, ἡγεμόνα νοῦν …» (De Somnis II § 267)
Exodus 12					Exod. 12, 13 Angelic agent of God, (Destroyer/Glory = כבודי “My Glory”) executes God’s judgment (Tibat Marqe I, 112, 66, 67, 68, 69)	Exodus 12; Joshua 2 Christ as true Passover; blood on doorposts and Rahab’s scarlet cord prefigure Christ, who is present and saves. τὸ πάσχα ὁ Χριστός, τὸ αἷμα τοῦ πάσχα, κοκκίνου σπαρτίου (Justin, Dial. 111); Exodus 12 (Passover Angel) The “Angel” who saved Israel at Passover and killed Egypt’s firstborn is Christ. ἄγγελος κυρίου, τὸ πάσχα, Χριστός (Justin, Dial. 118–128, but explicit in earlier ch. 49–50)
Exodus 13:21					Exod 13:21 ויהוה הלך לפניהם יומם בעמוד ענן Moses, Pillar of cloud/fire associated with Moses (Tibat Marqe VI §§1–13), Deut 4:20; Exod 13:21 “Iron furnace,” passed through the Sea” Israel’s redemption is by God’s direct power (Tibat Marqe VI.14–27)	Exodus 13:21–22; 14:6 Pillar of light, Red Sea crossing, Egyptians destroyed—Christ as acting Lord. στύλος φωτὸς ἔλαμπεν (Justin Dial. 131)
Exodus 15:1 – 2					Exodus 15, Sea narrative. Agents/hypostases of one God כבודה, אלהותה, מלאכיה (Tibat Marqe I, 15a)
Exodus 15:3					Exodus 15:3 Woe to Pharaoh the wicked, (given) what is appointed to him by the great prophet Moses! Moses his Man (Tal, Florentin, Ben Hayyim “the Man”) said: “Where are the magicians? Let them come and see me here, how I destroy you at my Lord’s command. Did they not say to you that I would perish by them in the sea, so that they would be glorified? Today they shall see who will perish in the sea. They shall learn that it is our Lord who is superior. Go, O sinner, and prepare yourself, and indeed you will see the reward of all your doings. Our Lord will destroy you with all kinds of afflictions. If the magicians said to you that I will perish in the sea, my Lord has informed me that you are the one who will perish in the sea. You will see which statement is true, that of the magicians or that of our Lord.” Moses is clearly blurred with the Man/Hero of War of Exodus 15:3, Tal acknowledges the difficulties of this section of text. “This appendix consists of 9 paragraphs which intervene between § 8 and § 18 in MS S (see notes ad loc.). They represent dialogues between Moses and the stubborn Pharaoh on one hand and between Moses and the sea on the other hand … The first two paragraphs (9a–10a) consist of a dialogue between Moses and Pharaoh at the Sea of Reeds, an extension of the dialogue described in Exod. 7:10–9:11. The debate with Pharaoh is transferred to another stage; from Pharaoh’s palace and the Nile to the shores of the sea. In paragraphs 11a–13a Moses and the sea converse about the coming events. The sea commits itself to let Israel pass safely, but argues that it cannot accept becoming defiled as the grave of the impure Egyptians.” Tal’s explanation is only a set up for explaining the clear reference to Moses “on the waves” which he can only explain by means of the birth narrative: “Remarkable claim of the sea about Moses being left on its waves, which contradicts the story told in Exod. 2:3–5, that actually his mother put him in an ark among the reeds: היאר שפת על בסף.” But MacDonald saw this more correctly. Moses is standing on the sea as the “hero/man of war.” The difficulty is that the Samaritan text does not read “man of war” but “hero of war.” It didn’t help that MacDonald saw Christian influence from Jesus’s walking on the water. Nevertheless the context is clearly Exodus 15 and Moses is upon the sea. Moreover Tal and the various authorities on Samaritan Aramaic seem to overcomplicate the explanation of the epithet משה אישה. In the Samaritan Pentateuch, forms like אישה are sometimes used where the text implies a special, possibly angelic, figure—often translated as “the man” rather than “his man.” While most scholars interpret the -ה suffix as an emphatic or definite marker, it may reflect an older sense of divine possession or designation, subtly marking the figure as uniquely belonging to God. Exod. 15:3 “YHWH is a man of war” YHWH Himself, (Tibat Marqe II); Exod. 15:3, 21:6, 22:8 Names of God, Elohim has associates, YHWH is unique (Tibat Marqe II §37); Exodus 15:3 “God is man of war” (victory, no other power) לית עמה אל אחר ברא ושכלל (Tibat Marqe IV §§78–92),
Exodus 16:14						Exodus 16:14, Num 20:11 Manna and water from rock, Christ as provider. ἄρτον … μάννα, ὕδωρ ἐκ πέτρας (Justin, Dial 131)
Exodus 17						Exodus 17; Joshua (Rock, Victory) The “Rock” and “Lord” present with Israel, giving victory by Joshua’s hand, is Christ (alluded to, less explicitly in these chaps). Κύριος, Ἰησοῦς, λίθος (Justin DIal. 127)’ Exodus 17 (the Rock in the Wilderness) Christ is identified as “that spiritual Rock that followed them; and the Rock was Christ.” Irenaeus, quoting Paul, presents Christ as present with Israel in the wilderness, supplying them spiritual drink. (Irenaeus, Adversus Haereses 4.27.3); Exodus 17:6 (Water from the Rock) The water flowing from the rock for Israel: “If the rock was Christ, without doubt the water was baptism blessed in Christ.” He does not say Christ was physically there, only typologically present. petra Christus … aqua in Christo baptizatum (Tertullian De Baptismo cap. 9.3); Exodus 17 (Moses’ uplifted hands during Joshua’s battle with Amalek) Moses’ gesture with outstretched hands foreshadows the form of the cross, but Tertullian does not say Christ was present—he says it prefigures the cross of “the Lord Jesus” (“nomini domini Iesu dicebat dimicaturi…”). “nomen domini Iesu dicebat dimicaturi”, “crucis habitus quoque erat necessarius” (Tertullian, Adversus Iudaeos X.10)
Exodus 17:6						Exodus 17:8–13 (Moses’ hands, Joshua/Jesus fighting Amalek) Joshua (=Ἰησοῦς) led the battle, but Moses’ hands stretched in the sign of the cross, in the presence of the name Jesus, caused the victory. Justin says the name “Jesus” present at the head of the battle and the “sign” (cross) is why Israel prevails. “ἐν ἀρχῇ τῆς μάχης τοῦ ὀνόματος τοῦ Ἰησοῦ ὄντος, αὐτὸς τὸ σημεῖον τοῦ σταυροῦ ἐποίει.” (Justin, Dial. 90–91 (esp. 90.5–7; 91.3–4); Exodus 17:5–13 Moses stretches out hands (the Cross); Joshua (=Jesus) leads, victory by Jesus’ name. τύπος τοῦ σταυροῦ, Ἰησοῦ ὀνόματι (Justin, Dial. 111–112); Exodus 17:6 (Water from Rock) The Lord, supplying water to the wandering Hebrews from the rock, gives an example of sobriety to the ancients. He gives them drink from the rock in the desert, teaching moderation. ὁ κύριος ἐχoρήγει ποτόν (the Lord supplied drink) (Clement of Alexandria, Paedagogus II.2.19.2 (p. 144.1 Stählin); Exodus 3:2ff, 17:6 (Moses, the rock) The Word spoke with Moses from the bush, led Israel out, gave water from the rock (“that rock is Himself”). ὁ λόγος τοῦ θεοῦ; αὐτὸς ἐστὶν ἡ πέτρα (Irenaeus Dem. 46) (112)
Exodus 17:9						Exodus 17:9–13; Joshua 17:14 Moses’ outstretched arms and the name Joshua (Jesus) as types of Christ’s cross/victory. τὸ ὄνομα Ἰησοῦ … τοῦ σταυροῦ (Justin Dial. 131)
