Hellenistic origins of christianity

[gollamudi]

Hi brother Const.,
you have made good points on this thread. I know there are many dogmas which Christianity had adopted from Pagan myths.

The name of the thread is not deceptive since Christianity had taken its origins from hellenism.

[Constitutionalist]

Quote (Nick Hassan @ Nov. 08 2009,21:19)

Hi con, Constantine did not affect the body of Christ. He just clarified the fact that most who had begun the walk were not faithful and apostasised. The false church bears no relationship to the Body of Christ and has no relationship with Jesus or his God.

Yes but what beliefs have you carried for the last 2000 years, are you free from all the false teachings that were cemented into Christianity?

[Constitutionalist]

Quote (gollamudi @ Nov. 08 2009,22:15)

Hi brother Const., you have made good points on this thread. I know there are many dogmas which Christianity had adopted from Pagan myths. The name of the thread is not deceptive since Christianity had taken its origins from hellenism.

They do not seem to grasp that notion. Hellenization just didn't magically disappear at the onset of Constantines Bishops, his bishops beliefs came from somewhwere. Hence there was already Paganism blending into the Messianic teachings.

Matthew 7:15 Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves.

Matthew 24:11 And many false prophets shall rise, and shall deceive many.

Luke 6:26 Woe unto you, when all men shall speak well of you! for so did their fathers to the false prophets.

Act 20:29-30 For I know this, that after my departing shall grievous wolves enter in among you, not sparing the flock. Also of your own selves shall men arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away disciples after them.

Romans 16:18 For they that are such serve not our Lord Jesus Christ, but their own belly; and by good words and fair speeches deceive the hearts of the simple.

1Corinthians 11:19 For there must be also heresies among you, that they which are approved may be made manifest among you.

2Corinthians 11:13-15 For such [are] false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ. And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light. Therefore [it is] no great thing if his ministers also be transformed as the ministers of righteousness; whose end shall be according to their works.

Collossians 2:8 Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.

1Timothy 4:1-3 Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils; Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron; Forbidding to marry, [and commanding] to abstain from meats, which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving of them which believe and know the truth.

2Peter 2:1 But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction.

Do you think those very Greco-Romans provided absolute untainted Sound doctrine?

[gollamudi]

Hi brother Const.,
That is the fate of Christianity everybody thinks that his doctrine is only the true doctrine and others are wrong. Whom we can believe if our N.T is full of contradictions?

[kerwin]

Quote (gollamudi @ Nov. 09 2009,12:15)

Hi brother Const., you have made good points on this thread. I know there are many dogmas which Christianity had adopted from Pagan myths. The name of the thread is not deceptive since Christianity had taken its origins from hellenism.

Why have the Jews rejected the God of Abraham?

What statues in the Law of Mosses apply to Gentiles as well as to the children of Israel?

How does a hunter kill an animal without violating the laws of slaughter?

Rabbi Lerner at about.com November 9,2009 wrote:

Quote

In addition to being lifted up, a ritual slaughterer must move to the animal quickly, use a knife that is incredibly sharp and without even the slightest nick, and cut through the animal's trachea and esophagus in a single motion (at least one of these for fowl). All this is required in order to try to minimize the animal's suffering.

So our hunter sneaks up on an animal and somehow manages to hoist it up so he can slit its throat.

It is a false teaching and this Rabbi knows it since he also stated:

Rabbi Lerner at about.com November 9,2009 wrote:

Quote

Rules for kosher slaughtering of animals developed from the rules of the sacrificial system in the Temple.

In other words it is not really what God established as the way for animals to be slaughtered though it is the way priests developed to sacrifice animals to God.

Here is the rest of the source.

[gollamudi]

THE LORD'S SUPPER – INSTITUTED BY JESUS OR PAUL?
In Matthew, Mark and Luke, Jesus institutes the Lord's Supper during the Passover meal (in John's gospel the Lord's Supper is not instituted – Jesus was dead by the time of the Passover meal).

In 1 Corinthians 11:23 the apostle Paul writes, “For I received from the Lord that which I also delivered to you, that the Lord Jesus in the night in which He was betrayed took bread…” Here Paul claims that he got the instructions for the Lord's Supper directly from Jesus (evidently from one of his many revelations). Paul writes these words about twenty years after Jesus' death, and had the church already been celebrating the Lord's Supper he certainly would have been aware of it and would have had no need to receive it from the Lord. Some apologists try to play games with the text to make it seem like Paul actually received the instructions from the other apostles, but one thing Paul stresses is that what he teaches he receives from no man (Galatians 1:11-12).

The Lord's supper was not invented by Paul, but was borrowed by him from Mithraism, the mystery religion that existed long before Christianity and was Christianity's chief competitor up until the time of Constantine. In Mithraism, the central figure is the mythical Mithras, who died for the sins of mankind and was resurrected. Believers in Mithras were rewarded with eternal life. Part of the Mithraic communion liturgy included the words, “He who will not eat of my body and drink of my blood, so that he will be made one with me and I with him, the same shall not know salvation.”

[kerwin]

Gollamudi wrote:

Quote

THE LORD'S SUPPER – INSTITUTED BY JESUS OR PAUL?

Actually, neither since it is the Day of Unleavened Bread.  We do of course celebrate the glorification of The Anointed One at that time.

Luke 22:7(NIV) reads:

Quote

Then came the day of Unleavened Bread on which the Passover lamb had to be sacrificed.

It is the times Jews eat the Passover and so  is very appropriate for the true Jewish faith that Holds Jesus as the Anointed One, and their Passover.

Of course there are many false believers who call themselves Jews but who reject the true teachings of God.

Luke 2211(NIV) reads:

Quote

and say to the owner of the house, 'The Teacher asks: Where is the guest room, where I may eat the Passover with my disciples?'

It is a Hebrew tradition establish in memory of God freeing the children of Israel from Egypt.

Exodus 34:18(NIV) reads:

Quote

“Celebrate the Feast of Unleavened Bread. For seven days eat bread made without yeast, as I commanded you. Do this at the appointed time in the month of Abib, for in that month you came out of Egypt

Gollamudi wrote:

Quote

in John's gospel the Lord's Supper is not instituted – Jesus was dead by the time of the Passover meal

Not according to what I read.  Jesus was executed on a Friday evening and the Passover meal is eaten on a set day.

Leviticus 23:4-8(NIV) reads:

Quote

” 'These are the LORD's appointed feasts, the sacred assemblies you are to proclaim at their appointed times: The LORD's Passover begins at twilight on the fourteenth day of the first month. On the fifteenth day of that month the LORD's Feast of Unleavened Bread begins; for seven days you must eat bread made without yeast. On the first day hold a sacred assembly and do no regular work. For seven days present an offering made to the LORD by fire. And on the seventh day hold a sacred assembly and do no regular work.'

