Bible Things in Bible Ways
Paul and his use of Greek Philosophy
_5 Replies_
(https://biblethingsinbibleways.wordpress.com/2013/07/14/paul-and-his-use-of-greek-philosophy/#comments)
Out of the 27 books, epistles and letters that make up the New Testament,
13 have been authored by the Apostle Paul (This does not include the book of
Hebrews which some believe he wrote). One of the most influential people
in the 1st Century _Church_
(https://biblethingsinbibleways.wordpress.com/2013/03/17/defining-the-word-church/)
, a former _Pharisee_
(https://biblethingsinbibleways.wordpress.com/2013/03/22/who-were-the-pharisees/)
, he took
the gospel or Good news of our Messiah to the Greek speaking world of his
day. This was no easy task. The peoples of Rome, Corinth, Galatia, Ephesus,
Phillipi, Colosse & Thessalonica which he wrote to, were all part of the
Greek speaking world educated in Greek literature and philosophy, with their
own gods, traditions and opinions.
If you have read Paul’s epistles, inevitably, a thought such as “Why is
Paul so hard to understand?” would have crossed your mind at some point. It
is true that some of his letters are not that easy to read or understand.
And interestingly, this has been the case even in his day, as we see Peter
saying “… even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom
given unto him hath written unto you; As also in all his epistles, speaking
in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood,
which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other
scriptures, unto their own destruction” (2Pet 3:15,16)
Today, I present to you some research into Paul’s words and why we have
such a hard time understanding most of it. As you will see listed below, Paul
uses the words, ideas and Greek philosophy presented by such philosophers
as Plato, Socrates, Aristotle, Seneca and many more intellectuals of his
day, to help the people who he was talking to, better understand his
teachings.
1Cor 15:33
Evil communications corrupt good manners.
Quoted from Thais, a work done by “Menander“, a writer from the 3rd
Century BC, who in turn is supposed to have quoted from another Scholar named “
Euripides”.
Titus 1:12
The Cretians are always liars, evil beasts, slow bellies.
In writing to Titus Paul quotes a description of the Cretans taken from “
Epimenides“. Paul calls Epimenides “one of themselves, a prophet of their
own”.
Acts 17:24-29
In Acts 17:18 Paul is encountered by Epicureans and Stoics. Paul’s first
sentence struck directly at the “Epicurean” theory (the origin of the world
by mere coincidence and of atoms) and arrayed himself with the “Stoics”
in their doctrine of the (Divine Wisdom and Providence creating and ruling
all things). His speech is made up of words quoted from a Roman Stoic
Philosopher called Lucius Annaeus Seneca as mentioned below.
Acts 17:24
Paul went on to say, “God dwelleth not in temples made with hands.”
Seneca, the most prominent contemporary representative of Stoicism, had
put their doctrine into these words, “The whole world is the temple of the
immortal gods,” and “Temples are not to be built to God of stones piled on
high. He must be consecrated in the heart of every man.”
Acts 17:25
Paul said, “Neither is God served by men’s hands, as though he needed
anything, seeing he himself giveth to all life, and breath, and all things.”
Seneca put the same truth in this form: “God wants not ministers. How so?
He himself ministereth to the human race.”
Acts 17:26-28a
Paul said, “God made of one every nation of men to dwell on all the face
of the earth.”
Seneca agrees, “We are members of a vast body. Nature made us kin, when
she produced us from the same things and to the same ends.”
Paul said, “God is not far from each one of us; for in him we live, and
move, and have our being.”
Seneca wrote, “God is at hand everywhere and to all men.” and again, “
God is near thee ; he is with thee ; he is within.”
Acts 17:28b
Paul says, For we are also his offspring.
In Paul’s speech at Athens, he quotes from “certain of your own poets”.
The poet he is talking about is Aratus, and this is a line found in the
Phaenomena of Aratus
Acts 17:29
Then Paul proceeded, “Being then the offspring of God, we ought not to
think the godhead is like unto gold or silver or stone, graven by art or
device of men.”
