The religion of Plutarch : $b A pagan creed of apostolic timesOakesmith, John
Religion
The religion of Plutarch : $b A pagan creed of apostolic times
Oakesmith, John
Plutarch -- Religion
diversity—the belief, namely, in Dæmons—but which Plutarch uses to great
effect in his attempts after unity, by assigning, with Pythagoras,[174]
every recognized tradition unworthy of the Highest to these subordinate
beings whose influence is everywhere felt in nature and in human life,
and whose presence, at any rate, interpenetrates and overruns the whole
of Plutarch’s views on religion.[175]
It is no unfitting circumstance in a priest of Apollo that his noblest
utterances respecting the nature of God should be contained in
discourses connected more or less with the temples and traditions of
the god. In the discussion, for instance, on the syllable “E” written
over the narrow entrance of the Amphictyonic Temple at Delphi, Ammonius
is represented as expressing views of the Divine Nature which are
unsurpassed for sublimity in any other part of Plutarch’s writings, or
even in Greek literature generally. We quote them here as embodying
Plutarch’s beliefs on the Unity, Eternity, and Absoluteness of the Divine
Nature. “Not then a number, nor an arrangement, nor a conjunction or
any other part of speech, do I think the inscription signifies. It is
rather a complete and concise form of address, an invocation of the God,
bringing the speaker with the very word, into a conscious recognition
of His power. The God salutes each of us, as we approach His shrine,
with the great text, ‘Know thyself,’ which is His way of saying χαῖρε
to us; and we in our turn, replying to the God, say εἶ—‘Thou art,’ thus
expressing our _belief in His true and pure and incommunicable virtue of
absolute being_.[176]... Now we must admit that God absolutely is; not
that he _is_ with reference to any period of time, but with reference
to an immovable, immutable, timeless eternity, before which there was
nothing, after which there is nothing, in respect to which there is
neither future nor past, than which there is nothing older or younger.
But being Unity, the Unity that he is _now_ is the same Unity with which
he occupies eternity; and nothing really exists but that which is
endowed with the same absolute existence as he—neither anything that has
come into existence, nor shall come into existence, nor anything which
had a beginning, or shall have an end. In worshipping him, therefore, we
ought assuredly to salute and address him in a manner corresponding to
this view of him; as, _e.g._, in the phrase already used by some ancient
philosophers, the phrase, ‘Thou art one.’ For the Divine principle is not
many, as we are, each of us compacted of countless different passions,
a mingled and varying conglomerate of assembled atoms. But Being must
necessarily be Unity, and Unity must be Being. It is Diversity—that is,
the principle of discrepancy from Unity—which issues to the production of
non-Being, whence the three names of the God are one and all appropriate.
He is _Apollo_ (ἀ πολύς), because he repudiates and excludes the many
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