John 1:13(NIV) reads:

Quote

It was just before the Passover Feast. Jesus knew that the time had come for him to leave this world and go to the Father. Having loved his own who were in the world, he now showed them the full extent of his love. The evening meal was being served, and the devil had already prompted Judas Iscariot, son of Simon, to betray Jesus.

The evening meal is the Passover meal.

The Lord's supper was not invented by Paul, but was borrowed by him from Mithraism, the mystery religion that existed long before Christianity and was Christianity's chief competitor up until the time of Constantine.

1 Corinthians 11:20-21(NIV) reads:

Quote

When you come together, it is not the Lord's Supper you eat, for as you eat, each of you goes ahead without waiting for anybody else. One remains hungry, another gets drunk.

I admit it does not sound like the Lord’s Supper the “Christian” Churches celebrate today.

So the Passover Meal is a practice of Mithraism according to you.  I suppose that Mithraism could have borrowed it from the Hebrew religion.   That is would not be too surprising since the 12 tribes were scattered to the nations,  

From what I have heard the oldest known cult locations of Mithraism are dated at earliest to 80AD so it certainly could have borrowed from the true Hebrew faith that acknowledges Jesus as the Anointed One.   Rome is the place where some of the earliest artifacts have been found.  The earliest dated Mithraeum outside of Rome dates about 148 AD.

Why do some so called Jews teach Kocher Laws that are not God's Words?   What do they hope to do by teaching lies in the name of the Lord?

[NickHassan]

Quote (Constitutionalist @ Nov. 09 2009,17:58)

Quote (Nick Hassan @ Nov. 08 2009,21:19) Hi con, Constantine did not affect the body of Christ. He just clarified the fact that most who had begun the walk were not faithful and apostasised. The false church bears no relationship to the Body of Christ and has no relationship with Jesus or his God. Yes but what beliefs have you carried for the last 2000 years, are you free from all the false teachings that were cemented into Christianity?

Hi CON,
We are here to find truth from the source God gave us-scripture.

letting scripture speak for itself and proving it by the principle of 2Cor 13.1 is the aim.

The food is the Word of God and peeling off what men has added will slowly improve our knowledge if we walk in the way.

[gollamudi]

Similarities between the Greek Mystery Religions and Christianity

The Greek mystery religions were cults into which a person could be initiated (taken in). The initiate was called “mystes,” the introducing person “mystagogos” (leader of the mystes). The leaders of the cults were the “hierophantes ” (revealer of holy things) and the “dadouchos” (torchbearer).Several mystery religions existed before the Hellenistic era. Their great period of proliferation began during the reign of the Emperor Augustus (reigned 44 BCE to 14 CE). In the first century CE almost every city of the eastern Mediterranean had a temple dedicated to a god or a goddess of a mystery religion.

These religions were so widespread that many officials and kings participated in them. For example, in Alexandria Ptolemy IV Philopator (reigned 221-205 BCE) was a devotee of Dionysus. At about 34 BCE, the Roman general Mark Anthony, after his successful expedition to Armenia, entered triumphantly into Ephesus casting himself in the role of the savior god Dionysus. He was received by ecstatic maenads. (The maenads were women, participants in orgiastic Dionysian rites. They performed a rite, which was the forerunner of the Christian ritual of communion. They tore up an animal and ate its flesh, which symbolized the flesh of the god Dionysus.) In the time of Jesus, in Rome Emperor Augustus was an initiate of the Eleusinian mysteries and a devotee of Apollo. Under his rule, in 28 BCE, a splendid temple of Apollo was built on the Palatine Hill. Gaius Caesar (Caligula), the Roman emperor from 37 to 41 CE, instituted his own mystery religion and was initiated in it. Frescoes of the goddess Isis (of the mystery of Isis) dating from the time of Caligula were found in the ruins on the Palatine Hill at Rome. Emperor Vespasian (reigned 69-79 CE) became a devotee of Sarapis (a god associated with Isis) after he participated in a miracle (the healing of a lame hand and a vision problem) in Alexandria (at 70 CE). Domitian (reigned 81-96 CE) built a huge temple for Isis and adopted the Egyptian dietary laws after the priests of Isis saved his life. At the end of the 1st century CE he erected on the Campus Martius in Rome the temple of Isis, a stately building. Trajan (he reigned 98-117 CE) is depicted on his triumphal arch as sacrificing to Isis. The Roman emperors Septimus Sevirus and Caracalla, who ruled jointly from 198 to 211 CE, were devotees of Sarapis. Caracalla appeared on his coins as “Sarapis Cosmocrator.” He called himself “Philosarapis” (lover of Sarapis).

There is a distinct difference between the words “secret” and “mystery.” A secret is knowledge that is hidden, whereas a mystery is a truth that can be understood only by revelation from God. The words “secret” and “secrets,” which appear in the Old Testament books, refer to lack of knowledge, not to lack of understanding. The mystery is more like an enigma, a riddle, or a puzzle. There were no mysteries in the Old Testament, except in the book of Daniel. In Daniel God gave a dream to King Nebuchadnezzar that included a mystery, whose explanation was revealed to Daniel by God. The book of Daniel contains a mystery because it was completed around 167-164 BCE, during the time of Antiochus IV, when the mystery of Dionysus was widespread in Palestine.

The word “mystery” (Gr. mysterion ) is a key word in Christianity. It appears in the New Testament 22 times in the singular and 5 times in the plural. The following verses portray Christianity as a mystery religion. “Without any doubt, the mystery of our religion is great.” (1 Timothy 3:16 NRSV) “… they {the deacons} must hold fast to the mystery of the faith …” (1 Timothy 3:9 NRSV) “The mysteries of the kingdom of heaven.” (Luke 8:10 KJV) “… the mystery {of Christ}, which from the beginning of the world has been hid in God …” (Ephesians 3:9 KJV) More than once Paul mentions “the mystery of Christ”: “This mystery is great; but I am speaking with reference to Christ and the church.” (Ephesians 5:32 NASB) “… so that we may speak forth the mystery of Christ …” (Colossians 4:3 NASB) “When you read this you can perceive my insight into the mystery of Christ.” (Ephesians 3:4 RSV) Interestingly, Paul did not say “the mystery of Jesus.” Perhaps because he was not concerned with the historical Jesus. Paul preached the spiritual Jesus: the Christ. Gentile Christianity was “the mystery of Christ,” like “the mystery of Dionysus” or “the mystery of Isis.” With the following declaration Paul indicated that Christianity is a mystery religion: “This is how one should regard us, as servants of Christ and stewards of the mysteries of God.” (1 Corinthians 4:1 RSV) Paul wrote that resurrection was a mystery: “Lo! I tell you a mystery; We will not all sleep, but we will all be changed …” (1 Corinthians 15:51 KJV) His gospel was a mystery: “… that I may open my mouth boldly, to make known the mystery of the gospel …” (Ephesians 6:19 KJV) Gentile Christianity was “the mystery hidden for ages and generations but now made manifest to his saints {the Gentile Christians}.” (Colossians 1:26 KJV) “But we speak the wisdom of God in a mystery.” (1 Corinthians 2:7 KJV) “{God} … made known to us the mystery …” (Ephesians 1:9 KJV)

