A Jewish-Hellenistic treatise arguing, through Stoic, Aristotelian, and Platonic proofs, that the cosmos is generated by God yet will never be destroyed.
On the Eternity of the World is Philo of Alexandria's philosophical treatise on whether the universe will ever perish. Philo surveys the major Greek positions: the Stoics (Democritus, Epicurus, Chrysippus) who hold the world is both generated and destructible, cycling through periodic conflagrations; Aristotle, who argued the world is ungenerated and indestructible; and Plato's Timaeus, which Philo reads as teaching that the world is generated but, once made, will never be dissolved. Philo sides with the Platonic middle position, and links it to Moses, noting that the Jewish lawgiver had already declared 'that the world is both generated and incorruptible' long before Aristotle or the Pythagoreans took up the question.
The bulk of the work is a dense chain of logical arguments against cosmic destruction: nothing exists outside the world to destroy it externally, its elements are arranged according to nature rather than in disorder, and every nature strives to preserve what belongs to it, so the world's own nature must strive for its permanence. Philo devotes long stretches to demolishing the Stoic doctrine of ekpyrosis (cosmic conflagration and rebirth), using Chrysippus's own 'Growing Argument' (the Dion and Theon paradox about a man who loses a foot) against him, and examining whether the post-conflagration 'seed' of a new world could plausibly regenerate a cosmos. He also refutes arguments, attributed to Theophrastus, that erosion of mountains, the retreat of the sea, and the youth of human arts and technologies prove the world had a beginning in time and therefore must end.
The treatise matters as a rare piece of technical Greek natural philosophy from a Jewish author, showing how thoroughly Philo could argue on the Greeks' own terms — quoting the Timaeus, Chrysippus, Critolaus, Boethus, Theophrastus, and Heraclitus — while still anchoring the conclusion in Mosaic authority. It is also a good specimen of ancient argument-cataloguing: Philo lays out multiple schools' proofs, sometimes several versions of the same argument, before turning to systematically refute the conflagration doctrine.
“But long ages before him, Moses, the lawgiver of the Jews, declared in the sacred books that the world is both generated and incorruptible.”
— On the Eternity of the World · read this chapter →
“Time, moreover, furnishes the greatest proof of the world's eternity. For if time is ungenerated, the world of necessity is ungenerated as well.”
— On the Eternity of the World · read this chapter →
“For souls it is death to become water, for water it is death to become earth.”
— On the Eternity of the World · read this chapter →
“It is sheer folly, however, to judge the age of the human race by the arts and crafts; for anyone who follows this absurd line of reasoning will end up declaring the world to be young”
— On the Eternity of the World · read this chapter →
It is Philo of Alexandria's treatise on whether the cosmos will ever be destroyed. Philo argues, following his reading of Plato's Timaeus, that the world was generated by God but will never perish, and spends most of the text refuting the Stoic doctrine that the world periodically burns up and is reborn.
Yes. Philo holds that the world is generated (it had a beginning, made by God as craftsman) but incorruptible, meaning it will never be destroyed. He treats this as the correct middle position between those who say the world is eternal in both directions and those who say it is both generated and perishable.
Philo claims that Moses, 'the lawgiver of the Jews,' had already taught in the sacred books that the world is generated and incorruptible long before Aristotle, Plato, or the Pythagoreans debated the question, effectively crediting Mosaic revelation with anticipating the best Greek philosophical conclusion.
He attacks it on multiple fronts: he argues nothing exists outside the cosmos to destroy it, that the world's elements are naturally ordered rather than disordered, and that a fiery 'seed' left after a conflagration could not plausibly regenerate a whole cosmos. He also turns Chrysippus's own Dion-and-Theon paradox against the Stoic position.
They are figures in a puzzle Philo borrows from Chrysippus's 'Growing Argument': Dion is a complete man, Theon a part of him (up to but not including a foot); when Dion loses his foot, the puzzle asks who is destroyed. Philo uses this analogy, with the world as Dion and its soul as Theon, to argue the world's body could lose parts without the world itself being destroyed.
He directly discusses Democritus, Epicurus, the Stoics (especially Chrysippus), Aristotle, Plato's Timaeus, Critolaus, Boethus, Theophrastus, Heraclitus, and the Pythagorean Ocellus, making the treatise a valuable window into Hellenistic-era cosmological debate.
Allegorical Interpretation I · Allegorical Interpretation II · Allegorical Interpretation III · Every Good Man is Free · Flaccus · On Abraham · On Dreams · On Drunkenness · On Flight and Finding · On Husbandry · On Joseph · On Mating / Preliminary Studies