Moreover, brethren, I declare to you
the gospel which I preached,
which also you received
and I which you stand,
by which also you are saved,
if you hold fast that word
which I preached to you––unless
you believed in vain.
1Corinthians 15:1–2
There is many an attempt to
synthesize Christianity with Greek philosophy. This attempt is an attempt to syncretize
Greek philosophical influence to be the influence that the Biblical writers
held in their letters and epistles. The apostle Paul in the opening Scripture
refers that salvation of a person is from the gospel and a person’s holding
fast to that doctrine, otherwise any belief other than this is a belief in
vain. Therefore, to hold to a belief that the New Testament was influenced by
Greek philosophy and that the writers attempted to create a syllogism between
the two theological beliefs is to say nothing more than the Scriptures, in this
case, the New Testament, are not the words of God that are inspired by Him for
men to record in accordance with actual circumstances within Christian circle
and the rest of the world. If a person holds to this theory then the life,
death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ has lost it’s meaning, or has a meaning
other than what God inspired men to record. It is to believe in vain. There is
no distinction between what the Greek philosophers wrote and believed and that
which Christian men wrote and believed. Plenary inspiration of the Scriptures is
then reduced to man’s thoughts and beliefs; this leads to believing in vain, as
it does not include the whole of Scripture, both the Old Testament and the New
Testament as having continuity in the revelation of God and of His purpose(s).
this debate as to the historical origins of the New Testament ( I will hold
this essay to this part of Scripture) continues today as to the formation of
Christian Faith. Is the New Testament just another batch of documents,
documents that owe their existence due to the influence of Greek philosophy and
ideology? Was there an influence from Plato, or from the Stoics, or from the
Greek idea of the Logos?
To review some of what has been
previously written by me is to understand that the Greek philosopher, Plato,
did have and does have, influence on subsequent philosophers. Christopher Stead
(1913–2008 A.D.), a professor of divinity at the University of Cambridge who
was interested in the application of the Aristotelian concept of the ousia,
substance, a Greek word derived from eimi a verb of existence, to be, or
I am. And homoousios, a Greek word meaning “same substance” or “same
essence”, not to be found in the Bible, but is used in the Nicene Creed noting
that Jesus is of one essence with the Father. The First Ecumenical Council that
was held was held in Nicea A.D. 325 as the best language to use
concerning the Holy Trinity. The Arians favored “homoiousios” meaning “similar
essence”, notice that the letter “i” and the closeness of the two words
in Greek, and is the position of Jehovah Witnesses. Even in this present age
there can be seen the influence of ancient Greek philosophies, therefore we
must do justice to our investigation and determine if this Greek influence did
influence the writers of the New Testament.
Plato’s doctrine that is has much influence was his theory
of Forms or ‘Ideas’. Plato’s theory was not that this theory of Forms or “Ideas”
were “thoughts” as we understand the word, rather he believed that they were
eternal objective realities which make up the system or world which we could
understand intelligibly.[1]
This is dualism of the universe which his mentor Socrates held as well. This
is, the universe is both immaterial and consist as well in the experiential world.
It is a world whereby there is the unperceived world housing the objective,
transcendent, eternal, intelligible, archetypal, and perfect reality that makes
objects what they “really” are.[2]
These Forms or Ideas are said to be those transcendent realities that give
meaning and definition to
particular physical objects. If the
object itself changes, this in no way alters the Platonic Form. In any case,
the two "substances" work in union to bring about the reality of the
object (as well as its identification). For example, that a chair can be
recognized by a perceiver is evidence of some sort of idea of what a chair
would look like. Plato sees this "chairness" as a transcendent
archetype for the particular chair being observed. So, behind every object
there exists a Form that gives it definition.
Some then
assign a notion of dualism of the universe, that is, for them, abundantly clear,
to the New Testament Gospel writers. Is this true? The apostle John wrote about
Jesus and made perfectly clear in his writings that Jesus was an incarnation of
God (cf. John 1:1,14; 8:58; 10:30–33). Any perusal of the Gospels will provide
evidence to the reunion of the essence (the spirit) of Jesus with the material
body in the Resurrection (cf. Matt. 28:1–8, Mark 16:1–8, Luke 24:36–46; John
20:1–27). This seems to be an affirmation of dualism in the writings of the
Gospel portraits of Jesus. Many then conclude that it was Platonism and its
distinct and original view of he universe.
Is it? In
the next blogs I will illuminate open this suggestion that there is Platonic
dualism in the New Testament. I will examine other philosophical theories as
well in the coming blogs to determine if they had any influence on the New
Testament writers. This is slow, hopefully not painful, to examine these
philosophies, yet, it is our faith and the truth of the Gospels, the New Testament,
the Scriptures in totality that is at stake. We must never forget our goal:
Changing from the Inside Out, to hold fast to Authentic Biblical Faith.
Al Scripture is given by
Inspiration
of God,
And is profitable for doctrine,
For reproof,
for correction,
For instruction in righteousness.
2Timothy 3:16
Pray for Guidance From The Holy Spirit
Richard L. Crumb
No comments:
Post a Comment