The Gentile Christians borrowed various terms from the mystery religions. Ignatius, the Bishop of Antioch, Syria, a prominent Church father (he died ca. 110 CE), wrote to the Ephesians and called them “initiates”: “… you are … fellow-initiates with {the apostle} Paul …” Clement of Alexandria invited Gentiles to be initiated in the “holy mysteries” of Christianity: “Then you will have the vision of my God, and will be initiated in those holy mysteries {of Christianity}, and will taste the joys that are hidden away in heaven …” Clement called Christianity the “truly sacred mysteries: “He {the Christian initiate} saw the light and a vision {the initiates of the mystery religions saw the light and a vision}, he was sanctified by initiation, and Jesus marked the initiate with his seal: ‘O Truly sacred mysteries! O pure light! In the blaze of torches I have a vision of heaven and of God. I become holy by initiation.’ The Lord {Jesus} reveals the mysteries; he marks the worshipper with his seal …” Christians were marked symbolically with the seal of the Lord, like the Dionysians were marked with the seal of Dionysus.

The devotees of the mystery religions were consecrated and bonded with each other through the mystery, and set themselves apart from the unconsecrated world. Likewise, the Christians set themselves apart from the world: “… you are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world …” (John 15:19 KJV)

Plato mentioned that members of mystery communities considered each other brothers: “Dion attached to himself two brothers … men whose friendship was not derived from philosophy, but from … mutual entertaining and sharing in religion and mystic ceremonies.” Likewise, the Christians considered each other brothers. Paul addresses the Corinthians, “Now concerning our brother Apollos, I strongly urged him to visit you with the other brothers …” (1 Corinthians 16:12 NRSV)

The Church father Clement of Alexandria (ca. 150-211 or 215 CE) wrote, “… in the current Mysteries among the Greeks ceremonial purifications hold the premier place.” The initiation to the mysteries was preceded by rites of purification such as fasting, baptism (including sprinkling of holy water), and confession. Plutarch (ca. 46-119 CE) mentions that mystery initiates confessed their sins during the ritual of initiation. “When Antalcidas was being initiated into the mysteries at Samothrace, he was asked by the priest what especially dreadful thing he had done during his life …” The Christian theologian Ter
tullian (ca. 155-220 CE) wrote, “In certain mysteries, e.g. Isis and Mithra, it is by baptism that members are initiated …” Likewise, the Christians were initiated with confession of sins and baptism. The second century Christian apologist Justin Martyr (born ca. 100 CE died ca. 165 CE) acknowledged that the Greek mystery religions practiced baptism before Christianity but denied that the Christians borrowed this ritual from the mystery religions. He explained that the reason Gentiles practiced baptism before Christianity is because the demons learned about baptism from Isaiah and taught it to the Gentiles: “… the demons prompted those who enter their temples … to sprinkle themselves also with water; furthermore, they cause them to wash {baptize} their whole persons.”

As mentioned earlier, after Antiochus IV, the mysteries of Dionysus were widespread in Palestine. Sometime after Antiochus IV, the Essenes practiced repentance followed by baptism as part of the initiation to their sect. They passed this practice to John the Baptist. John preached baptism for the remission of sins: “John did baptize in the wilderness, and preach the baptism of repentance for the remission of sins. And there went out to him all the land of Judaea, and they of Jerusalem, and were all baptized of him in the river of Jordan, confessing their sins.” (Mark 1:4-5 KJV) The early Christians borrowed this ritual from John the Baptist. They first repented and then were baptized: “Then Peter said to them, Repent, and be baptized … for the remission of sins …” (Acts 2:38 KJV)

In the initiation ceremonies of the mysteries, after the preliminaries, followed the delivery of the sacred symbol or signal. One Dionysian symbol was the leaf of ivy. (Christians used as symbols the fish and the anchor.) The initiation was conducted in the dark. It culminated in the vision of the deity of the cult. The appearance of light played an important role. During the ceremony of initiation at the greater mysteries of Eleusis the initiate “saw the light” (usually the bright light of a torch) and received the revelation of the mysteries from his god. Similarly, Paul “saw the light” on the road to Damascus and “received the revelations of the mysteries” from the spiritual Jesus: the fictional Jesus. But Paul did not consider Jesus his god. As we will examine later, he considered Jesus as the mediator to God. He wrote, “… the mystery was made known to me by revelation …” (Ephesians 3:3 RSV) Paul was initiated by Jesus into the mystery of Christ: “… so that we may speak forth the mystery of Christ …” (Colossians 4:3 NASB)

With this vision the mystery initiate attained union with the deity of his cult and was endowed with eternal life. Epictetus (born ca. 55 and died 135 CE) also said, “… whatever we do and say in imitation of and {in} union with Him {god}.” The initiate was in union with the deity: the deity lived in the initiate and the initiate lived in the deity. Gentile Christianity adopted this, too. Paul wrote, “… Christ lives in me.” (Galatians 2:20 KJV) John wrote, “{Jesus said:}… I am in the Father and the Father is in me.” (John 14:11 NRSV) “… I am in my Father, and you in me, and I in you.” (John 14:20 NRSV) These were common expressions of the Greek mystery religions. They existed before the writing of the New Testament. The devotees of the Greek mystery religions and the Stoics believed that god lives in the heart of the righteous. In the following quotation Epictetus chastised those who sinned: “You are a being of highest importance; you are a fragment of god upon Baal Fal[len] on the ground: She puts [sackcloth] and loincloth {to mourn}.” Anath seized Mot and destroyed him: “She seizes Godly Mot, with sword she does kill him.” Because of her victory over death, Baal revived and returned to his throne: “So I knew that Alive was Puissant {mighty} Baal!” The myths of Tammuz and Baal have similarities with the Greek myth of the goddess Persephone. Persephone went to Hades and returned to life every year. Her death and return from Hades was celebrated every year in the mysteries of Eleusis. People in those days believed that various demi-gods and heroes had gone down to Hades and come back. Orpheus (from whom the Orphics received their name) and Dionysus went to Hades and returned. Plato wrote, “Orpheus … they sent back … from Hades.” The Greek historian Diodorus of Sicily (1st century BCE) wrote, “… he {Orpheus} dared the amazing deed of descending into Hades, where he entranced Persephone … and persuaded her … to allow him to bring up his dead wife from Hades, in this act resembling Dionysus; for the myths relate that Dionysus brought up his mother Semele from Hades.” Pollux, Theseus, and the god-man Hercules (god-man: half god, half man; the offspring of a god and a human), went down to Hades and came back. Diogenes Laertius wrote that Pythagoras returned from Hades: “So greatly was he {Pythagoras} admired that his disciples used to be called ‘prophets to declare the voice of God,’ besides he {Pythagoras} himself says in a written work that ‘after two hundred and seven years in Hades he has returned to the land of the living.’ ” Finally, the god-man Jesus (the fictional Jesus of the Gentile Christians) descended and returned from Hades. “… the Son of man will be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.” (Matthew 12:40 KJV) “For Christ … was put to death … he went and preached to the spirits in prison {Hades} …” (1 Peter 3:18-20 NIV) Justin Martyr wrote: “… Dionysus was born of Zeus’ union with Semele … and died, he arose again and ascended to heaven …” Likewise, the god-man Jesus was born of God and a mortal woman, died, arose, and ascended to Heaven. When the Gentile Christians preached that Jesus, the man conceived by God and a mortal woman, went to Hades and returned, they did not have to work hard to convince the people of the Roman Empire to believe this, because those people already believed in such things. In other words, the stories and beliefs of Christianity were readily acceptable because they were similar to the existing stories and beliefs of the Greek mystery religions.