Seneca parallels the thought again: “Thou shalt not form him of silver and
gold: a true likeness of God cannot be molded of this material.
Gal 5:23b
Paul says, Against such there is no law.
Roman 2:14b
Paul says, Are a law unto themselves.
Paul’s words are eerily familiar to Aristotle‘s saying of men eminent for
wisdom and virtue, “Against such there is no law, for they themselves are
a law,”
1Cor 9:24a
Paul says, “Know ye not that they which run in a race run all, but one
receiveth the prize?
Plato says, “But such as are true racers, arriving at the end, both
receive the prizes and are crowned”
Rom 7:22,23
Paul says, “But I see another law in my members, warring against the law
of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin which is in my
members.”
Plato says,”There is a victory and defeat – the first and best of
victories, the lowest and worst of defeats – which each man gains or sustains
at
the hands not of another, but of himself; this shows that there is a war
against ourselves – going on in every individual of us.”
Phillip 3:19
Paul says, “Whose end is destruction, whose God is their belly, and whose
glory is in their shame, who mind earthly things“.
Plato gives a vivid description of those gluttonous and intemperate souls
whose belly was their God, in Plato’s work called “the Republic”.
Rom 8:5
Paul says, “For they that are after the flesh do mind the things of the
flesh;”
Gal 6:8
Paul says, “For he that soweth to his flesh shall of the flesh reap
corruption”
Plato speaks of “to be carnally-minded was death” in Phaedo
2 Cor 4:4
Paul says, “In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them
which believe not”
Plato speaks of “the God of this world blindeth the eyes of his votaries”
in Theaetetus
In the book Paul and His Epistles – D.A. Hayes writes “Plato would have
pictured for him the truth that the God of this world blindeth the eyes of
his votaries, and Paul never could have forgotten the picture when he had
once read it.” – Theaet., 176; Rep., 7, 514
(Please note that the above point has been corrected as rightly pointed
out by dear brother, Dan Angelov – my sincere apologies for misquoting it
before) I wish to thank Angelov for re-checking the post and communicating
this correction.
Php 1:21
Paul says, “For me to live is Christ, and to die is gain.”
Plato says, “Now if death is like this, I say that to die is gain.”
2Tim 4:6
Paul says, “I am now ready to be offered, and the time of my departure is
at hand
To be with Christ, which is far better.”
Plato says, “The hour of departure has arrived, and we go our ways, I to
die and you to live. which is better God only knows.
1Cor 13:12
Paul says, “For now we see through a glass, darkly, but then face to face.
”
Plato says, I am very far from admitting that he who contemplates
existences through the medium of thought, sees them only “through a glass,
darkly,”
anymore than he who sees them in their working effects.
1Thess 5:15
Paul says, “See that none render evil for evil unto any man.”
Plato says, Then we ought not to retaliate or render evil for evil to
anyone, whatever evil we may have suffered from him.
1Cor 9:16
Paul says, “For necessity is laid upon me ; yea, woe is unto me, if I
preach not the gospel!”
Plato says, But necessity was laid upon me – the word of God I thought
ought to be considered first.
Acts 14:15
Paul and Barnabas say, “We also are men of like passions with you“.
Plato says, I am a man, and, like other men, a creature of flesh and
blood, and not of ” wood or stone,” as Homer says.
2Cor 7:2
Paul says, “I speak because I am convinced that I never intentionally
wronged anyone“.
Plato says, We have wronged no man ; we have corrupted no man ; we have
defrauded no man.
Rom 12:4
Paul says, “For as we have many members in one body, and all members have
not the same office“.
Socrates says “To begin with, our several natures are not all alike but
different. One man is naturally fitted for one task, and another for another.
”
Eph 1:22,23
Paul says, “And hath put all things under his feet, and gave him to be the
head over all things to the church, Which is his body, the fulness of him
that filleth all in all.”
