Greco-Jewish Philosophy

GRECO-JEWISH PHILOSOPHY Greek influence made itself felt among the Hebrew people as early as the 5 century b. c., but it was not until the 2 century B. c. that systematic efforts were made to syncretize Greek philosophy and Jewish religious doctrine. The first attempt of this kind was made in the rich Jewish colony at Alexandria in Egypt. Two reasons explain the movement: the Alexandrian Jews admired Greek learning, and, secondly, they steadfastly adhered to their religion as revealed by God. Slowly the idea gained currency that the Greek philosophy was derived from Holy Scripture, and was therefore God’s work rather than that of men. Naturally this conviction led to the harmonizing of Scripture and Greek philosophy. It must be added that where disagreement between the two appeared, the syncretizers were always ready to explain Scripture by allegory in such wise as to dispel the discrepancy; in other words, they were ready to fit Scripture to philosophy, but not disposed to bring their philosophy into agreement with Scripture. Two notable Jewish syncretizers will be discussed in the present Chapter: a) Aristobulus, and b) Philo Judaeus.

a) Ar ist obul us (flourished about 150 b. c.)

Life: Aristobulus was a Jewish priest of Alexandria in the 2 century b. c. He is numbered among the teachers of Ptolemy Philometer.

Works: Aristobulus wrote Commentaries on Scripture in an effort to harmonize the sacred writings with Greek philosophy.

Doctrine: Homer and Hesiod and Orpheus had some knowl- 124 edge of Revelation, as a study of their poems reveals. Now all Greek philosophy has its roots in the doctrines of these ancient poets. Therefore Greek philosophy is itself derived from the Scriptures, and, in particular, from the Books of Moses. Even the mythologies of the old Greeks were derived from Revelation. The seeker after truth must therefore value Greek philosophy as a thing revealed; and he does well who shows in detail the agreement existing between these related and complementary bodies of truth, Scripture and Greek speculation. Aristobulus throughout his syncretic work holds to the doctrine of the unity of God, distinct from the world, the creator and ruler of all. He also teaches the spirituality and immortality of the human soul.

Remark: Aristobulus is important only as the originator of the Greco-Jewish movement in philosophy. Others seconded his efforts, but of most of these we know little or nothing. It was left for Philo Judæus to erect the Greco-Jewish syncretism into a system of philosophy.

b) Phil o Judæus (born about 25 b. c.)

Life: Philo was born of noble parents at Alexandria. 25 B. c. is the probable date of his birth; and we know he was alive in a. d. 40, for in that year he was sent to Rome to vindicate Jewish rights and religion before Caligula. Thus he was a contemporary of Our Lord. We know little of his life, and the date of his death is uncertain. Eusebius writes of him {Hist. Eccl., II, 4) : “In the time of Herod the king flourished Philo, a man held in great esteem not only by our own people, but also by those of heathen education. Of Hebrew birth, he conceded nothing in splendor of race or dignity to any in Alexandria. The value of his labors in sacred and traditional learning his writings declare. It is needless here to say how great was his knowledge of philosophy and letters, for he is known to have surpassed all of his age in his zeal for the study of Plato and Pythagoras.”

Works: Philo wrote many books in Greek, most of which deal with the interpretation of Scripture. The more philosophical of these books treat of The Making of the World, The Allegories of the Law, and The Immutability of God.