Justin Martyr wrote the following to win Gentiles over to Christianity: “When we say that God created and arranged all things in this world, we seem to repeat the teaching of Plato; when we announce a final conflagration, we utter the doctrine of the Stoics; and when we assert that the souls of the wicked … after death, will be … punished, and that the souls of the good … will live happily, we believe the same things as your poets and philosophers … When … we assert that the Word, our … Jesus Christ, who is the first-begotten of God the Father, was not born as the result of sexual relations {between a mortal man and a mortal woman}, and that He was crucified, died, arose from the dead, and ascended into Heaven, we propose nothing new or different from that which you say about the so-called sons of Jupiter {sons of Zeus}.” But by making these comparisons, Justin inadvertently confirmed that Christianity borrowed several beliefs form the Greek mystery religions. By saying “we propose nothing new or different from that which you say about the so-called sons of Jupiter,” he, confirmed the statement of Ecclesiastes, who wrote, “… what has been done will be done again; there is nothing new under the sun. Is there anything of which one can say, ‘Look! This is something new’? It was here already, long ago.” (Ecclesiastes 1:9-10 NIV) To put it in the words of Ecclesiastes, most of the Christian beliefs “were there already, long ago.”

Before the emergence of Christianity Plato, the Stoics, and the Greek mystery religions used figurative interpretation to explain the Greek classical poems, which the Greeks considered inspired by gods (just as the Jews c
onsidered the poems of Isaiah inspired by God). Christianity adopted this method of interpretation through Philo of Alexandria, the Platonist. (Further on, we will examine compelling evidence indicating that the New Testament writers were inspired by Philo’s writings.) Porphyry accused the Christian Church father Origen of using the figurative interpretation of the Stoics and the Greek mystery religions. He wrote, “He {Origen} used the books of Chaeremon the Stoic and Cornutus, from whom he learned the figurative interpretation, as employed in the Greek mysteries …”

The writers of the New Testament borrowed Gentile sayings and used them with some adaptations. For example,

“Zeus was, Zeus is, Zeus will be.” “ ‘I am the Alpha and the Omega,’ says the Lord God, ‘who is and who was and who is to come’ …” (Revelation 1:8 NASB)

Some Gentiles scorned the Gentile Christians for borrowing their beliefs from the Greeks. Tertullian wrote, “… we are laughed at for proclaiming that God will judge, for just so the {Greek} poets and philosophers set up a tribunal in the world below.” Further on in his book Tertullian mentioned the river Pyriphlegethon, the flaming river of the underworld mentioned in the writings of Plato. Tertullian believed that such river existed. He believed that Plato was inspired by God. (Plato lead the Christians to believe several things.) Tertullian acknowledged the striking similarities between the Gentile beliefs about life after death and the corresponding beliefs mentioned in the New Testament. Twice he referred to Christianity as “our mysteries.” Naturally, he claimed that the beliefs of Christianity are older than the parallel beliefs of the Greek mystery religions. He claimed that the mysteries of the Greeks are copies of the mysteries of Christianity: “Now whence, I ask you, do the {Greek} philosophers and poets find things so similar? Whence indeed, unless it be from our mysteries. And if from our mysteries {notice, he acknowledges Christianity as a mystery religion} which are the older, then ours are truer and more credible when the mere copies of them win credence. If they invented these things out of their feelings, then our mysteries must be counted copies of what came later, a thing contrary to nature. For the shadow never exists before the body, nor the copy before the truth.” Tertullian is correct on this point: that the shadow does not exist before the body, nor the copy before the truth. But he is incorrect on this one: the Greek philosophers and poets wrote before the advent of Christianity. The Greek mystery religions existed before Christianity. They cannot be “the shadow” or “the copy.”

In the following passage, Justin Martyr is trying to prove that the motifs of the myth of the god-man Jesus were not inspired by Gentile myths about god-men: “… those counterfeits which he who is called the devil is said to have performed among the Greeks; … For when they tell that Bacchus {Dionysus}, son of Jupiter, was begotten by [Jupiter's] intercourse with Semele … and when they relate, that being torn in pieces, and having died, he rose again, and ascended to heaven; and when they introduce wine into his mysteries, do I not perceive that [the devil] has imitated the prophecy announced by the patriarch Jacob, and recorded by Moses? And when they tell that {the god-man} Hercules was strong, and traveled over all the world, and was begotten by Jove {Zeus} of Alcmene, and ascended to heaven when he died, do I not perceive that the Scripture which speaks of Christ, 'strong as a giant to run his race,' has been in like manner imitated? And when he [the devil] brings forward Asclepius as the raiser of the dead and healer of all diseases, may I not say that in this matter likewise he has imitated the prophecies about Christ?” Justin Martyr and Tertullian tried to explain away the similarities between Mithraism and Christianity. They claimed that these similarities existed because the demons learned from the Old Testament about the future rituals of Christianity and imitated them before the advent of Christianity. Clement of Alexandria suggested that Christianity is indeed a mystery religion with “truly sacred mysteries” and that the Christian mysteries offer the pure light and vision of the only true God. He called the Greek mysteries shameless and corrupt. Referring to Christianity Origen wrote, “… we call them {Christianity} our mysteries.” He distinguished Christianity from “the other mysteries.” Celsus, too, implied that Christianity was one of the mystery religions. While discussing Christianity, he referred to the Greek mystery religions as “the other mysteries.” Clement of Alexandria claimed that Christianity was the best mystery religion, and rightfully so because in the fourth century it managed to eliminate its forerunners and competitors.

