Plato's Phaedo & The Bible

[Craig]

One of my fellow students in the Philosophy of Plato class, after reading the Phaedo, thinks that it may have influenced the Bible. Specifically, he thinks that Socrate's discussion of bodily needs and desires as being a hindrance to philosophy, (Stephanus pagination 64-65a), influenced the Bible in its description of some of these things as vices (excessive eating as gluttony, sex outside of marriage and/or without the intent of procreation). I'm personally not convinced; I'm pretty sure some of the Biblical passages on the subject predate the Phaedo. But it's a fascinating idea nonetheless.

What are your thoughts and opinions on the subject?

[Craig]

For those who have not read the Phaedo, here's the relevant passage:

And how this may be, Simmias and Cebes, I will endeavor to explain. For I deem that the true disciple of philosophy is likely to be misunderstood by other men; they do not perceive that he is ever pursuing death and dying; and if this is true, why, having had the desire of death all his life long, should he repine at the arrival of that which he has been always pursuing and desiring?

Simmias laughed and said: Though not in a laughing humor, I swear that I cannot help laughing when I think what the wicked world will say when they hear this. They will say that this is very true, and our people at home will agree with them in saying that the life which philosophers desire is truly death, and that they have found them out to be deserving of the death which they desire.

And they are right, Simmias, in saying this, with the exception of the words "They have found them out"; for they have not found out what is the nature of this death which the true philosopher desires, or how he deserves or desires death. But let us leave them and have a word with ourselves: Do we believe that there is such a thing as death?

To be sure, replied Simmias.
And is this anything but the separation of soul and body? And being dead is the attainment of this separation; when the soul exists in herself, and is parted from the body and the body is parted from the soul-that is death?

Exactly: that and nothing else, he replied.
And what do you say of another question, my friend, about which I should like to have your opinion, and the answer to which will probably throw light on our present inquiry: Do you think that the philosopher ought to care about the pleasures-if they are to be called pleasures-of eating and drinking?

Certainly not, answered Simmias.

And what do you say of the pleasures of [sex]-should he care about them?

By no means.
And will he think much of the other ways of indulging the body-for example, the acquisition of costly raiment, or sandals, or other adornments of the body? Instead of caring about them, does he not rather despise anything more than nature needs? What do you say?

I should say the true philosopher would despise them.
Would you not say that he is entirely concerned with the soul and not with the body? He would like, as far as he can, to be quit of the body and turn to the soul.

That is true.
In matters of this sort philosophers, above all other men, may be observed in every sort of way to dissever the soul from the body.

That is true.
Whereas, Simmias, the rest of the world are of opinion that a life which has no bodily pleasures and no part in them is not worth having; but that he who thinks nothing of bodily pleasures is almost as though he were dead.

That is quite true.

http://classics.mit.edu/Plato/phaedo.html

Craig's note: I changed one line which read "And what do you say of the pleasures of love- should he care about them?" to "And what do you say about the pleasures of sex..." based upon the GMA Grube translation of the Phaedo.

[USViking]

One of my fellow students in the Philosophy of Plato class, after reading the Phaedo, thinks that it may have influenced the Bible. Specifically, he thinks that Socrate's discussion of bodily needs and desires as being a hindrance to philosophy, (Stephanus pagination 64-65a), influenced the Bible in its description of some of these things as vices (excessive eating as gluttony, sex outside of marriage and/or without the intent of procreation). I'm personally not convinced; I'm pretty sure some of the Biblical passages on the subject predate the Phaedo. But it's a fascinating idea nonetheless.

What are your thoughts and opinions on the subject?

I do not know the Bible and its chronology well,
but I would think the OT had attained its present
form before the c350BC composition of Phaedo.

Dietary restrictions occur in the OT; are there
injunctions against gluttony as well?

Non-marital sex is widely practiced in the OT;
it seems fidelity, monogamy and procreative
intent (aside from the ambiguous episode of Onan)
are innovations of the ministry of Christ and
his disciples. It might be some of them were
familiar with Greek philosophy, and the NT was
composed in Greek.

I think some of the seminal theologians of the
early church, such as Augustine and Jerome
made explicit mention of its influence on their thought.

[Craig]

I do not know the Bible and its chronology well,
but I would think the OT had attained its present
form before the c350BC composition of Phaedo.

Dietary restrictions occur in the OT; are there
injunctions against gluttony as well?

One of the most frequently cited passages against gluttony is Deuteronomy 21:20

"And they shall say unto the elders of his city, This our son is stubborn and rebellious, he will not obey our voice; he is a glutton and a drunkard."

Apparently, Gluttony entails several vices:

The sins associated with gluttony war against that harmony between man and God and man and man. It is basically a sin in which one lives to please self. It is associated with:


Stubbornness - This is, "I am going to do things my way and that's it - period." This is the enforcer to control situations in order to have one's way to live or do as they please.
Rebellion - Gluttony wars against self-control. Rebellion is going off the set standard and disrupting the harmony between God and man. It is going against the normal use of things that God has given to man.

Disobedience - A refusal to submit to God and His word concerning excess, such as don't be filled with wine, but be filled with the Spirit.

Drunkenness - excess; filling the need for something lacking inside one's self. I remember when I used to play computer games. I would do it 24 hours a day. I was to go to Cleveland clinic once and kept playing even while Mary was warming up the car. Excess does not necessarily mean the consumption of food or drink.

Wastefulness - where there is excess, there is waste.

http://www.velocity.net/~edju/1deadly.htm

Non-marital sex is widely practiced in the OT;
it seems fidelity, monogamy and procreative
intent (aside from the ambiguous episode of Onan)
are innovations of the ministry of Christ and
his disciples. It might be some of them were
familiar with Greek philosophy, and the NT was
composed in Greek.


It's true that it's widely practiced in the OT. However, the main point of the Phaedo is that the pleasures of sex are detrimental to philosophy. The main reason I included non-marital sex is because there are Christians who'd be quick to assert that the pleasures of sex are not wrong, but rather that it depends upon the context in which the sex occured. In other words, I'm saying that it's the idea in the Bible that sex is negative, and not the context of when it is negative (for example, pre-marital sex), that seems to be related to the Phaedo.

Donna Huijsen, Phil Herich et al. Holy Bible: King James Version. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 2000.