In the Greco-Roman context, a divine man follows a systematic guideline, established by Ludwig Bieler in 1935. Stories have closely followed these idiosyncrasies of a divine man, such as those involving Jesus, Moses, and various other figures that have been emphasized for their significant value; although, the story of Apollonius parallels Bieler’s guidelines of a divine man closer than other stories at the time and is ostensibly used as rhetoric in order to galvanize those who had condemned him.
Apollonius was rebuked and speculated for his use of magic, as it was believed to be used for “malevolent use” and was later used as insults towards him (White 59). Philostratus saw the benevolence in Apollonius’ actions and was ready to manifest his teachings and miracle stories to those who had berated. His “magic” was reinterpreted into euphemisms as miracles and wisdom to reduce the stigma placed on Apollonius’ “magical powers.” Just as Socrates and Plato expressed their wisdom and divinely ideals and were regarded as significant philosophers, Philostratus wanted others to view Apollonius’ wisdom and power not as dark magic but a product of philosophical wisdom (White 59).
It can be speculated that Philostratus implemented these idiosyncrasies of a divine being to promote and emphasize Apollomius’ life because it follows divine being stories so closely, such as Jesus in the Gospels (White 60). Philostratus uses rhetoric and follows traditional Greek idioms of a divine man in order to support Apollonius’ authenticity of being a divine being, This is seen through the miracle birth story of Apollonius, followed by a early childhood filled with wisdom, and ending with an adulthood of deeds through miracles and a following of those who believe in his teachings and wisdom. Because this account of Apollonius’ life closely parallels other stories that are associated with divine beings, it can be perceived as persuading others to believe that he is not evil because of these powers but almost god-like but in human form, and a medium from a divine force.
From my own perspective I can see how both sides have a viable contention. Apollonius’ narrative was expressing an era where the idea of a divine man was prominent, which could be the focus of the argument for either end. The contention in favor for Apollonius as divine could use this as showing how this narrative parallels with other stories of divine beings; although, because it so closely follows the narrative of a divine being, it could be argued that the author simply used this narrative structure to embellish Apollonius’ life.