Paul and his interpreters : $b A critical historySchweitzer, Albert
Religion
Paul and his interpreters : $b A critical history
Schweitzer, Albert
Bible. Epistles of Paul -- Criticism, interpretation, etc. -- History; Paul, the Apostle, Saint
What Paul has to say about man rests in the first place [pg 097] on
ordinary observation and is of a self-evident character. The special
features of his view which go beyond this are to be explained from
eschatology and not from Greek thought. Anthropology and psychology,
in the development which he gives them, have reference not to the
natural man but to the redeemed man, who is risen with Christ, endowed
with the Spirit, and already living in a supernatural condition. His
conception of the natural condition of man is determined by reference
to its actual abolition, and therefore has quite a different
orientation from that of the Greek thinkers.
How do matters stand in regard to the assertion that his system
contains Platonic elements?
What comes into question is not Platonism proper, but the religious
modification and popularisation of it which later on, in the third
century, came to completion in Neo-Platonism. What this philosophy has
in common with Paul is the general desire for deliverance from
corporeity. When it is more closely considered, however,
characteristic differences appear.
Platonism as a religion has to do with the deliverance of the soul
from its imprisonment in the body, Paul looks for the deliverance of
the whole human personality. In the one case the antithesis is between
soul and body, in the other between the supernatural body and the
corruptible flesh. Platonic religious feeling desires release from all
corporeity, what Paul hopes for is a different kind of materiality. He
believes in a resurrection, Platonism in mere immortality. For him the
fate of the individual is so bound up with cosmical, eschatological
events that the new state of existence can only result from a cosmical
revolution. Platonism knows nothing of a temporally conditioned
redemption of this kind, but represents it as coming to pass
immediately after death.
The materialism which is implicate in eschatology thus opposes a
barrier to the Platonising of Paul’s religious thought.
For his conception of spirit a parallel might be sought [pg 098] in
Stoicism, which teaches that a spiritual substance proceeding from God
permeates the universe, including corporeal organisms, and manifests
itself in man as the rational soul. Common to this philosophy and to
Paul is the material conception of spirit. But the differences which
it exhibits are of such a kind that there can be no question of the
Apostle’s dependence upon it. In the Stoic philosophy the spirit is
identical with the rational soul; in Paul it is introduced as
something new alongside of the latter, and ends by displacing it.
According to the philosophic conception it is active in the world from
all eternity; according to the doctrine of the Apostle it first
appears in the times of the End, and is only bestowed upon a limited
section of mankind. The one view is a pantheistic monism, the other is
a theistic dualism.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account