Plutarch wrote that the Pythagoreans hid the meanings of their sayings from the common people. The Pythagoreans and later the Neopythagoreans (who revived Pythagoreanism in the 1st century CE) blended philosophy with mysteries. They were like a mystery religion. Their beliefs were similar to those of the Orphics. Seneca wrote, “And as only the initiated know the more hallowed portion of the rites, so in philosophy {specifically, the Pythagorean and Neopythagorean} the hidden truths are revealed only to those who are members and have been admitted to the sacred rites. But precepts {axioms} and other such matters are familiar even to the uninitiated.” Origen compared Christianity to Neopythagoreanism: “The existence of certain doctrines, which are beyond those which are exoteric {suitable to be imparted to the public} and do not reach the public, is not a peculiarity of Christian doctrine only, but is shared by the philosophers. For they had some doctrines that were exoteric and some esoteric {designed for or understood by the specially initiated alone}. Some hearers of Pythagoras only learned of the master’s ‘ipse dixit’ {exoteric sayings}; but others were taught in secret doctrines which could not deservedly reach ears that were uninitiated and not yet purified. None of the mysteries in any place, in Greece or in barbarian land has been attacked for being secret.” Apparently, some attacked Christianity for being secret or having esoteric doctrines, and Origen defended it with this argument. Origen wanted Gentiles to treat Christianity like the mystery religions. In a way, he put Christianity in the class of the mystery religions.

Christianity was put together by blending Hellenistic Judaism with the Greek mystery religions. But after it became a major religion it began to influence the other mystery religions. In other words, the influence did not always flow one way: from the Greek mystery religions to Christianity. For example, it is likely that the Dionysians borrowed from the Christians the miracle of turning the water into wine. (In the Gospel of John, Jesus turned the water in the jars into wine in Cana of Galilee.) Pausanias was a Greek traveler and geographer who wrote between 143 and 176 CE. He wrote, “Between the market-place and the Menius is an old theater and a shrine of Dionysos. The image is the work of Praxiteles. Of the gods the Eleans worship Dionysos with the greatest reverence, and they assert that the god attends their festival, the Thyia. The place where they hold the festival they name the Thyia is about eight stadia from the city. Three pots are brought into the building by the priests and set down empty in the presence of the citizens and of any strangers who may chance to be in the country. The doors of the building are sealed by the priests themselves and by any others who may be so inclined. On the morrow they are allowed to examine the seals, and on going into the building they find the pots filled with wine. I {Pausanias} did not myself arrive at the time of the festival, but the most respected Elean citizens, and with them strangers also, swore t
hat what I have said is the truth. The Andrians too assert that every other year at their feat of Dionysos wine flows of its own accord from the sanctuary.”

Source: http://www.jesushistory.info/mystery_religions_influence.htm

[georg]

Quote (kerwin @ Nov. 09 2009,20:54)

Quote (gollamudi @ Nov. 09 2009,12:15) Hi brother Const., you have made good points on this thread. I know there are many dogmas which Christianity had adopted from Pagan myths. The name of the thread is not deceptive since Christianity had taken its origins from hellenism. Why have the Jews rejected the God of Abraham? What statues in the Law of Mosses apply to Gentiles as well as to the children of Israel? How does a hunter kill an animal without violating the laws of slaughter? Rabbi Lerner at about.com November 9,2009 wrote: Quote In addition to being lifted up, a ritual slaughterer must move to the animal quickly, use a knife that is incredibly sharp and without even the slightest nick, and cut through the animal's trachea and esophagus in a single motion (at least one of these for fowl). All this is required in order to try to minimize the animal's suffering. So our hunter sneaks up on an animal and somehow manages to hoist it up so he can slit its throat. It is a false teaching and this Rabbi knows it since he also stated: Rabbi Lerner at about.com November 9,2009 wrote: Quote Rules for kosher slaughtering of animals developed from the rules of the sacrificial system in the Temple. In other words it is not really what God established as the way for animals to be slaughtered though it is the way priests developed to sacrifice animals to God. Here is the rest of the source.

We are not under that Old Testament Law any longer, we are under
Luke 22:20 ….”This cup is the new covenant in My Blood.”
He gives us the greatest Commandments in
Math. 2:37
Jesus said,” You shall love the LORD your God with all of your Heart, with all your Soul, an with all your mind.”
Verse 38
“This is the first and great commandment.”
Verse 39 “And te second is like it. “You shall love your neighbor as yourself.”
Verse 40
“On these two commandments hang all the Law and the prophets.”
Peace and Love Irene

[kerwin]

Quote (georg @ Nov. 16 2009,18:27)

Quote (kerwin @ Nov. 09 2009,20:54) Quote (gollamudi @ Nov. 09 2009,12:15) Hi brother Const., you have made good points on this thread. I know there are many dogmas which Christianity had adopted from Pagan myths. The name of the thread is not deceptive since Christianity had taken its origins from hellenism. Why have the Jews rejected the God of Abraham? What statues in the Law of Mosses apply to Gentiles as well as to the children of Israel? How does a hunter kill an animal without violating the laws of slaughter? Rabbi Lerner at about.com November 9,2009 wrote: Quote In addition to being lifted up, a ritual slaughterer must move to the animal quickly, use a knife that is incredibly sharp and without even the slightest nick, and cut through the animal's trachea and esophagus in a single motion (at least one of these for fowl). All this is required in order to try to minimize the animal's suffering. So our hunter sneaks up on an animal and somehow manages to hoist it up so he can slit its throat. It is a false teaching and this Rabbi knows it since he also stated: Rabbi Lerner at about.com November 9,2009 wrote: Quote Rules for kosher slaughtering of animals developed from the rules of the sacrificial system in the Temple. In other words it is not really what God established as the way for animals to be slaughtered though it is the way priests developed to sacrifice animals to God. Here is the rest of the source. We are not under that Old Testament Law any longer, we are under Luke 22:20 ….”This cup is the new covenant in My Blood.” He gives us the greatest Commandments in Math. 2:37 Jesus said,” You shall love the LORD your God with all of your Heart, with all your Soul, an with all your mind.” Verse 38 “This is the first and great commandment.” Verse 39  “And te second is like it.  “You shall love your neighbor as yourself.” Verse 40 “On these two commandments hang all the Law and the prophets.” Peace and Love Irene

I am not sure what point you are attempting to make. Could you give me a more explicit statement?

[kerwin]

Gollamudi .

I can perhaps understand your sources ignorance but I assumed you were more informed of Scripture than to fall for that.  You really do not know what “mystery” Paul was speaking of.  

I am also going to question that a mystery and a secret are different as some of the definitions of the two words appear to by synonyms to English speakers as well as to the Greek writers of scripture.

If you were to claim the tenet of the Trinity is a mystery as in not understandable then I would agree since it is illogical as well as false.  Paul on the other hand refers to the gospel as a mystery and it is understandable though that knowledge is hidden from those whom are perishing.

[gollamudi]

Hi brother Kerwin,
Was it hidden from even Jesus if Paul says so?