Exodus 19					Exod. 19 “מאתין קעימין” (“assembly of mortals and immortals”) “immortals and mortals (angels and men) gathered at Sinai” Distinction between humans and angels at revelation (Tibat Marqe IV §§19, 43), Praise and worship are attributed both to humans and angels together (“the angels rejoiced … praise the Lord … ascribe greatness to our God”), but there is no blending of “man” with angelic or divine status (§50), Exod 19–24; Exod 3; Exod 4:27 Moses, Aaron Moses’ speech “like God’s,” Moses’ body radiant Moses as a unique, empowered man אנש (Tibat Marqe VI 28 – 43), Exodus 19–20 Moses & God—no “third” “No third person between the Lord and Moses … As though it were a man speaking with his companion, but without using tongue and mouth.” Moses is the closest (Macdonald, 650, 287 Morning Hymn)
Exodus 19:19					Exod 19:19 משה ידבר והאלהים יעננו בקול Moses Moses speaks with God directly—preeminence of Moses among men (Tibat Marqe Book VI §§1–13), Exod 19:19 “Moses spoke and God answered by voice” Moses Speech of Moses “blended with” God’s voice—emphasizing prophetic intimacy, not equality (Tibat Marqe VI, 14 – 27)
Exodus 19:22
Ex 20					Exod 20; Deut 5; Exod 34 “Written by the finger of God… in two tablets” Torah originates in heaven; Moses as prophet receives it (Tibat Marqe VI 14 – 21)	Exodus 20 (The Logos (as the παιδαγωγός, i.e., the divine educator, speaking through Moses, gives commandments and offers remedies for sin, including rituals of cleansing and repentance) ὁ παιδαγωγὸς διὰ Μωσέως φάσκει (Clement, Paedaogus 1.4.4); Decalogue – Clement states the Decalogue “through the iota element, signifies the blessed Name, representing Jesus as the Logos.” No implication of physical presence, only typological. “λόγον ὄντα τὸν Ἰησοῦν παριστῶσα” (Clement of Alexandria Stromateis 6.16.145)
Exodus 20:13			Exod 20 : 13 (“Thou shalt not murder.” The command is grave because the human being is the living cult-object of God—an earthly replica of the eternal Idea—so to strike a person is to profane God’s own most sacred possession) «ἄνθρωπος δέ, ζῷον ἄριστον … οἰκειότατον ἀπεικόνισμα καὶ μίμημα τῆς ἀιδίου καὶ εὐδαίμονος ἰδέας» (De Decalogo §134); Exod 20 : 13 (same command To kill is also temple-robbery: nothing laid up in a shrine is holier than man himself, the choicest “dedication” that belongs to God) «τί γὰρ σεμνότερον ἢ ἁγιώτερον ἀνάθημα ἀνθρώπου;» (De Decalogo §133)
Exodus 20:21					Exod. 20:21; cf. Samaritan traditions Moses dwelt among angels. Moses among “immortals” (angels) Moses ascends to “Concealed” (Tibat Marqe IV, §§19–30), Moses “learning Torah from the immortals” (ממנה … מירון המאר על פתורון יתב … במשכון הקבע), i.e., from angels, at Sinai (§44);
Ex 22			Exod 22 :1–2 (the house‑breaker struck in the night. The burglar symbolizes a mind that steals the divine prerogatives; when it attributes everything to the human instead of to God it is called “the ἀνθρώπινος νοῦς.”) λέγεται γοῦν … τέχνας καὶ ἐπιτηδεύματα … ἔθετο μόνος ὁ ἀνθρώπινος νοῦς» (Leg. All. III. § 31)
Exodus 23:20						Exodus 23:20–23; 32:33–34: The “angel” who leads Israel is Logos/Christ; “my name is in him.” ὁ κύριος … ὁ ἄγγελός μου προπορεύεται … ἐν αὐτῷ τὸ ὄνομά μου. (Clement of Alexandria, Paedagogus 1.58.1–2); Num 13:16 (Joshua named Jesus), Exod 23:20 Christ is prefigured in Joshua; when Joshua son of Nun is renamed “Jesus,” Tertullian says the Christ speaks in Exodus as the Spirit of the Creator—thus identifying Christ/Jesus as present and speaking to Moses (“my angel… because my name is in him”). Iesus cognominatus… Quis enim loquebatur, nisi spiritus creatoris, qui est Christus? (Tertullian, Adversus Marcionem III.16.4–6); Exod 23:20 Christ’s future name is confirmed by the one who commands Moses; “my name is in him.” Tertullian identifies the angel as Christ and the name as “Jesus.” nomen meum super illum est (Tertullian, Adversus Marcionem III.16.5)
Exodus 24:10									Qur’an 2:255 (Throne Verse) God “sits” physically on the Throne; traditions where Prophet/Muhammad joins him. ʿarsh (عرش), sitting. Literalist readings: corporeal co-sitting (al-Khallāl tradition). (p. 9–10, 13)
Exodus 24.17					Exod 3:2; Exod 24:17 “Fire in bush/Sinai” Moses Moses’ body described with mythic attributes (radiant, fiery, wise), but all as gifts/manifestations of God, not as an independent power (Tibat Marqe VI, 14 – 27)
Exodus 25:22					Exod. 25:22 God meets Moses “above the ark” Moses as “raised above all mankind” לא קעם ולא יקום לעלם נביא הסתקף על כל מינה דאדם (Tibat Marqe IV §§93–108)
Exodus 25:40					Exod 25:40 וראה ועשה בתבניתם… Moses “sees” the heavenly model; makes the earthly copy Moses as mediator, not demiurge (Tibat Marqe Book VI §§1–13)
Ex 28			Ex 28 :4‑30 (There are two shrines of God, he says: (i) the cosmos, whose true high‑priest is the Logos; (ii) the rational soul, whose priest is “the man according to truth.” That priest is no ordinary mortal but the perfected, spiritual Man who officiates inside the soul’s sanctuary) ὁ δὲ πρὸς ἀλήθειαν ἄνθρωπος (De somniis § 214‑215)
Ex 29			Ex 29 :4 (Philo is explicit: the rational soul is a second temple, and its officiant is this higher Man. The phrase is his technical marker for the hidden, noetic Anthropos) ἕτερον δὲ λογικὴ ψυχή, ἧς ἱερεὺς ὁ πρὸς ἀλήθειαν ἄνθρωπος (De somniis § 214‑215)
Exodus 32						“Exodus 32 (Golden Calf) People sinned with golden calf, God was present “Ὁ λαὸς… τοῦ παίζειν” (Justin, Dial. 20.1)
Exodus 32:10					Exod. 32:1, 23 Moses as prophet, משה אישה (“Moses the Man”) (Tibat Marqe I, 10a)
Exodus 33:7					Exodus 33:7: All this speech to Joshua from the great prophet Moses (took place) at the gate of the tent which Moses pitched far from the camp and called it Tent of Gathering (Exod. 33:7). From that place Joshua went out, the servant of Moses His Man/the Man (משה אישה), and came in a hurry to the holy Sanctuary. He stood there in front of the gate and raised his voice in lament. (Tibat Marqe V.6)
Exodus 33:11			Exod 33 : 11 (God speaks “face to face” with Moses. Philo calls the sage who has renounced ownership of everything the σπουδαῖος ἄνθρωπος, a God‑befriended Man who participates in the divine inheritance of the whole cosmos) «ὁ σπουδαῖος ἄνθρωπος κέκτηται μὲν οὐδὲν κυρίως, ἀλλ’ οὐδ’ ἑαυτόν» (Vita Mosis I §157); Exod 33 : 20 (“Man shall not see Me and live.” God tells Moses that not even the whole universe—much less human nature—can “contain” the unmediated divine reality, marking a limit that sets the ordinary man apart from the hidden, supra-cosmic Man implied by the Logos) «οὐχ οἷον ἀνθρώπου φύσις ἀλλ’ οὐδ’ ὁ σύμπας οὐρανός τε καὶ κόσμος δυνήσεται χωρῆσαι.» (De Specialibus Legibus I §44)			Exodus 33–34 (Moses encounters pillar‑man‑cross – Trypho interprets the pillar of cloud/pillar‑pillar as the crucified One) τὸν σταυρωθέντα τοῦτον ἀξιῶν πεῖθειν ἡμᾶς … (Justin Martyr, Dial. 38.1); Exodus 33:11: Clement discusses God conversing with Moses “as a friend to a friend,” but does not say this was Christ/Jesus physically present; only applies to God. “διελέγετο Μωυσεῖ ὁ θεὸς ὡς φίλος φίλῳ.” (Clement of Alexandria Stromateis 4.3.9); Exodus 33:11, 22–23 (Moses & LORD) The Word spoke with Moses “as a man speaks with his friend”; foreshadows Christ. (Irenaeus Adversus Haereses 4.20.9); Exodus 33:12-23; Numbers 12:6 sqq. Tertullian discusses Moses’ request to see God’s glory, connecting it to the visible Christ who would later be incarnate, and says Moses saw the “face of a man” (Christ). “os ad os loquar ad eum in specie (utique hominis, quam erat gestaturus)” (Tertullian, Adversus Marcionem 4.22.15-16)