Plato says “First, then, the gods, imitating the spherical shape of the
universe, enclosed the two divine courses in a spherical body, that, namely,
which we now term the head, being the most divine part of us and the lord
of all that is in us; to this the gods, when they put together the body,
gave all the other members to be servants.”
1Cor 12:14-17
Paul explains that “a body is not one single organ, but many. … Suppose
the ear were to say, ‘Because I am not an eye, I do not belong to the body’
, it does still belong to the body. If the body were all eye, how could it
hear? If the body were all ear, how could it smell? But, in fact, God
appointed each limb and organ to its own place in the body, as he chose.”
Socrates asks Protagoras, “Is virtue a single whole, and are justice and
self-control and holiness parts of it? … as the parts of a face are
parts-mouth, nose, eyes and ears.” Socrates then probes into the metaphor
further
by asking Protagoras if they agree that each part serves a different
purpose, just as the features of a face do, and the parts make the whole, but
each
serves a different purpose–“the eye is not like the ear nor has it the
same function.”
1Co 12:25
Paul says “That there should be no schism in the body; but that the
members should have the same care one for another. And whether one member
suffer,
all the members suffer with it; or one member be honoured, all the members
rejoice with it.”
Socrates says, that the best-governed city is one “whose state is most
like that of an individual man. For example, if the finger of one of us is
wounded, the entire community of bodily connections stretching to the soul for
‘integration’ with the dominant part is made aware, and all of it feels
the pain as a whole”
Paul’s use of Greek Philosophy of his day and age, cannot be overlooked or
dismissed. He used the words of intellectuals of his day to his advantage
in taking God’s word and the good news to the Greek speaking Gentile world.
The evidence provided above cannot be passed off as mere coincidence. He
wrote and spoke these words to a particular people who would have understood
and would have been very familiar with the metaphors and ideas which he was
using. One of the main reasons that we have such a hard time understanding
Paul’s words is that we are so much removed from the world Paul was living
in, and talking to. The above verses are only a few I could find in my
attempt in researching this subject. But I am sure that there are many more
instances where Paul would have used Greek Philosophy to his advantage.
This study would be somewhat of a shock to some who depend on Paul’s words
alone as the epitome of Scripture. (This is not in anyway, an attempt to
demean his writings or his work) Paul was and still is one of the greatest
apostles of God. But as Peter said in 2Pet 3:15,16, “there are some things in
his letters that are hard to understand”. It is better for us to take this
warning seriously, and not fall into the category of “ignorant and
unstable people who distort Paul’s teachings to our own destruction”. We must
always remember that God’s Word cannot have confusion or disorder. Paul’s
words(The actual meaning of his words, and not what we read into it) cannot
disagree with any other author in the Bible. His words have to co-exist with
all of Scripture in harmony.
========================================
from the site:
Credo House
Paul, the New Socrates in Athens: Paul as Philosopher (Part III)
* September 30, 2010
The noted philosopher of religion Marilyn McCord Adams makes the mystifying
assertion that “the Paul of Acts does not pursue his mission to the
Athenians, for the simple reason that he was not a philosopher.”_[1]_
(http://www.reclaimingthemind.org/blog/wp-admin/post-new.php#_ftn1) Au
contraire!
His departing Athens was by no means due to insufficient philosophical
skills. In Douglas Groothuis’s book On Jesus in the Wadsworth Philosopher
Series, we see why Jesus could be called a remarkable philosopher; if this is
true of Jesus, then it would be true of Paul as well. Indeed, we have seen
in my two previous blog posts on the apostle Paul that he had ample
philosophical skills and the requisite suppleness of mind to show himself to
be a “
lover of wisdom.”
In this piece I note, among other things, that Luke presents Paul’s
Areopagus speech at Athens (Acts 17) as that of a gifted
philosopher-theologian.
Luke views Paul as a Socrates-like philosophical figure.