[kerwin]

Quote (gollamudi @ Nov. 17 2009,11:18)

Hi brother Kerwin, Was it hidden from even from Jesus if Paul says so?

Some things are hidden from Jesus as he stated.  

Jesus taught the mystery i.e. secret of entering the kingdom of heaven thus the secret is revealed in his teachings.  If you are either ignorant or unbelieving of his teachings then it is a mystery to you.

There are a few other secrets mentioned in scripture.

The only one I know offhand that was hidden from Jesus is the time of his return.

I know of nothing Paul stated was hidden from Jesus.

[gollamudi]

PLATONISM AND CHRISTIANITY

“The peculiarity of the Platonic philosophy,” says Hegel, in his History of Philosophy (vol. ii.), “is precisely this direction towards the supersensuous world, – it seeks the elevation of consciousness into the realm of spirit. The Christian religion also has set up this high principle, that the internal spiritual essence of man is his true essence, and has made it the universal principle.”

Some of the early Fathers recognized, as they well might, a Christian element in Plato, and ascribed to him a kind of propaedeutic office and relation toward Christianity. Clement of Alexandria calls philosophy “a sort of preliminary discipline () for those who lived before the coming of Christ,” and adds, “Perhaps we may say it was given to the Greeks with this special object; for philosophy was to the Greeks what the law was to the Jews, – a schoolmaster to bring them to Christ (Strom., 1, 104 A; cf. 7, 505, 526). “The Platonic dogmas,” says Justin Martyr, “are not foreign to Christianity. If we Christians say that all things were created and ordered by God, we seem to enounce a doctrine of Plato; and, between our view of the being of God and his, the article appears to make the only difference” (Apol., 2, 96 D, etc.). “Justin” (says Ackermann, in the first chapter of his Das Christliche des Platonismus, which is the leading modern work on this subject), – ” Justin was, as he himself relates, an enthusiastic admirer of Plato before he found in the gospel that full satisfaction which he had sought earnestly, but in vain, in philosophy. And, though the gospel stood infinitely higher in his view than the Platonic philosophy, yet he regarded the latter as a preliminary stage to the former, In the same way did the other apologetic writers express themselves concerning Plato and his philosophy, especially Athenagoras, the most spirited, and philosophically most important, of them all, whose Apology is one of the most admirable works of Christian antiquity.”

The Fathers of the early church sought to explain the striking resemblance between the doctrines of Plato and those of Christianity, principally by the acquaintance, which, as they supposed, that philosopher made with learned Jews and with the Jewish Scriptures during his sojourn in Egypt, but partly, also, by the universal light of a divine revelation through the “Logos,” which, in and through human reason, “lighteth every man that cometh into the world,” and which illumined especially such sincere arid humble seekers after truth as Socrates and Plato before the incarnation of the Eternal Word in the person of Jesus Christ.

Passages which bear a striking resemblance to the Christian Scriptures in their picturesque, parabolic, and axiomatic style, and still more in the lofty moral, religious, and almost Christian sentiments which they express, are scattered thickly all through the Dialogues, even those that treat of physical, political, and philosophical subjects; and they are as characteristic of Plato, as is the inimitably graceful dialogue in which they are clothed. A good selection of such passages may be seen in the introductory chapters of Ackermann’s work on the Platonic Element in Plato. A still more copious and striking collection might be made. But we do not wish to rest our thesis upon single passages, which, of course, may be exceptional, or, if taken out of their connection, might be misunderstood. To preclude mistake, we must examine the Platonic philosophy itself in its principles and spirit.

1. Perhaps the most obvious and striking feature of it is, that it is pre-eminently a spiritual philosophy. Hegel, as we have seen, speaks of “this direction toward the supersensuous world,” this “elevation of consciousness into the realm of spirit,” as “the peculiarity of the Platonic philosophy.” There is no doctrine on which Plato more frequently or more strenuously insists than this, – that soul is not only superior to body, but prior to it in order of time, and that not merely as it exists in the being of God, but in every order of existence. The soul of the world existed first, and then it was clothed with a mate. rial body.

The souls which animate the sun, moon, and stars, existed before the bodies which they inhabit (Timæus, passim). The pre-existence of human souls is one of the arguments on which he relies to prove their immortality (Phæd., 73-76). Among the other arguments by which he demonstrates at once the immortality of the soul and its exalted dignity are these: that the soul leads and rules the body, and therein resembles the immortal gods (Phæd. 80); that the soul is capable of apprehending eternal and immutable ideas, and communing with things unseen and eternal, and so must partake of their nature (Ibid., 79); that, as consciousness is single and simple, so the soul itself is uncompounded, and hence incapable of dissolution (78); that soul being everywhere the cause and source of life, and every way diametrically opposite to death, we cannot conceive of it as dying, any more than. we can conceive of fire as becoming cold (102- 107); that soul, being self-moved, and the source of all life and motion, can never cease to live and move (Phædrus, 245); that diseases of the body do not reach to the soul; and vice, which is a disease of the soul, corrupts its moral quality, but has no power or tendency to destroy its essence (Repub., 610), etc. Spiritual entities are the only real existences: material things are perpetually changing, and flowing into and out of existence. God is: the world becomes, and passes away.

The soul is: the body is ever changing, as a garment. Souls or ideas, which are spiritual entities, are the only true causes; God being the first cause why every thing is, and ideas being the secondary causes why things are such as they are (Phæd., 100 sq.). Mind and will are the real cause of all motion and action in the world, just as truly as of all human motion and action. According to the striking illustration in the Phædo (98, 99), the cause of Socrates awaiting death in the prison, instead of making his escape as his friends urged him to do, was that he chose to do so from a sense of duty; and, if he had chosen to run away, his bones and muscles would have been only the means or instruments of the flight of which his mind and will would have been the cause. And just so it is in all the phenomena of nature, in all the motions and changes of the material cosmos. And life in the highest sense, what we call spiritual and eternal life, all that deserves the name of life, is in and of and from the soul, which matter only contaminates and clouds, and the body only clogs and entombs (Gorg., 492, 493). Platonism, as well as Christianity, says, Look not at the things which are seen, but at the things which are not seen; for the things which are seen are temporary, only for a season; but the things which are not seen are eternal.