Exodus 33:20					Exodus 33:20 (“No one can see My face…”) No one can perceive God’s essence; all revelation is through forms/likenesses (דמותה) and not the true nature itself. עמתה משגר ביד מרה לית על דמותה (“the sent one is not the divine form/essence”) (Tibat Marqe, Book I, §2)	Exodus 33:18–23, Exodus 34:5–6 (“no one shall see my face and live”) Tertullian distinguishes the invisible Father and the visible Son, saying the Son was the one seen by Moses and others, and that these visions were not of the Father but of the Son, who appeared in a visible form. “invenimus enim et a multis deum visum … visum quidem deum … visibilem vero filium agnoscamus pro modulo derivationis” (Tertullian Adversus Praxean 14.2–14.6); Exod 33:20; Luke 10:22 The Son, not the Father, is seen and heard; the Father is invisible. (Christ as visible figure in the OT theophanies). Deum nemo videbit et vivet; Nemo cognovit patrem nisi filius (Tertullian, Adversus Marcionem II.27.5) Tertullian says: “So whatever you find unworthy of God, assign to the Son (who was seen, heard, mingled with men, etc.)” — explicitly assigns anthropomorphic theophanies to the Son/Christ, not the Father. in filio et viso et audito et congresso… miscente in semetipso hominem et deum (Tertullian, Adversus Marcionem) II.27.6) “We even profess Christ always acted in the name of God the Father, was conversing from the beginning, the very one who descended, questioned, swore, etc.” (summary) Christum semper egisse… ab initio conversatum (Tertullian, Adversus Marcionem II.27.3–4)
Exodus 33:22					Exod 33:22 “My Glory passes by” Moses Glory is presented as a “manifestation” or “agent” of God, sometimes acting separately (cf. Fossum, Sects, pp. 366–368); Possible “angelic” function for Glory (כבודה) (Tibat Marqe VI, 14 – 21), Exod 33:22; Exod 34:6–7 Glory, God, Moses “Glory” as God’s agent, כבודה (Tibat Marqe VI, 28 – 43)
Exodus 34:6 – 7					Exod 34:6–7 “The Lord, merciful and gracious…” God Both “Glory” and Moses recite the divine attributes; Glory echoes (Tibat Marqe VI 14 – 21)
Exodus 34:29 – 30.					Exod 34:29–30 פניו עור קרן Moses Moses’ face “radiant”—interpreted as Moses restored Adam’s “image” “Man” as bearer of divine radiance, but not divine himself (Tibat Marqe V Book V §§32–37), Exodus 34:29–30 Moses (Image of God) “The Image was clothed with light … as wise as the sign of the world.” Human, endowed with glory (Macdonald, 650)	Exodus 34:29–35 (Moses veils his face); 2 Corinthians 3:13–16 Tertullian claims that Moses’ veiled face was a figure for the hiddenness of Christ, and that Christ was preached by Moses, and should have been recognized by the Jews. “Christus creatoris a Moyse praedicatus nondum venit? … in quo eum intellegere deberent?” (Tertullian, Adv. Marc. 5.11.6–7)
Lev 16			Lev 16 : 17 (While the high‑priest is inside the Holy of Holies he “is no man,” showing that the purified νοῦς transcends the human condition and enters the sphere of God) ὁ δὲ ἱερεὺς μέντοι ἄνθρωπος οὐκ ἔσται κατ’ αὐτὸν ὅταν εἰσῇ εἰς τὰ ἅγια τῶν ἁγίων (Quis rerum divinarum heres sit §§84‑85); Lev 16 : 17 – the high‑priest entering the Holy of Holies on the Day of Atonement In the inmost shrine the high‑priest ceases to be a mere human being and becomes an intermediate nature, “less than God yet greater than man”; Philo presents him as a revealer of the divine Man hidden behind the ritual. μεθόριός τις θεοῦ καὶ ἀνθρώπου φύσις … ὅταν γὰρ … ὁ ἀρχιερεύς, ἄνθρωπος οὐκ ἔσται (De Somnis II §§ 188‑189); Lev 16 : 17 (the high‑priest entering the Holy of Holies When he crosses the veil the high‑priest “is no man”; he becomes a liturgos who, in his immortal aspect, is allied with the Un‑generated) «ὅταν … ὁ ἀρχιερεύς, ἄνθρωπος οὐκ ἔσται … δῆλον ὅτι οὐδὲ θεός, ἀλλὰ λειτουργὸς θεοῦ» (De Somnis II §§ 231‑232); Lev 16 (Day of Atonement. True festal joy, he insists, is intellectual—it is unreachable “without healing of sins and passions,” so God commands a purgative sacrifice †precisely to restore the νοῦς of ἀνθρώπων to its divine archetype) «φρόνησιν … λάβειν οὐκ ἔνεστ’ ἄνευ θεραπείας ἁμαρτημάτων … τοῦ ἡγεμονικοῦ … ὃ ἐμορφώθη πρὸς ἀρχέτυπον εἰκόνος θείας … ἀνθρώπων» (Spec. Leg. I § 168‑169)
Lev 18			Lev 18 : 6 (“ἄνθρωπος ἄνθρωπος…” The doubled ἄνθρωπος signals the true man—the one constituted by virtue, not by the composite of soul + body) τὸ μὲν οὖν μὴ ἅπαξ ἀλλὰ δὶς φάναι ἄνθρωπος ἄνθρωπος … σημεῖόν ἐστι … ὁ ἀληθινὸς οὗτός ἐστιν» (De Gig. 32‑34)
Lev 21			Lev 21:10‑12 (high‑priestly rules. The high‑priest, said Philo, has been allotted a nature “greater than human,” acting as a boundary‑being through whom “men propitiate God and God, using a subordinate minister, dispenses gifts to men”) «μείζονος … φύσεως ἢ κατ’ ἄνθρωπον, … ἵνα διὰ μέσου τινός ἄνθρωποι μὲν ἱλάσκωνται θεόν, θεὸς δὲ … χάριτας ἀνθρώποις ὑποδιακόνῳ τινὶ χρώμενος ὀρέγῃ» (Spec. Leg. I § 116)
Lev 27			Lev 27 :30‑32 (law of the tithe. The nous is “the true man within the man,” an immortal principle lodged in a mortal body, and it alone should be tithed to God) ὃς κυρίως εἰπεῖν ἄνθρωπός ἐστιν ἐν ἀνθρώπῳ, κρείττων ἐν χείρονι καὶ ἀθάνατος ἐν θνητῷ (De congressu erud. 97‑98)
Number 7:8,9					Numbers 7:89; sacrificial laws “Moses, His man, did as commanded…” (גבריה Aramaic) referring to Moses performing sacrifices. (Tibat Marqe I §45, p. 46)
Numbers 11:3					Num 11:3; 12:3 האיש משה עניו מאד Moses Humble “man,” greatest among men on earth Moses as “man” archetype (Tibat Marqe V §§32–37)
Numbers 11:23						Numbers 11:23 (Manna/Quails) The God and angel promising and providing meat was Christ, as both God and angel sent by the Father. αὐτός, ὢν καὶ θεὸς καὶ ἄγγελος (Justin Dial. 126)
Numbers 12:3					Numbers 12:3 Moses, “the man Moses was very humble …” משה אישך (Tibat Marqe §§67–77)
Numbers 12:7					Numbers 12:7–8 “His man, Moses,” (אנשיה Aramaic) is faithful in all God’s house; God speaks to him face to face. (Tibat Marqe I §34, p. 36); Num 12:7; Moses honored by creation “All creatures honored him”; “Entrusted in My house” (Tibat Marqe VI.23–25, 493–494), Num 12:7 בכל ביתי נאמן הוא Moses Entrusted with all, surpasses all others Moses as most faithful “man” (Tibat Marqe Book V §§32–37); Numbers 12:7 Moses as “His Man” (אנשיה Aramaic) MacDonald Vol. 1, p. 99 Liturgy/Poem), Numbers 12:7 Moses is “His Man” אנשיה Aramaic (MacDonald Vol. 1, p. 462 Exegetical)
Numbers 12:8					Gen. 41:38; Num. 12:8 “Spirit of God in Joseph” and “Mouth to mouth with Moses” Moses and Joseph as highest among men מללה אלה פה אל פה האן נביא כמשה (Tibat Marqe IV §§93–108)
Num 13						Numbers 13:16 (Joshua = Jesus / Israel name play – Justin connects Joshua son of Nun יֵשׁוּעַ־יִשְׂרָאֵל with name ΙΣ = Jesus = Israel) τίς οὖν εἰς τὴν γῆν εἰσήγαγε τοὺς πατέρας … ἐν τῷ ὀνόματι τούτῳ … ΙΣ ἦν … καὶ Ἰσραήλ … μετωνομάκει (Justin Martyr, Dial. 75.2–3); Numbers, Joshua (Caleb, Joshua) Christ is present saving those who believe, just as he saved Caleb, Joshua, and innocent children in the past. (Irenaeus, Adversus Haereses 4.28.3); Numbers 13:16 God revealed the saving Name (Jesus) to Moses, who named Joshua “Jesus,” sending him with power of the Name. (Irenaeus, Dem. 27)
Num 15			Num 15:1‑16 (whole‑burnt offering. Philo divides sacrifice into three archetypes: the whole‑burnt “for God alone,” the communion‑offering (σωτήριον) for human betterment, and the sin‑offering for release from evil—thus mapping every human (ἀνθρώπων) need onto a graded ascent toward the divine) «τὴν μὲν ὁλόκαυτον δι’ αὐτὸν μόνoν τὸν θεόν … τὰς δ’ ἄλλας δι’ ἡμᾶς … σωτήριον … περὶ ἁμαρτίας … ἀνθρώπων» (Spec. Leg.  I § 195‑197)
