Athens reached its political and cultural zenith following the end of its wars with Persia in 449 BCE. Some of the most famous and influential Greek intellectuals lived during this time, including tragedians Aeschylus (525–456 BCE), Euripides (480–406), and Sophocles (497/6–406/5); the comic playwright Aristophanes (446–386); the historians Herodotus (484–425), Thucydides (460– 400), and Xenophon (430–354); the “Father of Western Medicine,” Hippocrates (460–370; and many others associated with him who contributed to the Hippocratic corpus); and the famed philosophers Socrates (470/69–399), Plato (428 or 423–348/7), and Aristotle (384–322).
It was also during this time that the Athenian Acropolis was rebuilt. Upon it were constructed the famed Parthenon (discussed above); other major temples, including the Propylaia, the Temple of Athena Nike, and the Erechtheion; and the Athenian sculptor Phidias’s colossal 30-foot bronze statue of Athena Promachos (“Athena who fights in the front line”).
Athens came to be resented for its dominance during this period, and following a series of debilitating civil wars and other internal conflicts Philip II of Macedon defeated an alliance of Greek city-states that included Athens in 338 BCE, effectively ending Athenian supremacy in the region. It was Philip II’s son, Alexander “the Great,” who went on to spread Greek thought and literature to the greater Near East, bringing Hellenism to cities that were still shaping the Bible.
ALEXANDER’S CONQUEST AND THE DIADOCHOI
Greek culture influenced the Bible because of one man: Alexander the Great. His conquest of the Mediterranean and Near East introduced Greek culture to Jerusalem, which was at the time the center of the Persian province of Yehud (which would become Judea).2 Alexander’s victory at the Battle of Issus (near the present-day Turkish city of Iskenderun) in 333 BCE and the Battle of Gaugamela (near Nineveh) in 331 BCE meant that Alexander’s Hellenic armies controlled the eastern Mediterranean. But following the unexpected death of Alexander the Great in 323 BCE, his kingdom was divided up among a number of his generals, family members, and close friends. These are referred to as the Diadochoi, or “the successors.”
Two of the Diadochoi, both generals under Alexander, are important for the composition of the Bible: Ptolemy I Soter (or “Savior,” 367–283 BCE) and Seleucus I Nicator (or “Victor,” 358– 281 BCE). Ptolemy I took control of Egypt. He named himself pharaoh in 304 BCE, and it was from Egypt that the Ptolemaic dynasty ruled Jerusalem and Judea. Under the Ptolemies, Jerusalem had de facto control over its own affairs. Residents were allowed to choose their own high priest and enjoyed relative autonomy.
However, after the Battle of Panium (biblical Caesarea Philippi and modern Banias) in 199 BCE, when the rival Seleucids ruling from Syria defeated the Ptolemies for control of the eastern Mediterranean coastal lands, the Seleucids imposed much harsher hellenizing policies on Jerusalem. Under the rule of Antiochus IV Epiphanes (or “God Manifest,” 215–164 BCE), life became intolerable for conservative religious Jews. Antiochus IV’s aggressive program of hellenization not only introduced Greek thought, religion, philosophy, and language to the Jewish people, but it also banned Jews from many traditional Jewish religious rites like sacrifice and circumcision. Antiochus IV’s actions led to the Maccabean Revolt, in which conservative religious Jews led by Mattathias and his son, Judah Maccabee, his brothers, and their descendants threw off their Greek Seleucid overlords and established an approximately one-hundred-year period of Jewish self-rule under their own Hasmonean dynasty.
We’ll discuss the significance and results of hellenization in the next chapter on Alexandria, but it is important to note that one book of the Hebrew Bible directly mentions the Greek conquest of the eastern Mediterranean—and specifically the actions of Antiochus IV. This book is Daniel, which cleverly chronicles the conquest by the Greek Seleucids not as history, but as a prophecy.