2. The philosophy of Plato is eminently a theistic philosophy. “God,” he says, in his Republic (716 A), “is (literally, holds) the beginning, middle, and end of all things. He is the Supreme Mind or Reason, the efficient Cause of all things, eternal, unchangeable, all-knowing, all-powerful, all-pervading, and all-controlling, just, holy, wise, and good, the absolutely perfect, the beginning of all truth, the fountain of all law and justice, the source of all order and beauty, and especially the cause of all good” (see Philebus, Phædo, Timaeus, Republic, and Laws, passim). God represents, he impersonates, he is the True, the Beautiful, but, above all, the Good. Just how Plato conceived these “Ideas” to be related to the divine mind is a much disputed point. In discussing the good, sometimes we can hardly tell whether he means by it an idea, an attribute, a principle, a power, or a personal God. But he leaves us in no doubt as to his actual belief in the divine personality. God is the Reason (the Intelligence, , Phæd., 97 C) and the Good (, Repub., 508 C); but he is also the Artificer, the Maker, the Fathe
r, the Supreme Ruler, who begets, disposes, and orders all (cf. Timæus, passim, with places just cited). He is and , Phæd., 106 D, and often elsewhere).

Plato often speaks also of in the plural; but to him, as to all the best minds of antiquity, the inferior deities are the children, the servants, the ministers, the angels, of the Supreme God (Tim., 41). Unity is an essential element of perfection. There is but one highest and best, – the Most High, the Supreme Good: God in the true and proper sense is one. The Supreme God only is eternal, he only hath immortality in himself. The immortality of the inferior deities is derived, imparted to them by their Father and the Father of all, and is dependent on his will (Tim., 41). God made the world by introducing order and beauty into chaotic matter, and putting into it a living, moving, intelligent soul; then the inferior deities made man under his direction, and in substantially the same way. God made the world because he is good, and because, free from all envy or jealousy, he wished every thing to he as much like himself as the creature can be like the creator (Tim., 30 A).

Therefore he made the world good; and when he saw it he was delighted (Tim., 37 C; cf. Gen. i. 31). God is the author of all good, and of good only, not of evil. “Every good gift cometh down from the Father of the celestial luminaries;” “for it is not permitted (ob Oijuc, it is morally impossible) for the best being to do any thing else than the best” (Tim., 30 A; cf. Jas i. 17). God exercises a providential care over the world as a whole, and over every part (chiefly, however, through the inferior deities who thus fulfil the office of angels – Laws, 905 B-906), and makes all things, the least as well as the greatest, work for good to the righteous and those who love God, and are loved by him (Phæd., 62; Repub., 613). Atheism is a disease, and a corruption of the soul; and no man ever did an unrighteous act, or uttered an impious word, unless he was a theoretical or practical atheist (Laws, 885 B), that is, in the language of the indictment at common law, he did it, “not having the fear of God before his eyes.”

3. The Platonic philosophy is teleological. Final causes, together with rational and spiritual agencies, are the only causes that are worthy of the study of the philosopher: indeed, no others deserve the name (Phæd., 98 sqq.). If mind ) is the cause of all things, mind must dispose all things for the best; and when we know how it is best for any thing to be made or disposed, then, and then only, do we know? how’ it is and the cause of its being so (Phæd., 97). Material causes are no causes; and inquiry into them is impertinent, unphilosophical, not to say impious and absurd. Thus did Plato build up a system of rational psychology, cosmology, and theology, all of which are largely teleological, on the twofold basis of a priori reasoning and mythology, in other words, of reason and tradition, including the idea of a primitive revelation The eschatology of the Phædo, the Gorgias, and the Republic, is professedly a , though he insists that it is also a (Repub., 523) or a (709).

His cosmology he professes to have heard from some one (Piced., 108 D); and his theology in the Timæus purports to have been derived by tradition from the ancients, who were the offspring of the gods, and who must, of course, have known the truth about their own ancestors (40 C). Yet the whole structure is manifestly the work of his own reason and creative imagination; and the central doctrine of the whole is, that God made and governs the world with constant reference to the highest possible good; and “Ideas” are the powers, or, in the phraseo1ogy of modern science, the “forces,” by which the end was to be accomplished.

4. The philosophy of Plato is pre-eminently ethical, and his ethics are remarkably Christian. Only one of his Dialogues was classified by the ancients as “physical,” and that (the Timæus) is largely theological. The political Dialogues treat politics as a part of ethics, – ethics as applied to the State. Besides the four virtues as usually classified by Greek moralists, – viz., temperance, courage, justice, and wisdom, – Plato recognized as virtues humility and meekness, which the Greeks generally despised, and holiness, which they ignored (Euthyphron, passim); and he insists on the duty of non-retaliation and non-resistance as strenuously, not to say paradoxically, as it is taught in the Sermon on the Mount (Crit., 49). That it is better to suffer wrong than to do wrong is a prominent doctrine of the Gorgias (479 E, 508 C). But as the highest “idea” is that of the Good, so the highest excellence of which man is capable is likeness to God, the Supreme and Absolute Good. A philosopher, who is Plato’s ideal of a man, and, so to speak, of a Christian, is a lover of wisdom, of truth, of justice, of goodness (Repub., bk. vi., passim), of God, and, by the contemplation and imitation of his virtues, becomes like him as far as it is possible for man to resemble God (Rep., 613 A, B).

5. Plato is pre-eminently a religious philosopher. His ethics, his politics, and his physics are all based on his theology and his religion. Natural and moral obligations, social and civil duties, duties to parents and elders, to kindred and strangers, to neighbors and friends, are all religious duties (Laws, bk. ix., 881 A, xi., 931 A). Not only is God the Lawgiver and Ruler of the universe, but his law is the source and ground of all human law and justice. “That the gods not only exist, but that they are good, and honor and reward justice far more than men do, is the most beautiful and the best preamble to all laws” (Laws, x. 887). Accordingly, in the Republic and the Laws, the author often prefaces the most important sections of his legislation with some such preamble, exhortation, or, as Jowett calls it, sermon, setting forth the divine authority by which it is sanctioned and enforced.

6. Plato gives prominence to the doctrine of a future state of rewards and punishments. At death, by an inevitable law of its own being, as well as by the appointment of God, every soul goes to its own place; the evil gravitating to the evil, and the good rising to the Supreme Good. When they come before their Judge, perhaps after a long series of transmigrations, each of which is the reward or punishment of the preceding, those who have lived virtuous and holy lives, and those who have not, are separated from each other. The wicked whose sins are curable are subjected to sufferings in the lower world, which are more or less severe, and more or less protracted, according to their deserts. The incurably wicked are hurled down to Tartarus, whence they never go out, where they are punished forever () as a spectacle and warning to others (Gorg., 523 sqq.; Phæd. 113 D sq.). Those, on the other hand, who have lived virtuously and piously, especially those who have purified their hearts and lives by philosophy, will live without bodies (Phæd., 114 C), with the gods, and in places that are bright and beautiful beyond description. More solemn and impressive sermons were never preached in Christian pulpits than those with which Plato concludes such Dialogues as the Gorgias, the Phædo, the Republic, and the Laws.