Numbers 16					Numbers 16 “You abandoned the prophethood of Moses his Man/the Man (משה אישה) and followed Korah.” (Tibat Marqe III, 23a p. 51)
Num 18			Num 18:20; Deut 18:2 (God the priests’ “portion” Philo calls the priestly tribe “heirs of God Himself,” raising them above the ordinary estate of ἀνθρώπων and into God’s own sphere) «ὁ θεὸς κλῆρον αὐτῶν εἶναι … κατ’ ἀναφορὰν … ἀνθρώπων» (Spec. Leg.  I § 131); general, sacrificial laws (Speaking of the tithe–system, Philo says the arrangement stamps a royal dignity on the priests “greater than that of any ἀνθρώπων,” for they receive tribute as viceroys of the one God) «βασιλέων σεμνότητα … τοῦ πασῶν ἀνθρώπων γένους» (Spec. Leg. I § 142)
Numbers 22						Numbers 22:22–23 (Balaam) The angel who appeared to Balaam was the Word Himself (i.e., Christ), holding a sword. ὁ λόγος αὐτός (Irenaeus, Fragment 23)
Num 23			Num 23 : 19 (“God is not a man to change” He contrasts the pure theological road—which fashions the idea that “God is not man” at all—with popular religion, noting the gulf between unchanging Deity and mutable man) οὐχ ὡς ἄνθρωπος ὁ θεὸς (De Somnis § 237); Num 23 : 19 (Balaam: “God is not a man…” In sharpening the verse Philo contrasts the merely human way of self‑defence with the divine, implying that true Manhood belongs with God, not with flesh) «οὐχ ὁμοίως ἄνθρωπος ἀμύνεται καὶ θεός» (Vita Mosis I §174);
Num 24			Num 24 : 3‑4 (Balaam’s 3rd oracle. Balaam styles himself “the Man who truly sees”—for Philo a title of the intelligible or prophetic Man through whom God speaks) «ὁ ἄνθρωπος ὁ ἀληθινῶς ὁρῶν» (Vita Mosis I §289); Num 24 : 17 (Balaam’s final oracle. Philo highlights the prophecy that “a Man will one day arise from you”, presenting this hidden coming Man as a divinely empowered ruler who will subdue nations) «ἐξελεύσεταί ποτε ἄνθρωπος ἐξ ὑμῶν» (Vita Mosis I §290)			Num 24 :17 + Zech 6 :12 (“Star / Rising‑Man”; the prophecies of the pre‑existent ‘Branch‑Man’ point to the Logos as a heavenly Man who later appears on earth) «Ἀνατελεῖ ἄστρον ἐξ Ἰακώβ … Ἰδοὺ ἀνὴρ, ἀνατολὴ ὄνομα αὐτῷ» (Dial. 106.4)
Num 25			Num 25 : 7‑8 (“neighbour” clause. The “neighbour” to be slain is the chorus of the senses that entraps the mind) ἀποκτενοῦμεν καὶ τὸν πλησίον, πάλιν οὐκ ἄνθρωπον, ἀλλὰ τὸν ‹αἰσθήσεων› χορόν (περι μεθης 70); Num 25 : 7‑8 (Phinehas’ spear represents divorcing every mortal, passion‑laden thought from the soul so that only the divine cause remains) πάντα ἄνθρωπον καὶ λογισμὸν τὸν ἐπακολουθήσαντα τῇδε τῇ δόξῃ… (περι μεθης 73- 74)			Numbers (reference to Phinehas) Phinehas is blessed by God for wounding the fornicator; Clement alludes to the episode in Numbers as a warning against lawlessness and contrasts this with Christ’s sacrifice. ὁ γοῦν ἐκκεντήσας τὸν πόρνον εὐλογούμενος πρὸς τοῦ θεοῦ δείκνυται ἐν τοῖς Ἀριθμοῖς. (Clement of Alexandria Stromateis 3.4.32.1)
Num 27			Num 27 : 16‑17 (Moses prays “May the Lord… appoint a man over the congregation” The requested Man is the divine shepherd‑Logos whom God sets over the ψυχή, so the flock will not be “sheep without a shepherd”) ἄνθρωπον ἐπὶ τῆς συναγωγῆς ταύτης (De Agric. § 44)
Deut 1			Deut 1 : 17 (In his micro‑/macrocosm argument Philo calls man a “little cosmos” and the cosmos a “great Man,” pointing to a cosmic, god‑like prototype of Man) βραχὺν μὲν κόσμον τὸν ἄνθρωπον, μέγαν δὲ ἄνθρωπον τὸν κόσμον (Quis rerum divinarum heres sit §§155‑156)
					Deut 4.11: Glorious the morning of Mount Sinai, the morning of the third day, in which were revealed hosts and powers and fundaments and angels and thunders and lightnings and torches and fire blazing to the heart of heaven (Deut. 4:11). (4) And also the cloud we are dealing with, by reason of Moses His Man/the Man (משה אישה), crowned Mount Sinai like a curtain, and from within (God) called Moses, and he went up in great majesty. And (the congregation) heard the speech of God to Moses, and Moses answering Him. Then the cloud honored him, when God came and made heard His voice proclaiming: I am the Lord your God (Exod. 20:2). The cloud covered him as He spoke: And the cloud covered it six days (Exod. 24:16). (5) Also the cloud shadowed him when God spoke to him. When he said: Show me Your glory (Exod. 33:18), God answered him with His speech: While my glory passes by, until his saying: I will cover you with my hand until I have passed by (Exod. 33:22). (Tibat Marqe V.29); The Divinity said to him: “Come in peace. For your sake I appeared to reveal my wonders.” Glory said to him: “Come in peace. I will make my glory pass before you.” The angels said to him, “Come in peace, O faithful one of God. We cannot turn away from you ever.” Honor said to him: “Peace to you, O middle man, I am fitted for no man (to deal with) but you.” The Good One said to him: “Peace to you, O Lawgiver. I am about to honor you.” The Holiness said to him: “Peace to you, O Man, for your sake I was made, to multiply all good.” The Faith said to him: “Peace to you, O leader who led six hundred thousand.” (Tibat Marqe V.15)
Deuteronomy 4:20					Deut 4:20; Exod 13:21 “Iron furnace,” passed through the Sea” Israel’s redemption is by God’s direct power (Tibat Marqe VI.14–27)
Deut 5			Deut 5 : 5 & 31 – “I stood between the Lord and you … / Stand here with Me” Moses, the paradigmatic wise mind, is portrayed as an intermediate being: more than a human, less than God, touching both extremes. «μήτε θεὸν αὐτὸν εἶναι μήτε ἄνθρωπον … **κρείττων μὲν ἐστιν ἀνθρώπου, θεοῦ δὲ ἐλάττων» (De Somnis §§ 229‑230)
Deuteronomy 5:27					Deut 5:27 “Faithful one, draw near and listen” Israel asks Moses to mediate—he is the “faithful servant” (Tibat Marqe VI 14 – 27)
Deut 8			Deut 8 : 3 (Philo adds “κατ᾿ εἰκόνα,” teaching that the Man made “according to the image” lives not on bread but on every utterance of God—i.e. on the Logos—pointing to a hidden, god‑nourished Man) οὐκ ἐπʼ ἄρτῳ μόνῳ ζήσεται ὁ ἄνθρωπος [κατ᾿ εἰκόνα] (Legum Allegoriae III §176 (Loeb vol. I); Deut 8 : 5 (“The Lord disciplines you as a man his son” To educate the dull‑witted, Scripture nevertheless likens God’s discipline to that of a human father, an allowable concession to imagination) ὡς εἴ τις παιδεύσειεν ἄνθρωπος τὸν υἱὸν αὐτοῦ (De Somnis § 237)
Deut 17			Deut 17 : 15‑16 (“You shall not set over yourself a foreign man as king” Philo reads the “foreign man” as alien passions; the soul must never enthrone that outsider but remain ruled by the inner, native Man) οὐ δυνήσῃ καταστῆσαι ἐπὶ σεαυτόν ἄνθρωπον ἀλλότριον (De Agric. § 84)
Deuteronomy 18:15					Deuteronomy 18:15: Moses’ prophecy of a prophet “like me,” interpreted as Jesus (by name)—Joshua son of Nun as a type. προφήτην … ἀναστήσει … τὸν Ἰησοῦν τὸν τοῦ Ναυῆ … τὸν Ἰησοῦν τὸν τοῦ θεοῦ υἱόν. (Clement of Alexandria, Paedagogus 1.60.3)
Deuteronomy 21:5					Deut 21:5, 31“Moses the man said…” (משה אישה (“Moses the man”) (Tibat Marqe III, 80b p. 248), “People have said a great thing, and their speech is now spread out before you: Levi is the owner of the blessing, and he pronounces it, and all of them listen. And thus Moses His Man/the Man said: for the Lord […] has chosen to minister and to bless in the name of the Lord (Deut. 21:5) and he concluded what he said about his deeds.”