HELLENIZATION IN DANIEL
Chapter 8 of the canonical book of Daniel describes the rise and fall of Alexander the Great as well as the rise of Antiochus IV using metaphorical, apocalyptic language as the literary vehicle of the vision. Apocalyptic is a style of writing that incorporates wildly vivid, yet meticulously symbolic visions set as prophecy usually of the end times, but is actually a commentary about the author’s present situation and his hopes for tomorrow. The second half of Daniel is unique in that it is apocalyptic prophecy actually set in the past, meaning that the author is “foretelling” things that appear to have already happened. In doing so, Daniel 8 preserves an encoded commentary on the rise of Antiochus IV and his oppressive policies in Jerusalem.
Let’s take a look at a few select passages of Daniel to see how these events are described. Daniel 8:1–2 recounts the history of Jerusalem and the greater Near East from the Neo-Babylonian Empire to the reign of the Seleucid king Antiochus IV. Then 8:3–4 describes the rise of the two-horned ram, representing the initially dominant Medes and the Achaemenid Persians who later overtook the Medes, and its conquest along the Fertile Crescent of the Neo-Babylonians to the west, its conquest north up the Tigris and Euphrates Rivers, and its campaign southward into Cana‘an:
I looked up and saw a ram standing beside the river. It had two horns. Both horns were long, but one was longer than the other, and the longer one came up second. I saw the ram charging westward and northward and southward. All beasts were powerless to withstand it, and no one could rescue from its power; it did as it pleased and became strong.
Daniel 8:5–8 discusses the rise and fall of a male goat with one horn (yes, a unicorn goat), representing Alexander the Great, and his conquest of the Median-Persian two-horned ram (vv. 6–7). In antiquity (and in apocalyptic symbolism), horns represent power. Thus, as Alexander the Great was a single conqueror, he is represented by a powerful single-horned animal. Verse 8 then describes the death of Alexander and the rise of the “four prominent horns,” representing the Diadochoi, the successors to his divided kingdom:
As I was watching, a male goat appeared from the west, coming across the face of the whole earth without touching the ground. The goat had a horn between its eyes. It came toward the ram with the two horns that I had seen standing beside the river, and it ran at it with savage force. I saw it approaching the ram. It was enraged against it and struck the ram, breaking its two horns. The ram did not have power to withstand it; it threw the ram down to the ground and trampled upon it, and there was no one who could rescue the ram from its power. Then the male goat grew exceedingly great; but at the height of its power, the great horn was broken, and in its place there came up four prominent horns toward the four winds of heaven.
Daniel 8:9–12 discusses the rise of the “little horn that grew exceedingly great,” which represents Antiochus IV, and gives an apocalyptic description of Antiochus IV’s actions against Jerusalem, including interfering with the Jerusalem priesthood and halting the sacrifices at the Temple:
Out of one of them came another horn, a little one, which grew exceedingly great toward the south, toward the east, and toward the beautiful land. It grew as high as the host of heaven. It threw down to the earth some of the host and some of the stars, and trampled on them. Even against the prince of the host it acted arrogantly; it took the regular burnt offering away from him and overthrew the place of his sanctuary. Because of wickedness, the host was given over to it together with the regular burnt offering; it cast truth to the ground, and kept prospering in what it did.
Daniel 8:13–14 adds a time component pertaining to Antiochus IV’s reign: “‘For how long is this vision concerning the regular burnt offering, the transgression that makes desolate, and the giving over of the sanctuary and host to be trampled?’ And he answered him, ‘For two thousand three hundred evenings and mornings; then the sanctuary shall be restored to its rightful state.’” The reference to 2,300 days (1 day is one evening and one morning)3 adds up to a little over six years on a 365-day calendar or half of that if the evenings and mornings are being counted separately. However it is counted, th
e period is intended as a comment about the duration of Antiochus’s policies.4
Thus, Daniel 8 preserves a commentary of the rise of Antiochus IV and his oppressive regime in Jerusalem. But although Antiochus IV’s brand of Hellenism was harsh, the general spread of Greek thought was ubiquitous and Jews living in antiquity far more readily accepted and adopted aspects of Greek culture than rejected it. And nowhere is this more evident than with regard to Greek philosophy.
GREEK PHILOSOPHIES THAT INFLUENCED THE BIBLE
With the advent of Hellenism and particularly Greek thought in the lands where Jews were living, it was inevitable that Greek philosophy would influence both the Old and New Testaments of the Bible. But before we look at how Greek philosophy helped shape the Bible, we should discuss a few of the philosophical schools that are mentioned by name or whose teachings are found in the Bible.
