Loading...
Larger font
Smaller font
Copy
Print
Contents

The Conditionalist Faith of Our Fathers, vol. 1

 - Contents
  • Results
  • Related
  • Featured
No results found for: "".
  • Weighted Relevancy
  • Content Sequence
  • Relevancy
  • Earliest First
  • Latest First
    Larger font
    Smaller font
    Copy
    Print
    Contents

    CHAPTER TWENTY-THREE: Greek Terms and Usages—“Psuche” (Soul); “Pneuma” (Spirit)

    I. Characteristic Advantages, Disadvantages, and Pitfalls of Greek

    The New Testament was written in Greek. The very terms we are now to survey were all fully established in this universal tongue, dominant at the dawn of the Christian Era. But at that time, it is to be remembered, the world was in pagan confusion. At that time endless being was regarded by some as a boon devoutly to be cherished, while by others it was considered an evil to be shunned.CFF1 419.1

    With some, influenced by Orientalism, existence was a curse rather than a blessing, and nirvana, or annihilation of the individual personality, was esteemed as the goal of life and the summit of hope. Consequently, at the time of Christ and the apostles the Immortality of the soul was the question of all questions in the various schools of Grecian philosophy, as well as a point of division and contention. And as elsewhere seen, its penetration had tragically split the ranks in the Jewish faith.CFF1 419.2

    Further, bodily resurrection to immortality—which was the supreme message of the primitive church and the paramount article of the early Christian faith—had no place in pagan speculation. When the early Greek sages brought back the lore of Egypt into Attica, it did not include the concept of a resurrection. And to the Greek intellect such an idea was utter foolishness. They saw the body return to the dust, and there they left it forever.CFF1 419.3

    1. ISSUE OF IMMORTALITY OF PARAMOUNT CONCERN

    As stated, immortality was a subject of swirling speculation among the Greeks, some maintaining and some refuting it—with a majority of pagan citizenry currently treating it as a jest. Nevertheless, the whole of life turned on the issue of the Immortality of the soul. The noblest specimens of human reasoning that ever charmed (and bewildered) the human intellect were the lofty speculations of Socrates and Plato, as set forth in the Phaedo—an attempt to establish the Innate Immortality of the soul and the assumption that whatever changes or pollutions it might suffer, or whatever pain it might endure, the soul could not cease to be.CFF1 420.1

    By such there was believed to be a deathless, innate principle in the human soul, or spirit, that utterly refused to die. According to Plato it never could become a thing of the past, blotted out forever. And many of the Jews, particularly around Alexandria, had imbibed these teachings of undeniable pagan origin. Philo had just given this notion tremendous impetus. Such was the historical setting at the dawn of the Christian Era. This is all covered in Part III.CFF1 420.2

    And all this involved certain language problems—advantages and disadvantages—in the proclamation of the gospel. Such was the complex linguistic and historical situation that confronted Christ and His apostles, to whom He committed His message, and the launching and upbuilding of His infant church.CFF1 420.3

    2. CONFLICT OVER PUNISHMENT OF WICKED

    The terms and specifications of the punishment of the wicked, set forth by Christ and the apostles in the New Testament, were likewise in direct contradiction to the Platonic assertion that the soul cannot die, and therefore cannot be destroyed. The New Testament Christians insisted that the whole man could and would die, and cease to be. Platonism held that the real being could not perish and see corruption. The New Testament Christians asserted that the entire person of the wicked could and would ultimately and utterly perish and suffer corruption. And the Greek terminology unavoidably used by both sides was the same. What Plato affirmed, the primitive Christians denied. And likewise, what Platonism disavowed, the New Testament Christian asserted. And, be it remembered, both groups in the early Christian Era clearly sensed the utter clash in viewpoint.CFF1 420.4

    All the phrases employed were in the Greek language, with its large vocabulary, its fine shadings, and its multiple tenses. Wherever the Christian preacher expounded his message on man, his origin, nature, and destiny, there were Platonists, Epicureans, Stoics, and Alexandrian Jews with their variant views, set to hear and refute—but all were bound together under the “scepter” of a common tongue, as someone has phrased it. To the Greek terminology and usage involved, then, we now turn.CFF1 421.1

    Larger font
    Smaller font
    Copy
    Print
    Contents