Deuteronomy 27:9					Deuteronomy 27.9. “Consider the honor by which Aaron was honored; cling to it and do not stray from it and enlighten your heart in keeping the precepts, and (then) you will not turn away from the “words of the blessings”. When Aaron was elevated with that honor, and he was partner to Moses His Man/the Man (למשה אישה) time after time, it was the will of God to honor Israel … He warned them away with the curse: And Moses and the Levitical priests said (Deut. 27:9) (Tibat Marqe III 41a) Also a few lines later (same context): When Moses begun speaking, he divided the tribes with great prophetic insight (into) two parts: those fit for reproof and those not to be reproved. Thus said God to Moses the Man (למשה אישה) at the time when He revealed to him what He revealed to Jacob. He divided them into those to whom reproof is appropriate, and those who are not to be reproved. And he announced to them the crossing of the Jordan, and about those who will stand for the blessing and those who will stand for the curse. And he revealed the greatness of that which was disclosed there.” (Tibat Marqe III 41b). Also “When Moses begun speaking, he divided the tribes with great prophetic insight (into) two parts: those fit for reproof and those not to be reproved. Thus said God to Moses the Man at the time when He revealed to him what He revealed to Jacob. He divided them into those to whom reproof is appropriate, and those who are not to be reproved. And he announced to them the crossing of the Jordan, and about those who will stand for the blessing and those who will stand for the curse.” (Tibat Marqe p. 228 a1 12296 .Or BL 1b) Also previous Tal footnote p. 202 ” [Hebrew loan with Aramaic marker of determination, in the sense of a person of a special position (DSA, p. 25), such as Moses, whom Deut. 33:1 calls האלהים איש,” the man of God”. אישה משה is the reflection of the ST Exod. 32:1.23 האיש משה) in inverse order: משה אישה, Num. 12:3). AC renders the word as אלרסול,” the messenger” (الرســـول(, an epithet assigned to God’s emissaries in Islam. See also §§ 4, 15 below. See also notes on Book I, § 2, s.v. מלאכיה.”
Deuteronomy 30:20					Deut. 30:20: “Let us bow down before Him and submit to His greatness, for He is our Master and Creator. And let us believe in Him and in Moses His Man/the Man (ובמשה אישה) who revealed to us the path of life, as He said: for that is life to you and length of days (Tibat Marqe IV.109); Deut 30:20; 32:47 “Your life” = Torah from Moses חייכם … הטוב ואת החיים … הרע ואת המות Moses as life-giver (Tibat Marqe §§78–92), Deut. 30:20, 33:4, Num 3:4 Moses אישה דגלה לן שביל חייה; איש האלהים Human prophet, (Tibat Marqe V 5),
					Deut 31:2–3 (Into Canaan) The Lord God who goes before Israel to destroy nations is Christ. Κύριος ὁ θεός σου, ὁ προπορευόμενος (Justin Dial. 126)
Deuteronomy 32					Deuteronomy 32 “I am (Exod. 3:14) in divinity, steadfast in awe. His greatness has no (defined) place – He created every place by His might. Glorified be our God, the great King, who gave prophecy to His Man/the Man Moses (משה אישה) to whom He revealed the way of truth. (Tibat Marqe IV. 35). Deuteronomy 32 “See how the great prophet Moses uttered this song and said: O nations, acclaim His people (Deut. 32:43). Then all of them bowed and worshipped and sought the deliverance. “We are the sons of these who were gathered with Moses His Man/the Man (אישה דבמשה) and heard from him this Great Song and were glorified by it. It is good for us to be gathered with the True One like them, and not depart from Him.” (Tibat Marqe 4.55); The Lord appeared (v. 19) and he adjoined to it the word and spurned (ibid.) – (God) appeared with wonders and spurned with punishments. He revealed Himself with wonders in order to deliver you, and spurned you with punishments in order to strengthen you. Because of the provocation of his sons and his daughters (ibid.) – a word of reproof. The entire congregation bowed down, when they heard from Moses His Man/the Man (משה אישה) this word. He joined the daughters and the sons, (who) were gathered in this word: Children in whom is no faithfulness (v. 20) – behold, a great reproof. Woe to the man who is not awakened. They incensed Me (v. 21) – exceedingly great distress. (Tibat Marqe 4.56); A good leader does not stray from the path whose course pleases his Master. How merciful and gracious this great King, who sent Moses His Man/the Man (משה אישה) and honored him by this. How merciful and gracious this great King, who granted Moses prophethood and appointed him over all His possessions. How merciful and gracious this great King, who sent to us Moses with every good. How merciful and gracious this great King, who made His voice heard to him in the Ten Words – life to us and to our generations forever. Exalted be Moses His Man/the Man (משה אישה) who stood reproving and began at the beginning and said: Ask your father and he will tell you (Deut. 32:7) (Tibat Marqe 4.57); and Moses His Man/the Man (ומשה אישה) emphasized it here, saying: Ask your father and he will tell you. Learn the truth and teach it to your son, that your Master may love you. (Tibat Marqe 4.58); , but Israel irritates. God says: That I may consume (Exod. 32:10), but Moses His Man/the Man (ומשה אישה) prays and says: Turn from your fierce wrath (Exod. 32:12). By reason of the prayer: renounce all the evil which you threatened to do (Tibat Marqe 4.63); Let us turn away from such deed and not draw near to it, for God and His Man/the Man (ואישה) warned us against it. Let us praise the name of our Master and not change His words. (Tibat Marqe 4.87)
Deuteronomy 32:4					Deuteronomy 32:4, God as Rock (“the Rock”) “הצור” / “the Rock – perfect is His deed” Used in wordplay: “Rock” (God) vs. “image” (Adam) (Tibat Marqe IV 324–338)
Deuteronomy 32:39					Deut 32:39 (also Isaiah, Hosea, Jeremiah, Psalms) Clement quotes passages in which God appears, speaks, or acts in the world (“I am he, and there is no God besides me; I kill and I make alive…”). Clement interprets these as acts of God/Logos, but does not explicitly say Christ or Jesus appeared physically before the Gospels. “Ἐγὼ εἰμι…καὶ σωτὴρ οὐκ ἔστι πάρεξ ἐμοῦ· ἐπιστράφητε πρός με καὶ σωθήσεσθε…” (Clement of Alexandria, Protrepticus 79.1–4)
Deuteronomy 32:43					Deut 32:43; Is 66:24 Angels and nations worship together; inheritance with patriarchs and righteous—Christ present with them. προσκυνησάτωσαν αὐτῷ πάντες ἄγγελοι θεοῦ (Justin Dial. 130)
Deut 33			Deut 33 : 9 (The priests’ “slaying” is not literal homicide but the cutting away of passions that cling to the soul) οὐδ’, ὥσπερ νομίζουσί τινες, ἀνθρώπους ἀναιροῦσιν οἱ ἱερεῖς (περι μεθης 68 – 69); Deut 33 : 9 (same verse, “brother” clause) “Brother” means the body—so the command is to sever the body’s rule over the soul, not to kill a human sibling) ἀδελφόν, οὐκ ἄνθρωπον, ἀλλὰ τὸ ψυχῆς ἀδελφὸν σῶμα ἀποκτενοῦμεν (περι μεθης 70); Deut 33 : 9 / Num 25 : 7‑8 (“neighbour” clause The “neighbour” to be slain is the chorus of the senses that entraps the mind) ἀποκτενοῦμεν καὶ τὸν πλησίον, πάλιν οὐκ ἄνθρωπον, ἀλλὰ τὸν ‹αἰσθήσεων› χορόν» (περι μεθης 70); Deut 33 : 1 (Moses called “man of God” The fully perfected person is “Κύριος καὶ Θεός” to others yet himself is still ἄνθρωπος θεοῦ—a human so wholly possessed by the Divine that he becomes God’s own “κλῆρος” and instrument. Philo cites Moses as the paradigm: “ἄνθρωπος θεοῦ”) ἄνθρωπος θεοῦ (De mutatione nominum 24 – 25); Deut 33 : 1 (Moses called “man of God” The soul that reaches full perfection becomes ἄνθρωπος θεοῦ: still human, yet so completely God’s own instrument that blessing others and mediating grace is its natural function. Philo stresses that such prayer and benediction belong “not to just any man, but to a man who has severed kinship with generation and made himself God’s possession”) ἄνθρωπος θεοῦ … οὐκ ἔστι τοῦ τυχόντος, ἀλλ’ ἀνθρώπου τὴν πρὸς γένεσιν μὴ ἑωρακότος συγγένειαν… (De mutatione nominum 125 – 127)