How so? Paul’s activity and teaching bear a similarity to the early Greek
philosopher Socrates as portrayed by his pupil Plato in The Apology, which
depicts Socrates’ trial)._[2]_
(http://www.reclaimingthemind.org/blog/wp-admin/post-new.php#_ftn2) We see
three verbal similarities between Socrates
and Paul:
Engaging in dialogues in the marketplace
Paul: “[E]very day with those who happened to be present,” Paul engaged
in dialogues (dielegeto) in the marketplace/agora (en tē agora) (17:17).
Socrates: “I go about the world, obedient to the god, and search and make
enquiry into the wisdom of any one, whether citizen or stranger” (Apology
23). The common place that Socrates engaged others was the marketplace: “If
I defend myself in my accustomed manner, and you hear me using words which
I have been in the habit of using in the agora… (Plato, Apology 17).
Proclaiming foreign deities:
Paul: He was accused of proclaiming “foreign gods/divinities [xenōn
daimoniōn]” because he was preaching Jesus and the resurrection (17:18).
Socrates: He was charged with being “a doer of evil, who corrupts the
youth; and who does not believe in the gods of the city, but has other new
divinities [hetera de daimonia kaina]” (Apology 24).
Presenting a new teaching:
Paul: He was asked to give an account of this “new teaching which you are
proclaiming [tis hē kainē autē hē hypo sou laloumenē didachē]” (17:19).
Socrates: “Socrates is a doer of evil, who corrupts the youth; and who
does not believe in the gods of the city, but has other new divinities”
(hetera de daimonia kaina]” (Apology 24).
Luke is trying to strengthen Paul’s message by connecting him to Socrates.
As biblical scholar Walter Hansen observes, “Luke indicates the
favourable reception which the [Areopagus] address should receive from his
hearers
in the Greek world by this association of Paul with Socrates.”_[3]_
(http://www.reclaimingthemind.org/blog/wp-admin/post-new.php#_ftn3)
Not only does Acts 17 show Paul’s philosophical prowess by connecting him
with Socrates; Paul actually quotes pagan philosophers/thinkers to build
bridges with his audience.
v. 23: “I also found an altar with this inscription, ‘TO AN UNKNOWN GOD.’”
Various writers like Pausanias and Diogenes Laertius [Laertes] mentioned
altars to unknown gods. Epimenides of Crete (6th cent. BC) was associated
with the altars to the unknown God in Athens.
v. 28: “for in Him we live and move and exist.” This is also attributed
to Epimenides the Cretan thinker.
v. 29: “as even some of your own poets have said, ‘For we also are His
children.’” (This was from the Stoic poet of Soli, near Tarsus, c. 315-246
BC.)
As an aside, Paul quotes Epimenides again in Titus 1:12 (“Cretans are
always liars, evil beasts, lazy gluttons”) and Menander in 1 Corinthians 15:33
(“
Bad company corrupts good morals”).
Some have compared Paul’s method of presentation to that of the Stoics—in
approach rather than in exact theological content. The Roman writer and
rhetorician Cicero gave the standard outline of Stoic arguments in his work
De natura deorum: “first they prove that the gods exist; next they explain
their nature; they show that the world is governed by them; and lastly,
[that] they care for the fortunes of mankind.”_[4]_
(http://www.reclaimingthemind.org/blog/wp-admin/post-new.php#_ftn4)
Being a good Jew, Paul was angered by the idols he saw in Athens.
However, he approached the Athenians graciously and calmly in an attempt to
build
bridges. He took as his opening, the Altar to the Unknown God. In the
sixth century BC, Athens had been plagued by pestilence. The despairing city
leaders called to the “prophet” Epimenides of Crete (whom Paul cites in
Titus 1:12) to come and help. His solution was to drive a herd of black and
white sheep away from the Areopagus and wherever they would lie down, they
would be sacrificed to the god of that place. As it turns out, the plague
ceased, and, as Diogenes Laertes described it, memorial altars with no god’s
name inscribed on them could be found as a result._[5]_
(http://www.reclaimingthemind.org/blog/wp-admin/post-new.php#_ftn5)
Paul was the consummate bridge-builder, who became all things to all people
—to Jew and Gentile alike—so that he might win some. Being the
cosmopolitan man he was, he could build rapport with his hearers on many
levels.