Doctrine: Sacred Scripture is the genuine font of truth, and from it are derived all true doctrines found in the philosophies of men. Now Scripture has an obvious sense, which is suited to the needs of uneducated minds ; but it has also a latent allegorical or mystical sense, which can be grasped only by those who have risen, by learning and virtue, to the contemplation of things divine. Everything in Holy Writ—historical data, genealogies, visions of prophets, etc.—contains latent sublime truths which philosophers must interpret. Philo proceeds to the work of interpretation. Where Scripture seems to disagree with his philosophy, its latent mystical meaning is developed in such a way that the disagreement disappears. Philo adheres in the main to Platonic philosophy, but at times he introduces doctrines of the Pythagoreans, the Stoics, and the Peripatetics. His teachings can be summarized under four heads : God ; The Word of God or Divine Logos; The World; Man and His Duties. i. God is wholly perfect. Description of God’s perfection in human language is hopelessly inadequate : God is ineffably or inexpressibly perfect; hence we cannot express attributes proper to God. But Philo inconsistently mentions attributes of God, calling Him eternal, immutable, most happy, lacking nothing, wholly simple (i. e., indivisible), all-just, all-wise, allmerciful, etc. God’s absolute distinction from the world is stressed by Philo to such an extent that he declares it impossible for the All-Perfect directly to produce or operate upon matter, which is all-imperfect. ii. God, by a mysterious generation, begot the Logos or Divine Word. Though divine, the Logos is distinct from and inferior to God. The Logos contains in itself the patterns or exemplars of all things, and the power to produce these things. The Logos is therefore the power that produced the universe. Nay, more : Philo seems to say that the Logos is not only the efficient (or productive) cause of the world, but that it is also the formal cause, interpenetrating and vivifying all the universe as a world-soul. iii. Matter is so imperfect a substance that it should be called non-being rather than being. It is wholly independent of God, and has existed from eternity. It is a potential principle, capable of uniting with forms to make up the bodily universe. The forms are contributed by the Logos, which either gives off forms or joins itself with the world and causes the universe to exist actually by reason of the forms of things contained in itself. The account of creation given in Genesis is forced by Philo into agreement with this theory. iv. The souls of men existed before their bodies as forms in the Logos. All were happy, but some sinned by a leaning towards sensuality, and were put into body-prisons. The soul in the body must wage continual war with evil tendencies. If victorious, the soul goes after death to heaven and happiness; otherwise it moves by transmigration into another human body. No soul is punished in a place of torments, but the wicked soul lives apart from God and endures continuous transmigrations. Man is meant to attain to the intellectual possession of God by contemplation. For contemplation peace and evenness of spiritual life is absolutely requisite; therefore must a man practise virtue and quell his passions and bodily appetites, for these disturb the soul and rob it of the calm necessary for contemplation. Philo follows Plato in the division and description of the virtues. As for contemplation, there are several stages of it, the highest of which is usually achieved only in the life to come, but may be attained here on earth by unceasing diligence in the practice of virtue, the quelling of the passions, and the study of philosophy, that divinely bestowed gift. One who achieves the highest form of contemplation on earth is rapt in continuous ecstasy.

Remarks: The striking feature about Philo’s system is its ’ evident eclecticism. He borrows from Plato his doctrine of the absolute aloofness of God from direct concern with the world: here we see clear indications of the influence of the Platonic doctrine of Subsistent, Real Ideas; and the same influence is shown in Philo’s account of the forms or powers resident in the Logos. He takes from the Stoics the notion of a world-soul, and that of indifference to worldly delights. From the Pythagoreans he takes the doctrine of transmigration. The remote origin of Philo’s ethical doctrine of contemplation is found in the old Hindu philosophies. All the points of this mingling of philosophical theory are drawn into unity and given authority by forcing the sense of Scripture to support them. Philo’s influence on subsequent pagan thinkers and upon the heretical philosophers of early Christian times was very pronounced. His principle of a double sense in Holy Writ started a movement which reached its height in the publishing of a work called Caballa (or Kabalah), which promulgates the doctrine that every word and even every letter of the sacred text contains a latent allegorical sense. This work appeared in the 2 century after Christ.

NEOPLATONISM The same dissatisfaction with the inadequate philosophies of post-Aristotelean times which gave rise to the Greco-Jewish movement also produced Neoplatonism. Greco-Jewish philosophy blends Greek philosophy and an allegorical version of Old Testament Scriptures; Neoplatonism blends Greek (and especially Platonic) philosophy with the pagan religion-philosophies of the Orient, and with certain notions derived from Christian Revelation. Neoplatonism is listed here with the pre-Christian philosophies because it belongs to pagan times in spirit, and because it is a terminal philosophy and not an inspirational one. It belongs to the end of an age—the pre-Christian age—even though it comes historically within the era that dates from the birth of Our Lord. This Chapter will discuss three phases of Neoplatonism as it exhibited itself in three Schools, namely : Article I. The Alexandrian School Article 2. The Syrian School Article 3. The Athenian School Article i. The Alexandrian School

a) Ammonius Saccas; b) Plotinus; c) Others.

a) Ammonius Saccas (a. d. 176-242), founder of Neoplatonism, was a native of Alexandria. He was reared in the Christian Faith, but apostatized and adopted Greek philosophy as his rule of life. About the beginning of the 3 century he 129