Deuteronomy 33:2					Deut. 33:2 Moses’s time as “shining” righteousness for all Moses (as light-bearer, great prophet) נביה רבה משה נהרה מופע על כל עלמה (Tibat Marqe IV §§93–108)
					Deut 33:26, 33:5 Yeshurun (Israel) “One the prophet of God, the other the minister … the chosen ones of Yeshurun.” Moses and Aaron as human leaders (Macdonald, 294 Nun stanza, Yeshurun)
Deuteronomy 34:5					Deut 34:5 וימת שם משה עבד יהוה Moses Moses as “servant of YHWH”; unique among men Archetype of the “Man of God” (Tibat Marqe V §§32–37)
Deuteronomy 34:10					Deut 34:10 (cf.), Moses “עבדה דאלה ובן בית אלהים” / “servant of God, son of the house of God” Uniqueness of Moses, “like Moses there has not arisen” (Tibat Marqe IV 324–338); Deut. 34:10, “איש”/“אנשה” (“man/people”) “Blessed is our Lord … believe in Him and Moses His prophet, like whom none has arisen” Moses called “man” (Exod. 19), “מאתין קעימין” (“assembly of mortals and immortals”) “immortals and mortals (angels and men) gathered at Sinai” Distinction between humans and angels at revelation (Tibat Marqe IV §§19, 43); Moses “learning Torah from the immortals” (ממנה … מירון המאר על פתורון יתב … במשכון הקבע), i.e., from angels, at Sinai (§44), Praise and worship are attributed both to humans and angels together (“the angels rejoiced … praise the Lord … ascribe greatness to our God”), but there is no blending of “man” with angelic or divine status (§50). Implicitly Moses gets his name “Man” from the angel. Deut 34:10; Moses the Man “O holy man, like whom none has arisen or will arise” Supremely unique human (Marqe VI.19, 490), Deuteronomy 34:10, Moses is “His Man” גבריה Aramaic (MacDonald Vol. 1, p. 223 Liturgy
						Joshua 5:13–15 Captain of Lord’s host as Christ (implied) “ἀρχιστράτηγος…” (Justin, Dial. 61.1–2)
						Isaiah 1:4	General Tertullian repeatedly notes that the demons recognize Jesus as “the Holy One of God” and “Jesus,” (Man) which, he argues, only makes sense if Jesus is the Christ of the Creator—the same name revealed in the OT and prophecy. “Iesus,” “sanctus dei” (Tertullian Adversus Marcionem IV.7.9–15, IV.8.5–8)
						Isaiah 6:1 (“I saw the Lord…”) Isaiah saw “the King, the Lord of Hosts,” as a vision of Christ. )(Irenaeus Adversus Haereses 4.20.8)
Isa 53						Isa 53:8 (Justin argues his origin is beyond human seed, implying a non‑ordinary yet genuinely human) Τὴν γενεὰν αὐτοῦ τίς διηγήσεται; … οὐκ ἔστι γένους ἀνθρώπου σπέρμα (Justin Martyr, Dial. 68.4)
“Psalmist”						Psalmist (David, Saul episode) The preexistent Word was the one who played music to drive away evil spirits from Saul (“with true music he drove away demons”). ᾗ τοῦ Σαοὺλ ἐνεργουμένου ἐκεῖνος ᾄδων μόνον αὐτὸν ἰάσατο (Clement of Alexandria, Protrepticus 1.5.3), Wisdom/Solomon (Pre-Creation Activity) Clement references Solomon saying wisdom was created before the heavens and earth. Clement allegorizes this as Christ/Wisdom pre-existing creation, active before the Gospel. «Σολομὼν πρὸ οὐρανοῦ καὶ γῆς καὶ πάντων τῶν ὄντων τῷ παντοκράτορι γεγονέναι τὴν σοφίαν λέγει, ἧς ἡ μέθεξις …» (Clement of Alexandria Stromateis 6.16.138)
Psalm 8:5						Psalm 8:5 (“You made him a little lower than the angels”) Clement contrasts humans with angels, noting “even the Lord bore flesh” but does NOT state Christ was present before the Gospel scene, only comments on human and angelic natures. καίτοι κἀκεῖνος σάρκα ἔφερεν (Clement of Alexandria Stromateis 4.3.8–9); Ps. 8:5; Heb. 2:9 Christ was “made a little lower than the angels,” disposed for these things by the Father (i.e., to take on human things, sufferings, etc.), as referenced in II.27.4 diminuens illum modico citra angelos, sicut apud David scriptum est (Tertullian, Adversus Marcionem II.27.4)
Psalm 24:7						Psalm 24:7 (“Open ye the gates…”) Of the many “gates” of salvation, Clement (borrowing from Justin) says this one “was in Christ,” which may suggest Christ’s presence at the gate in the Psalm, but the context is ambiguous (could be typological only). “ἡ ἐν δικαιοσύνῃ αὕτη ἦν ἐν Χριστῷ, ἐν ᾗ μακάριοι πάντες οἱ εἰσελθόντες…” (Clement of Alexandria, Stromateis 1.7.38.7); Psalm 24:7–10 “Lift up your gates…”—the ascension and entry into heaven (Irenaeus, Adversus Haereses Dem. 84)
						Psalm 24:10 (“Who is this King of Glory?”) Christ is identified as the “King of Glory” who ascended, thus present in the Psalms before the Gospel. “Quis est iste rex gloriae? dominus virtutum ipse est rex gloriae.” (Tertullian Adv. Marc. 5.17.5)
						Psalm 33(34):12–16 (Septuagint) Clement paraphrases and expounds on the Psalm, ascribing its spiritual lessons to Christ, but does not state Christ was physically present in the Psalm’s original context. ἐν Χριστῷ… πίστις… ὁ κύριος λέγει (Clement of Alexandria Stromateis 4.17.109–110)
						Psalm 68:17–18; Psalm 24 “Ascended up on high, led captivity captive”—Christ’s ascension (Irenaeus Dem. 83) (138–139)
						Psalm 99(98):6–7 (Exod 33ff) Christ with Moses, Aaron, Samuel (pillar of cloud) “λελαληκέναι αὐτοῖς ἐν στύλῳ νεφέλης…” (Justin, Dial. 56.13–14)
Ps 110						Psalm 110 Christ as eternal priest/king, Melchizedek order “Ἰησοῦς Χριστός… κατὰ τὴν τάξιν Μελχισεδέκ” (Justin Dial. 33.1); Ps 110 (the crucified one is nevertheless “God and Man … preached though crucified” ) σταυρωθεὶς … θεὸς καὶ ἄνθρωπος ; (Justin Martyr, Dial. 71.2); Psalm 110, 2 Son begotten “before morning star,” is king, judge, eternal priest, receives throne and oil from the Father. (Irenaeus, Dem. 48) (113); see below: Theodotus of Byzantium: Christ is only a man, “hominem tantummodo diceret,” born of a virgin, but just a solitary man, not God. hominem tantummodo (Theodotus of Byzantium: Christ is only a man, “hominem tantummodo diceret,” born of a virgin, but just a solitary man, not God. hominem tantummodo VIII.2VIII.2) (none: not direct citation) Second Theodotus: Christ is only a man, “ipsum hominem tantummodo dicit,” conceived by Spirit and born of a virgin, inferior to Melchizedek. hominem tantummodo, (Pseudo-Tertullian adversus omnes haereses VIII.3): Psalm 110:4 Second Theodotus: Interprets “You are a priest forever after the order of Melchizedek” as meaning Melchizedek is superior to Christ. (Pseudo-Tertullian adversus omnes haereses VIII.3)
						Proverbs (various) Clement interprets many Proverbs as allegories about Christ or the Church, but never as direct appearances of Christ before the incarnation. — Various (esp. Clement of Alexandria Stromateis 1.19.95–96)
Proverbs 8:22						Proverbs 8:21–25 Christ/Wisdom begotten before all creation. πρὸ τοῦ αἰῶνος ἐθεμελίωσέ με … γεννᾷ με (Justin Dial. 129); Proverbs 8:22 Clement identifies the Wisdom/Logos created by the Lord as the “good lamp,” the “Lord bringing the light” and faith and salvation to all, which is the Logos (who will become Christ), linking creation and revelation to the Logos. Not specifically a physical Christ, but a pre-existent, active Logos. ὁ λόγος ὁ πατρικός, ὁ ἀγαθὸς λύχνος, ὁ κύριος ἐπάγων τὸ φῶς, τὴν πίστιν πᾶσι καὶ σωτηρίαν (Clement of Alexandria, Protrepticus, 80.2–3); Proverbs 8:22–31 Sophia/Wisdom is Christ, present and active in creation. “Dominus condidit me…” (Tertullian, Adversus Hermogenem XVIII.1–2)
1 Sam 1			1 Sam 1 : 11 (Even Samuel, “perhaps born a man,” is received by Philo not as a mixed creature but as pure nous dedicated to God) Σαμουὴλ δὲ γέγονε μὲν ἴσως ἄνθρωπος, παρείληπται δ’ οὐχ ὡς σύνθετον ζῷον, ἀλλ’ ὡς νοῦς… (περι μεθης 144 – 145)
1 Sam 17			1 Sam (III Reg.) 17 : 18 (The widow addresses Elijah as “man of God,” and Philo treats the title as typical for prophets, i.e. men whose mind is joined to the divine) ἄνθρωπε τοῦ θεοῦ…» & «τοὺς προφήτας ἐκάλουν… ἀνθρώπους θεοῦ (De Gigantibus §§ 136‑139)