STOICISM
Stoicism was a school of Greek philosophy founded in Athens by Zeno of Citium early in the third century BCE. Stoics were characterized by their lack of expression of emotions they considered to be destructive, like anger, jealousy, and pride. They believed these emotions were the result of errors of thought, and therefore those who rid themselves of these emotions could achieve moral and intellectual perfection. Imagine Mr. Spock from Star Trek (or Commander Data for you The Next Generation fans) when thinking about Stoics. But far from being dour, Stoics actually sought to cultivate joy through mental discipline and virtuous living. Famous Stoics include statesman and dramatist Seneca the Younger (4 BCE–65 CE), Epictetus (55–135 CE), and the Roman emperor Marcus Aurelius (r. 161–80 CE). The apostle Paul is said to have debated with Stoic philosophers in Acts 17:18.
CYNICISM
The founding of Cynicism as a school of Greek philosophy is credited to Antisthenes (445–365 BCE), who was a disciple of Socrates (470/69–399 BCE). Cynics believed in living a virtuous life in agreement with nature, which they interpreted as the rejection of vanity, fame, power, cultural sophistication, sex, wealth, and personal possessions. They praised the “simple lifestyle” and a life consisting only of the bare necessities for survival. Cynics are so named after the Greek word for “dog” (κύων, think “canine”) because of their doglike behavior: they eat, sleep, pee, and poop anywhere and have a penchant for “barking” at others (i.e., preaching their message) in the public square.
Perhaps the most famous Cynic was Diogenes of Sinope (412 or 404–323 BCE), who is said to have lived in a large pithos, or ceramic storage vessel, in the alleys of Athens. Several scholars have argued that Jesus and Paul’s critique of wealth, earthly power, and pride and their promotion of a life spent in pursuit of the virtue of poverty were at the very least influenced by Cynicism.
EPICUREANISM
Epicureanism was a school of Greek philosophy founded by Epicurus (341–270 BCE) at the very end of the fourth century BCE. Epicurus taught that seeking what he called “pleasure” was the ideal in life. Many Christians have mischaracterized Epicurean pleasure as a hedonistic philosophy seeking “all pleasure and no pain,” one that is obsessed with sexual excess, gluttony, drunkenness, decadence, and cowardice, but this is a common rhetorical misrepresentation. In fact, Epicurus defined pleasure as the absence of fear (mental stress) and pain (physical stress) and taught that frugal, modest living, personal sacrifices for the long-term good, and the lifelong pursuit of knowledge were the best means by which to achieve such pleasure.5 The motivation behind the Christian mischaracterization of Epicureanism is more likely due to the fact that Epicureans regularly critiqued theistic religions and superstition. Famous Epicureans include the Roman poet Lucretius, whose poem On the Nature of Things is said to be the best summary of Epicurean thought in antiquity. The apostle Paul is also said to have debated with Epicurean philosophers in Acts 17:18.
PLATONISM
Platonism is the philosophical school associated with one of the best-known classical philosophers in history, Plato (428 or 423– 348/7 BCE). Plato founded his Academy in Athens in 387 BCE, which is considered the first institution of higher learning in the world. The Academy influenced Western thought, culture, and science, and its legacy continues to this day. Plato’s famous theory of Forms postulates that material objects we encounter on earth have an idealized, nonmaterial “form” in a higher realm and that the objects we experience with our senses on earth are but mere reflections of these idealized forms. This dualist theory is explained by Plato using the Allegory of the Cave, which suggests that while on earth we see only shadows on the walls of the cave (in which we live) of real objects that exist outside the cave (representing their existence in the world of forms). It is this idea of two worlds that the later Neoplatonists would adopt into Christianity and use to explain the world as divided into the ideal heavenly realm, in which God operates, and our physical realm, which is merely a reflection of it (cf. 1 Cor. 13:12; Heb. 1:3).