We have space only to allude to other characteristic features of Plato’s philosophy, such, for example, as his doctrine of “Ideas,” – the True, the Beautiful, the Good, the Holy, and the like, – which, looking at them now only on the ethical and practical side, are eternal and immutable, and not dependent even on the will of God (the holy, for instance, is not holy because it is the will of God, but it is the will of God because it is holy, just, and good – Euthyph., 10 D); the indispensable necessity of a better than any existing, not to say better than human, society and government (like the ideal republic, which is not so much a state, as a church or a school, a great family, or a Man “writ large”), in order to the salvation of the individual or the perfection of the race; the degenerate, diseas
ed, carnal, and corrupt state into which mankind in general have fallen since the reign of Kronos in the golden age (Laws, 713 C; Polit., 271 D: Crit., 108 1)), and from which God only can save any individual or nation (Repub., bk. vi., 492, 493); and the need of a divine teacher, revealer, healer, charmer, to charm away the fear of death, and bring life and immortality to light (Phæd., 78 A, 859).

And we can only advert to the radical defects and imperfections of Plato’s best teachings, – his inadequate conception of the nature of sin as involuntary, the result of ignorance, a misfortune, and a disease in the soul, rather than a transgression of the divine law; his consequent erroneous ideas of its cure by successive transmigrations on earth, and protracted pains in purgatory, and by philosophy (an aristocratic remedy, in its nature applicable only to the favored few); his philosophy of the origin of evil, viz., in the refractory nature of matter, which must therefore be gotten rid of by bodily mortification, and by the death of the body without a resurrection, before the soul can arrive at its perfection; his utter inability to conceive of such a thing as an atonement, free forgiveness, regenerating grace, and salvation for the masses, a fortiori for the chief of sinners; the doubt and uncertainty of his best religious teachings; his ifs and whethers, especially about the future life (Apol., 40 E, 42; Phæd., 107 C); and the utter want in his system of the grace, even more than of the truth, that have come to us by Jesus Christ, for, after all, Platonism is not so deficient in the wisdom of God as it is in the power of God unto salvation.

The Republic, for example, proposes to overcome the selfishness of human nature by constitutions and laws and education, instead of a new heart and a new spirit, by community of goods and of wives, instead of loyalty and love to a divine-human person like Jesus Christ. Baur (Socr. and Christ) does indeed find in the idealized Socrates of Plato an analogy (speculatively interesting, perhaps, but practically how unlike!) to the personal Christ, and in his “Ideas” a basis, not only for the doctrine of the “Logos” as it was developed by Philo and other Neo-Platonists, but also for the Incarnate Logos of the Gospel of John, with which it may, indeed, have some philosophical relation, but probably no historical connection, still less any corresponding influence on the history of the world.

The history of Platonism, and its several schools or sub-schools of thought and opinion, does not come within the scope of this article. It may be remarked, in general, that, in the Middle and the New Academy, there was always more or less tendency to scepticism, growing out of the Platonic doctrine of the uncertainty of all human knowledge except that of “ideas.” The Neo-Platonists, on the other hand, inclined towards dogmatism, mysticism, asceticism, theosophy, and even thaumaturgy, thus developing seeds of error that lay in the teaching of their master. After the Christian era, among those who were more or less the followers of Plato, we find, at one extreme, the devout and believing Plutarch, the author of that almost inspired treatise on the Delay of the Deity in the Punishment of the Wicked, and the practical and sagacious Galen, whose work on the Uses of the Parts of the Human Body is an anticipation of the Bridgewater Treatises, both of whom, like Socrates, we can hardly help feeling, would have accepted Christianity if they had conic within the scope of its influence; and, at the other extreme, Porphyry, and Julian the apostate, who wielded the weapons of philosophy in direct hostility to the religion of Christ; while intermediate between them the major part of the philosophers of the Neo-Platonic and eclectic schools who came in contact with Christianity went on their way in proud indifference, neglect, or contempt of the religion of the crucified Nazarene. But not a few of the followers of Plato discovered a kindred and congenial element in the eminent spirituality of the Christian doctrines and the lofty ethics of the Christian life, and, coining in through the vestibule of the Academy, became some of the most illustrious of the fathers and doctors of the early church. And many of the early Christians, in turn, found peculiar attractions in the doctrines of Plato, and employed them as weapons for the defence and extension of Christianity, or, perchance, cast the truths of Christianity in a Platonic mould.

The doctrines of the Logos and the Trinity received their shape from Greek Fathers, who, if not trained in the schools, were much influenced, directly or indirectly, by the Platonic philosophy, particularly in its Jewish-Alexandrian form. That errors and corruptions crept into the church from this source cannot be denied. But from the same source it derived no small additions, both to its numbers and its strength. Among the most illustrious of the Fathers who were more or less Platonic, we may name Justin Martyr, Athenagoras, Theophilus, Irenaeus, Hippolytus, Clement of Alexandria, Origen, Minucius Felix, Eusebius, Methodius, Basil the Great, Gregory of Nyssa, and St. Augustine. Plato was the divine philosopher of the earlier Christian centuries: in the middle ages Aristotle succeeded to his place. But in every period of the history of the church, some of the brightest ornaments of literature, philosophy, and religion, – such men as Anselm, Erasmus, Melanchthon, Jeremy Taylor, Ralph Cudworth, Henry More, Neander, and Tayler Lewis, – have been “Platonizing” Christians.

Source: http://www.sullivan-county.com/id2/gnostic_files/plato.htm

[kerwin]

gollamudi,

You choose to post someone elses words and they are not here to discuss them so there is nothing to discus.

If you have a point to make regarding them then please let us know. Thank you.

[gollamudi]

Hi brother Kerwin,
I bring here the expert's opinions than my own. I find them more appropriate to have strong base to initiate debates.

[kerwin]

Quote (gollamudi @ Nov. 21 2009,12:34)

Hi brother Kerwin, I bring here the expert's opinions than my own. I find them more appropriate to have strong base to initiate debates.

Many claim to be experts but only God and those he speaks through are truly experts. You need go to God instead of man to seek the truth. Jesus teaches us to do that by seeking God's righteousness and his kingdom.

I do not here these so called “experts” instructing their students how to do that. Jesus does.

[gollamudi]

That is the dilogue of brother Nick that our Bible is correct. But I find it more ambigous than any other book in this world. If it is so clear in black and white why at all these contradicting theologies?

[kerwin]

Quote (gollamudi @ Nov. 21 2009,14:01)

That is the dilogue of brother Nick that our Bible is correct. But I find it mre ambigous than any other book in this world. If it is so clear in black and white why at all these contradicting theologies?

Jesus told us why he often spoke in parables. If one is really searching for the truth then that is enough and if one is not then they will be misled.

Nick is correct that the truth is contained in scripture but sometimes he performs the same error the Pharisees do and put the letter before the spirit.

You should not reject the scripture just because you find it hard to understand but instead you seek for understanding and trust in God to point the way when the time is right.

I am a student and God is continually broadening my understanding of what he teaches. I hope this is also true of you, Nick, and everyone else on this site.

[Author]

Posts