G
Geremia
Guest
Was St. Paul familiar with the writings of Plato and Aristotle? If so, was he a Platonist or an Aristotelean? Thanks
- Status
U
UnworthyApostle
Guest
IMHO St.Paul was most likey a Platonist, and this comes from my occasional musing of philosophical reading. I did a quick google of the question and found an interesting tidbit of information on a webpage that says this :
"In First Corinthians 12, 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.”
comapre with,
"Plato also used these same organs when he put Socrates and Protagoras in a discussion about virtue,… 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.”
worldandi.com/newhome/public/2004/april/mtpub2.asp
A quick reading of select quotes from scripture do show a strong similarity between St.Paul’s theology and the philosophy of Plato. I do think now that Plato and St.Paul do have similar sounding sayings and this is addressed by the pope in a piece which I cannot recall at this moment.
Hope this helps!
God Bless!
"In First Corinthians 12, 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.”
comapre with,
"Plato also used these same organs when he put Socrates and Protagoras in a discussion about virtue,… 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.”
worldandi.com/newhome/public/2004/april/mtpub2.asp
A quick reading of select quotes from scripture do show a strong similarity between St.Paul’s theology and the philosophy of Plato. I do think now that Plato and St.Paul do have similar sounding sayings and this is addressed by the pope in a piece which I cannot recall at this moment.
Hope this helps!
God Bless!
G
Geremia
Guest
This seems like an interesting article: “St. Paul’s Homage to Plato”
L
larsenl1
Guest
Yes he would have known of the teachings of Plato and Aristotle. St Paul was a well educated man in the Hellenistic culture of Tarsus which was a thriving metropolis. He was a student of Gamaliel who is documented to be a respected rabbi before the destruction of the Temple in 70 A.D.
Gamaliel’s teachings are closer to Aristotle than to Plato.
“Then stood there up one in the council, named Gamaliel, a doctor of the law, high in reputation among all the people, and he said unto them: Take heed of yourselves what ye intend to do as touching these men. For before these days rose up Theudas, boasting himself to be somebody; to whom a number of men, about four hundred, joined themselves; he was slain, and all, as many as obeyed him, were scattered and brought to nought. After this rose up Judas of Galilee in the days of the taxing, and drew away much people after him; he also perished, and all, even as many as obeyed him, were dispersed. And now I say unto you, refrain from these men, and let them alone, for if this counsel or this work be of men, it will come to nought: but if it be of God, ye cannot overthrow it, lest haply ye be found even to fight against God.” (Acts 5:34)
“Gamaliel’s principle can be compared to Aristotle’s famous remark that we should not count a man happy (blessed?) until he is dead, recognizing that the meaning and truth of the events in a man’s life may not be evident at the time of occurrence, but may become clear in the future. This was one of the principles of Greek tragedy.”
mathpages.com/home/kmath431/kmath431.htm
Hope that answers your question.
- Status