NEOPLATONISM
The Platonist philosopher Plotinus (204–70 CE) added mystical elements to Platonism in the third century CE and founded what scholars today call Neoplatonism. Although it is difficult to describe beyond calling it “mystical Platonism,” Plotinus argued that all of reality was created by and exists because of a single, indescribable, unknowable principle he called “the One.” Ironically, Neoplatonists were originally opposed to Christianity; Plotinus’s student, Porphyry of Tyre, wrote a work called Against the Christians, which was one of the earliest refutations of Christianity.6 The Roman emperor Constantine the Great (272–337) banned every copy, as did Emperor Theodosius II (401–50), who ordered the burning of any existing copy of Against the Christians in 435 and again in 448.
However, given its belief in a single, divine source of all things and its dualistic worldview, one can see how Christians could be attracted to an altered form of Neoplatonism, which is exactly what happened when St. Augustine of Hippo (354–430) reinterpreted “the One” of Neoplatonism as the logos in the first chapter of the Gospel of John. Since that time, many Christians have attempted to conflate what they believe to be Platonist, Neoplatonist, and Second Temple Jewish apocalyptic thought with Christian thought, producing many of the popular Christian worldviews we have today, like the belief that a spiritual battle is taking place in another realm that can occasionally affect the lives of those in this earthly realm.
GREEK PHILOSOPHY IN QOHELET (ECCLESIASTES)
Hellenization was so pervasive in the ancient Jewish world that it seems inevitable that we would find some Greek philosophical influence within the pages of the Bible. One of the prime examples of Greek philosophy in the Hebrew Bible is found in the book of Qohelet (Ecclesiastes).7 Scholars have long considered Qohelet to contain elements of Greek philosophy, including Cynic, Stoic, and Epicurean ideals. This is because peppered throughout Qohelet is philosophy that doesn’t necessarily match up with the theology of the rest of the Bible.
Qohelet never refers to God as YHWH, but instead often uses the term “the God” (, ha-’elohim) with the definite article, to refer to the deity almost impersonally. This impersonal approach is consistent with the skeptical nature of the arguments of the book.
Qohelet begins with the famous line, “Vanity of vanities, all is vanity.” Other versions translate “vanity” as “meaningless” (NIV) or “futility” (JPS). In fact, the opening eleven verses of Qohelet appear at first glance to be so foreign to the rest of the Bible that the early rabbis actually debated in the Mishnah (the first written edition of Jewish oral traditions, also known as the “Oral Torah”) whether Qohelet was “inspired” and should be allowed in the canon!8
Qohelet is full of lines that appear to reflect Cynic and Epicurean philosophy:
I said in my heart with regard to human beings that God is testing them to show that they are but animals. For the fate of humans and the fate of animals is the same; as one dies, so dies the other. They all have the same breath, and humans have no advantage over the animals; for all is vanity. All go to one place; all are from t
he dust, and all turn to dust again. Who knows whether the human spirit goes upward and the spirit of animals goes downward to the earth? So I saw that there is nothing better than that all should enjoy their work, for that is their lot. (3:18–22)
And I thought the dead, who have already died, more fortunate than the living, who are still alive; but better than both is the one who has not yet been, and has not seen the evil deeds that are done under the sun. (4:2–3)
Do not all go to one place? (6:6)9
Qohelet’s theology appears to be so different from that of the remainder of the Hebrew Bible that many scholars believe it to be a critique of the predominant “vending machine” theology found in Deuteronomy—which rewards those who keep God’s law and punishes those who do not. In fact, this may be the genius behind the book and of those Jewish leaders who voted to retain it as part of the canon. The organizers of the Hebrew Bible were smart enough to realize that the Jewish experience during the Hellenistic and late Second Temple periods was different for different Jews. Some strands of the Jewish experience had, in fact, gone beyond the idealized Deuteronomistic theology of the exilic and Persian periods and were now better expressed by the teachings of various Greek philosophical schools. Thus, we should expect that some Jewish authors during the Hellenistic period incorporated various Greek philosophies into Judaism in an attempt to better express their own Jewish reality. It is to Judaism’s credit that it preserved these diverse traditions in its canon instead of banishing and burning those books that did not fit the narrow dogmas defined by certain religious leaders, as was done in later religions. (I’m looking at you, church fathers and early Christianity.)
The Cities That Built the Bible Page 12