Jer 15			Jeremiah 15 : 10 (Ἄνθρωπον μάχης … ἄνθρωπον ἀηδίας» Philo puts the verse in the philosopher’s mouth: the genuine sage is “a man of battle, a man the whole earth detests,” forever at war with every vice—an inner, non‑Adamite Man) ὦ μῆτερ, ἡλίκον με ἔτεκες, ἄνθρωπον μάχης καὶ ἄνθρωπον ἀηδίας πάσης τῆς γῆς (De Confusione Linguarum 44 – 45)
Ezekiel 1:26 – 28						Ezekiel 1:26–28 (man on the throne) The “likeness as the appearance of a man” is a prefiguration of the Son. (Irenaeus Adversus Haereses 4.20.10)
Zech 6			Zechariah 6 : 12 (Ἰδοὺ ἀνὴρ ὀνόματι Ἀνατολή The prophetic “Man called Anatolē (Rising/Dawn)” is, for Philo, the Father’s first‑born—an eternal, incorruptible Logos‑Man dwelling beside God) ἰδοὺ ἄνθρωπος ᾧ ὄνομα ἀνατολή … ὁ μὲν γὰρ πρεσβύτατον υἱὸν ὁ τῶν ὅλων ἀνέτειλε πατήρ (De Confusione Linguarum §§ 62‑63);			Zech 6 :12 (“Star / Rising‑Man”; the prophecies of the pre‑existent ‘Branch‑Man’ point to the Logos as a heavenly Man who later appears on earth) «Ἀνατελεῖ ἄστρον ἐξ Ἰακώβ … Ἰδοὺ ἀνὴρ, ἀνατολὴ ὄνομα αὐτῷ» (Dial. 106.4)
						Daniel 3:25 (“a fourth like a son of man”) Tertullian says it was the Son who appeared as the fourth figure in the furnace, though “in imagine et speculo et aenigmate” (not yet in flesh). “et in fornace Babylonii regis quartus apparuerit — quanquam filius hominis est dictus” (Tertullian Adversus Praxean 16.6); Daniel 3:25 Tertullian claims the “fourth man in the furnace” seen by Nebuchadnezzar is Christ, “like a son of man.” (Latin) “tanquam filius hominis” (Tertullian Adversus Marcioneem IV.10.12–13); Daniel 3:25 Tertullian says the ‘son of man’ in the fiery furnace is Christ, appearing before the incarnation (“nondum enim vere erat, nondum scilicet natus ex homine”) and saving the three youths, thus implying a pre-Gospel presence of Christ. “tanquam filium hominis (nondum enim vere erat, nondum scilicet natus ex homine) iam tunc istos exitus constituentem” (Tertullian Adversus Marcionem 4.21.7-8);
Daniel 7:9 – 13						Daniel 7:13 Son of Man coming with clouds ὡς υἱὸς ἀνθρώπου ἔρχεται ἐπάνω (Justin, 1 Apology LI.9); Daniel 7:9–28 Vision of Son of Man coming on clouds, pre-Gospel “ὡς υἱὸς… ἐπάνω νεφελῶν ἐλεύσεται” (Justin Dial. 31.1–2); Daniel 7:9–10 Daniel saw the Lord (“Ancient of Days”) in a vision, clothed in a white garment; Clement identifies this as the Lord. “θρόνοι… ἐκάθισεν… παλαιὸς ἡμερῶν… ἐνδύματι λευκῷ” (Clement of Alexandria, Paedagogus 108.2–3); Daniel 7:13–14 (“Son of Man in clouds”) The Son of Man (Christ) comes to the Ancient of Days and receives dominion. (Irenaeus Adversus Haereses 4.20.11); Daniel 7:13 (Son of Man), Isaiah, etc. References to “Son of Man” and Messiah’s future coming are cited, but always as future prophecy, not as Christ being present “physically” before incarnation. filium hominis venientem in nubibus XXII.6 (p.60) Christ called “Son of Man” and “man” in flesh; Tertullian argues Christ is truly human, not a phantom or mere quality. Christum et hominem et filium hominis inscripserit (Tertullian De resurrectione carnis II.5) (p.6); Daniel 7:13, Isaiah 53:3, Jeremiah 17:9, Acts 2:22, 1 Tim 2:5 He lists various OT and NT texts in which Christ is called “man,” “son of man,” or is shown to be human—asserting that Christ was truly and fully man according to prophecy and apostolic witness. “Homo in plaga et sciens ferre imbecillitatem” (Isa 53:3), “Et ecce super nubes tanquam filius hominis” (Dan 7:13), “homo Christus Iesus” (1 Tim 2:5), “Iesum Nazarenum virum vobis a deo destinatum” (Acts 2:22) (Tertullain De Carne Christi XV.1); Daniel 7:13 The title “Son of Man” applies to Christ; Tertullian says this is both prophecy and fulfilled in Jesus, who refers to himself as “filius hominis.” υἱὸς ἀνθρώπου (implied, Latin “filius hominis”) (Tertullian Adversus Marcionem IV.10.9–14)
The Gospel (generally)						(General: Parables/Mystery) Clement stresses that Christ taught through allegory and parables “not as a man of the world” but “as if he were”, hinting at a veiled or mysterious presence, not a concrete physical appearance. «ὁ κύριος, οὐκ ὢν κοσμικός, ὡς κοσμικὸς εἰς ἀνθρώπους ἦλθεν…» (Clement of Alexandria Stromateis 6.15.126); None (General Christian teaching) Jesus Christ our Lord, as Spirit, Word, and Reason of God, gave a new form of prayer for his disciples, as the “new wine in new bottles.” Iesus Christus dominus noster (Tertullian De Oratione §1); None (General Christian teaching) All things of the flesh are renewed in the spirit by the new grace of God, brought in by the gospel, which expunges all that came before. omnia de carnalibus in spiritalia renovavit nova dei gratia superducto evangelio expunctore totius retro vetustatis (Tertullian De Oratione §1); John 3:31 (cf. John 3:30–31) The teaching of John and his disciples prepared the way until Christ, who, being from heaven, taught heavenly things (implying the superiority of Christ). qui de terra est, inquit, terrena fatur, et qui de caelis adest, quae vidit ea loquitur (Tertullian De Oratione §1–2); None (General Christian teaching) Christ gave us the form of prayer (the Lord’s Prayer), which includes a summary (breviarium) of the entire gospel. oratio a Christo instituta (Tertullian De Oratione §1) None (General Christian teaching) Jesus (Christus) is the pattern of preaching, working, and suffering; he did the will of the Father, and we are to imitate him, even unto death. dominus administravit praedicando operando sustinendo (Tertullian De Oratione §4) None (General Christian teaching) Christian prayer is more powerful than pre-Christian prayer because it is shaped by Christ and acts in his name. oratio Christiana (Tertullian De Oratione §29) None (General Christian teaching) Even Christ himself prayed (“even the Lord himself prayed: to whom be honor and glory forever”). etiam ipse dominus oravit (Tertullian De Oratione §29 final sentence); Gospels (Healing on Sabbath, disciples eating) Tertullian consistently discusses Christ as “homo, quia et deus”—“what Christ, as man (and God), would do.” Argues Christ is physically present as a man performing healing, eating, and defending his disciples. “facturus fuerat et Christus homo, quia et deus” (Tertullian Adv. Marc. IV.12.10)
						Matthew 3:3	“Jesus was begotten by the dispensation of the Father through the Saviour [another Aeon], and all things were formed in his image. For this reason he was called ‘Man’ (Anthropos) and the Son of Man. And that the Saviour (Man) descended upon Jesus at his baptism and the rest of the aeons descended upon him too, each sending down something from herself into him, and that then he announced the unknown Father, worked miracles, and proclaimed salvation. But before his passion, the Saviour again departed from Jesus, so only the human Jesus suffered and rose.” (Irenaeus Against Heresies 1.7.2–3, paraphrased/abridged); Baptism of Christ (mythic version) “Upon this Christ, Jesus (Man) is said to have descended in the form of a dove at baptism.” (Describes the Gnostic myth, not the canonical gospel.) “Christum devolasse tunc in baptismatis sacramento Iesum per effigiem columbae.” (Tertullian, Adversus Valentinianos XXVI.2); “Son of Man” / “Homo” in doctrine Discusses “Homo” (Man) and “Son of Man” as titles for Christ within Valentinian speculation: “Some derive ‘Son of Man’ from the production of Man and Church [Homo et Ecclesia], hence the title is inherited.” “Hominis et Ecclesiae… Filium Hominis…” Tertullian Adversus Valentinianos XXXIX.1) Valentinian “Homo” as cosmic being The Gnostic “Homo” (Man) is not the historical Jesus but a primordial Aeon; Tertullian refers to their myth of “Homo” as a divine or cosmic archetype (not historical). “Homo pronuntiatus est… Homo Sermonem…” (Tertullian, Adversus Valentinianos XXXVI.2) “Son of Man” as Father’s own title “Some say the Father called himself ‘Man’ (Homo) as a great mystery of the name.” (Valentinian doctrine, not Tertullian’s view) “…quod ipsum Patrem pro magno nominis sacramento Hominem appellasse se praesumpserit.” (Tertullian, Adversus Valentianos XXXIX.2)
