Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

corpus-paul - Re: C-P: Paul and Plato

corpus-paul AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Corpus-Paul

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: "David C. Hindley" <dhindley AT csi.com>
  • To: "Corpus-paul" <corpus-paul AT franklin.oit.unc.edu>
  • Subject: Re: C-P: Paul and Plato
  • Date: Thu, 15 Jul 1999 01:18:31 -0400


Jeffrey,

You said:

>>Though I am still firmly convinced that the primary matrix for Paul's
thought and
beliefs is Jewish apocalypticsm, perhaps, as we entertain where Paul's
apparent
Platonism comes from, we also entertain the suggestion that, if it *is* there.
its
point of origin is neither middle Platonism or Gnosticism, but, as Bruce W.
Winter and
others have begun to argue, Stoicism

For a review of a recent of Winter's book on this subject , _Philo and Paul
among the
Sophists_. Society for New Testament Studies 96. Cambridge: Cambridge
University
Press, 1997-- see online review that appeared in Bryn Mawr Classical Review
99.02.13.<<

It looks as though your response involves two questions:

1) Is Platonism and Jewish apocalypticism mutually exclusive?

and

2) Is Paul's apparent Platonism derived from Platonism/gnosticism, or from
Stoicism?

In regards to question #1 above, I think the answer is "no, they are not
mutually exclusive." Pearson had cited at least two authorities who discuss
Platonic ascent traditions (e.g., John D Turner, "The Gnostic Threefold Path
to Enlightenment," NovT 22, 1980, pp 324-351; and Ruth Majercik, _Chaldean
Oracles_, SGRR5, Leiden: E J Brill, 1989) and compares them to those current
in Jewish apocalypticism. He also develops the case for a development of
Sethian style Gnosticism by disaffected Jews, and notes the large number of
apocalyptic keywords and ideas that these gnostics appropriated into their
essentially Platonic world view.

As for question #2, I will plead ignorance. A more in-depth study of Greek
philosophical systems is high up on my "to do" list, but not just quite yet. I
did read the review a month or so ago, but I do not recall Stoic influence
upon Paul's rhetoric being a main theme of the book. The thrust seemed to be
that Paul was in a sort of competition, somewhat against his will, with
professional sophists. Due to his supposed discomfort with sophistry, I would
think that if he utilized philosophical ideas in his rhetoric, it would be in
a crude and probably not-so-effective manner.

Let me ask: Does Paul's use of philosophical concepts come across that way to
you? It does not appear to me that he is making a concerted effort to use such
ideas, although he may have been aware of them and unconsciously incorporated
them into his rhetoric. As a result, it could appear so.

Regards,

Dave Hindley
Cleveland, Ohio, USA





Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page