And despite their misguided worship and allegiances, he sought to connect the
Athenians to their Maker, their Savior, and the Judge of all humanity.
The Socrates-like Paul also used his intellectual brilliance—both his
philosophical and theological-mindedness—for God’s glory. He was prepared to
present the risen Christ, in whom are hidden all the treasures of wisdom and
knowledge. In his ministry, he wisely recognized that evangelism is a
process, not necessarily an event. Jesus affirmed that people often need to
not only sit down and count the cost of discipleship; Paul likewise reasoned
not only with Jews in the synagogues, but with Gentiles in the agora; he
challenged his hearers to think through the logical conclusions of their own
beliefs as well as the philosophical implications of the Christian faith.
Unlike many well-intentioned evangelists who “rest their case” by saying,
“The Bible says…,” Paul wrapped key biblical themes into a language and
context that his pagan audience could understand; Paul even quotes other “
authorities” when they reflect biblical themes.
This type of pre-evangelism illustrates the importance of establishing
common ground with our hearers. As thoughtful believers, we can appeal to
common philosophical intuitions and ideals (e.g., human dignity and rights or
moral ideals) as well as to empirical evidences such as the universe’s
beginning in the Big Bang or the universe’s remarkable fine-tuning; we can
point
to the existence of beauty, objective moral values, reason, and
consciousness—all of which are readily explained in a theistic context, not a
non-theistic one. In doing so, we can, by the Spirit, point people to the God
“in
whom we live and move and have our being”—the God “who is not far from
each one of us.”
____________________________________
_[1]_
(http://www.reclaimingthemind.org/blog/wp-admin/post-new.php#_ftnref1)
Marilyn McCord Adams, “Philosophy and the Bible: The Areopagus Speech,”
Faith and Philosophy 9 (1992): 146.
_[2]_
(http://www.reclaimingthemind.org/blog/wp-admin/post-new.php#_ftnref2) G.
Walter Hansen, “The Preaching and Defence of Paul,” in Witness to
the Gospel: The Theology of Acts, eds. I.H. Marshall and David Peterson
(Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1998), 310.
_[3]_
(http://www.reclaimingthemind.org/blog/wp-admin/post-new.php#_ftnref3) Ibid.
This is contrary to what Marilyn McCord Adams asserts: “the Paul
of Acts does not pursue his mission to the Athenians, for the simple reason
that he was not a philosopher.” Marilyn McCord Adams, “Philosophy and the
Bible: The Areopagus Speech,” Faith and Philosophy 9 (1992): 146.
_[4]_
(http://www.reclaimingthemind.org/blog/wp-admin/post-new.php#_ftnref4)
Hansen, “Preaching and Defence,” 312; Bruce Winter writes: “It must be
concluded in seeking to understand Paul’s approach to Stoic views held by
his audience, that he may well have consciously used the traditional outline
of the Stoics on De natura deorum.” Bruce W. Winter, “In Public and in
Private: Early Christians and Religious Pluralism,” in One God, One Lord:
Christianity in a World of Religious Pluralism (2nd ed.), eds. A.D. Clarke and
B.W. Winter (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1992), 136.
_[5]_
(http://www.reclaimingthemind.org/blog/wp-admin/post-new.php#_ftnref5)
William Larkin, Acts (Downers Grove, IL: 1995), 255. The story behind
the Altar to an Unknown God is described by Diogenes Laertes’ Lives of the
Philosophers 1.110.
--
--
Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community
<[email protected]>
Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism
Radical Centrism website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