						Mark 5:24	Gospels (Jesus touched by woman with flow of blood) Jesus’ body is touched: “not a phantom, but a real body” (clothes touching his body, not a non-corporeal apparition), further arguing for the reality of Christ as a man. “vestimentum eius… corpori non phantasmati inditum, corpus quoque demonstrabatur” (Tertullian Adv. Marc. IV.20.13)
						Matthew 12:46	Gospels (Who is my mother and brothers?) Discusses Jesus’ statement “Who is my mother/brothers?”—argues Jesus had an actual mother and brothers (i.e., was physically born, a man), not just a “phantasm.” “verus mater et fratres eius foris stabant” / “quem videret hominem, quem audisset filium se hominis professum” (Tertullian, Adv. Marc. IV.19.7, 9–12)
						Matthew 17 Transfiguration (Moses & Elijah) Tertullian affirms the apostles were shown Jesus’s glory, along with Moses and Elijah; suggests Jesus as the Son was physically manifested before the Gospel events. “gloriam suam exhibuit, et Moysen et Heliam et insuper de caelo patris vocem” (Tertullian, De praescriptione haereticorum XXII.6)
						Matt 22:30/Mark 12:25 (Resurrection/Angels) At the resurrection, humans will be “like angels”—Tertullian says Christ said “like angels” to show men remain men, but with transformed flesh. erunt tanquam angeli (they will be as angels), non abstulit substantiam (he did not take away the substance) (Tertullian De De resurrectione carnis LXII.1–4)
The Gospel and Apostle						Matthew 23:37 (“Jerusalem, Jerusalem, how often…”) Clement says that Christ “desired” to gather Jerusalem’s children often—“twice: through the prophets and through the [personal] presence,” implying Christ was present in Israel before the Gospels. “ποσάκις δὲ ἢ ποῦ; δίς, διά τε προφητῶν καὶ διὰ τῆς παρουσίας” (Clement of Alexandria, Stromateis, 1.5.29.5); “How often… Jerusalem” Christ refers to frequent attempts to gather Israel, implying prior presence/agency before the incarnation (Irenaeus, Adversus Haereses IV.36.8–IV.37.1)
						Matthew 26:6	Gospels (Woman anointing Jesus) Argues the woman touching Jesus’ feet “solid body reality, not an empty phantom”; affirms the reality of Christ’s human body. “solidi corporis veritatem, non phantasma inane, tractaverit” (Tertullian, Adv. Marc. IV.18.9)
						Matthew 27:46	Mark 15:34 / Matthew 27:46 On the cross, Jesus cries “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?” This is the man (Son), not the Father, suffering and dying. “Deus meus, deus meus, ut quid me dereliquisti?” (Tertullian Adversus Praxean cap. 30.1–4)
						John 1:16 (“From his fullness we have all received”) The prophets received “from the fullness of Christ”; Clement interprets this as indicating Christ’s pre-existence and his inspiration of the prophets, but not bodily presence. πάντες … ἐκ τοῦ πληρώματος αὐτοῦ ἐλάβομεν, δῆλον ὅτι τοῦ Χριστοῦ (“all … from his fullness have received, namely of Christ”) (Clement of Alexandria, Stromateis 1.17.87)
						John 8:44 (“You are of your father the devil”) Jesus (the Lord) identifies the devil as the father of lies from the beginning; the true prophets are sent by the Lord, the false ones are not. λέγει ὁ κύριος “ὑμεῖς ἐκ τοῦ πατρὸς ὑμῶν τοῦ διαβόλου” (Clement of Alexandria, Stromateis 1.17.85)
						Romans 8:3	Romans 8:3 (“sent in the likeness of sinful flesh”) Tertullian insists that Christ truly had flesh like ours (not a phantom), which is essential for redemption. “…missum filium in similitudinem carnis peccati… carnea, quae peccatrici carni similis esset…” (Tertullian, Adv. Marc. 5.14.1–2)
						1 Corinthians 10:1–5 (esp. “all drank the same spiritual drink; for they were drinking from a spiritual rock which followed them, and the rock was Christ”) Clement cites Paul’s teaching that not all who were under the cloud or ate the same spiritual food attained true knowledge, suggesting a spiritual presence of Christ in the wilderness. However, Clement does not say this was a physical presence. πάντες ὑπὸ τὴν νεφέλην ἦσαν… καὶ πνευματικοῦ βρώματος… καὶ πνευματικοῦ ποτήματος μετέλαβον (Clement of Alexandria Stromateis 7.16.104.3); 1 Cor. 10:4 “Petra autem fuit Christus.” Tertullian affirms, “The rock was Christ” in the wilderness (not stated as physical, but as typology), and attacks Marcion for denying the connection. “petra illa Christus fuit” (Tertullian Adversus Marcionem V.7.12)
						1 Cor. 15:21–22; Gen. 3:19 Tertullian stresses the resurrection is bodily, “for as by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead,” making Christ a “man” in Adamic parallelism. “per hominem resurrectio … in Christo corpore vivificemur” (Tertullian Adversus Marcionem V.9.5)
						1 Cor. 15:45–47 Tertullian: “The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam a quickening spirit.” Christ is called “novissimus Adam”—emphasizes Jesus as “man.” “primus homo Adam … novissimus Adam” (Tertullian, Adversus Marcionem V.10.7–8)
						1 Cor. 15:47 “The second man is the Lord from heaven.” Tertullian points out the parallel: Adam (first man, earthly), Christ (second man, heavenly)—affirming Christ is “man.” “secundus dominus de caelo” (Tertullian Adversus Marcionem V.10.9)
						1 Cor. 15:49 “As we have borne the image of the earthly, we shall also bear the image of the heavenly.” Tertullian says this refers to living as the heavenly man—Christ as “man.” “imaginem caelestis” (Tertullian Adversus Marcionem V.10.10–11)
						1 Cor. 15:50 “Flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God.” Tertullian insists this refers to works of the flesh, not denial of bodily resurrection; he is defending Christ’s real body as “man.” “caro et sanguis regnum dei non possidebunt” (Tertullian Adversus Marcionem V.10.11)
						Ephesians 2:15	Ephesians 2:15 (“to create in himself one new man”) Christ is truly a new man, not a phantom. “vere novum, vere et hominem, non phantasma, novum autem et nove natum ex virgine dei spiritu” (Tertullian, Adv. Marc. 5.17.15)
						Ephesians 4:24 (“put on the new man”) The true wisdom is imparted through the Son; believers are to “put on the new man” created in righteousness and truth. ἐνδύσασθαι τὸν καινὸν ἄνθρωπον (Clement of Alexandria, Stromateis 1.18.90)
						Ephesians 5:32 (Marriage/Church) Christ is called the “perfect Adam” (novissimus Adam), and his marriage to the Church as a single bride is an image of monogamy. Tertullian does NOT claim Christ was present in OT scenes as a man. novissimus Adam, id est Christus… unam habens ecclesiam sponsam secundum figuram, quam apostolus… interpretatur, in Christum et ecclesiam (Tertullian De Monogamia 6.7)
						Colossians 1:22 (“reconciled in his body of flesh by his death”) Christ reconciles in his body of flesh—i.e., real, physical humanity. “in corpore eius per mortem; utique in eo corpore, in quo mori potuit per carnem” (Tertullian, Adv. Marc. 5.19.6)
						Philippians 2:7	Philippians 2:7 (“made in the likeness of men”) Christ was truly man, not a phantom—his “form of a servant” means real humanity. “in similitudine hominis, non in homine, et figura inventus homo, non substantia, id est non carne… Nam et inventum ratione posuit, id est certissime hominem.” (Tertullian Adv. Marc. 5.20.3–5)
						Phil 3:20-21 Christ will “transform our lowly body to be like his glorious body”—Christ as man in heaven, in the flesh. corpus nostrae humilitatis conformale corpori gloriae suae (Tertullian De resurrectione carnis XLVII.15, L.3, LI.1)
						Hebrews 11:26 “Moses considered the reproach of Christ greater riches than Egypt” Moses is said to esteem the reproach of Christ greater than the treasures of Egypt, connecting Christ to the Moses narrative. τὸν ὀνειδισμὸν τοῦ Χριστοῦ (Clement of Alexandria Stromateis 4.16.103)