The Immortality of the Soul—History of the Doctrine

We will now briefly notice the history and influence of Plato's teachings and followers. After finishing his travels, Plato returned to Greece, where he established a philosophical school, in which he taught his theory of the human soul, etc. This school was largely attended, and became very famous and influential. Contemporary with the sect which Plato established, there were several other schools of philosophy, as the Stoics, Epicureans, Peripatetics, etc; but as none of them taught the immortality of the soul, we are not now interested in them.

It was through Plato and his disciples that this doctrine came into the church, hence we are interested in their history. Enfield says: "The school of Plato long continued famous, but passed through several changes, on account of which it was successively distinguished into the Old, the Middle, and the New Academy. The Old Academy consisted of those followers of Plato who taught the doctrine of their master without mixture or corruption." (Hist. of Phil., p. 137.)

The Old Academy continued till about three hundred years before Christ. Then, under the teaching of ARCESILAUS, it passed into the Middle Academy. It differed from the Old in asserting that "everything is uncertain to human understanding, and, consequently, that all confident assertions are unreasonable." This school tended strongly to skepticism. It continued less than one hundred years, and met with much opposition. The New Academy succeeded it.

Carneades, born B. C. 214, was the first teacher of the New Academy. Its doctrines came back nearer to those of Plato. It allowed that a strong probability of truth might be attained by sufficient evidence. This school continued about one hundred years. "The last preceptor of the Platonic school in Greece was Antiochus of Ascalon. . . He resigned the academic chair B. C. 80. After his time, the professors of the academic philosophy were dispersed by the tumults of war, and the school itself was transferred to Rome." (Ibid., pp. 142-146.)

Platonism, having found its way to Rome, soon made its way into the Roman Church, as may be easily shown.

PLATONISM INTRODUCED AMONG THE ROMANS.

Rome was founded about seven hundred years before Christ; but for centuries the Romans were a barbarous, warlike people, taking little interest in theology or speculative philosophy. Enfield says it was not till the year 156 B. C. that philosophy began to be studied at Rome. It was then introduced by Grecian philosophers. At first it met with strong opposition from the leading men of the nation; but when Rome conquered Greece, and the two nations began to mingle, it was but a short time before the Grecian religion and philosophy were transplanted to Rome. Here they began to flourish with new life. "Hence," says the historian, "Greece, which had submitted to the arms, in her turn subdued the understandings of the Romans; and, contrary to that which in these cases commonly happens, the conquerors adopted the opinions and manners of the conquered." (Enfield's Hist. of Phil., p. 296.)

That the Romans received their religion mostly from Greece, is attested by all writers who treat of the subject. "The religion of the Romans," says a learned author, "appears to have been that of Greece —a mixture of Syrian and Egyptian fables. The principal gods of both people were the same." (Elements of Mythology, p. 244.) "The religious system of the Romans," says Mr. Fisk, "gives clear evidence of its Grecian descent, being in scarcely any part of it a native growth, but borrowed chiefly from the Greek colonies in Italy." (Class. Antiq., p. 86.) Dr. Good says, "The philosophers of Rome present us with nothing new, for they merely followed the dogmas of those of Greece." (Book of Nature, p. 380.)

Very soon every Grecian sect of philosophy had its patrons among the Romans. The Epicurean, the Stoic, the Pyrrhonic, and other schools, which openly denied the soul's immortality, had numerous followers. But Platonism also was embraced by others. Among the most noted of these was Cicero, who was born B. C. 106. He was a great admirer of Plato, and said and wrote much to prove the immortality of the soul. He did for that doctrine among the Romans, what Plato had done for it among the Greeks. Yet even he confessed that he felt sure of the soul's immortality only while he was arguing for it; in his hours of sober reflection he doubted it. Nevertheless, a goodly number adopted this view, at least in theory.

THE ALEXANDRIAN SCHOOL.

About this time a singular school was started at Alexandria in Egypt, then a part of the Roman empire. It was called the Eclectic or New Platonic School. The origin of it was this: Certain philosophers, seeing the endless disputes and contradictions among the many different sects of philosophy and religion, formed the plan of gleaning from all whatever was good and consonant to reason, and rejecting the rest. Platonism was the basis of this school, and the doctrine of the immortality of the soul held a conspicuous place in it. It was through this school, further improved in the second century by Ammonius Saccas, a Platonic Christian, that this doctrine came into the church; hence we are interested in its history. It is not certain just when it started; but probably not far from the time of the birth of Christ. So say Dr. Mosheim, Enfield, and the Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge. (Mosheim's Commentaries, vol. i. p. 38; Enfield's Hist. of Phil., p. 343; Enc. Rel. Knowl., art. Eclectics.)

Referring the reader to the above authors for a full history of this school, I will only select a few facts bearing directly on my subject. "Upon the foundation of the Platonic philosophy," says Enfield, "with an abundance of heterogeneous materials collected from every other sect, was erected an irregular, cumbrous, and useless fabric, called the ECLECTIC SCHOOL." One Potamon, a Platonist, is supposed to have been its founder. (Mosheim's Com., vol. i. p. 38.) Says the Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge, "They held Plato in the highest esteem, but did not scruple to join with his doctrine whatever they thought conformable to reason in the tenets of other philosophers." (Art. Eclectics). "Potamon endeavored to reconcile the precepts of Plato with those of other masters." (Enfield's Hist. of Phil., p. 327.)

"The Christian religion, too, which had now found its way to Alexandria, became incidentally the occasion of encouraging and promoting this coalition of opinions; for when the heathen philosophers perceived that this new establishment, supported by the splendor of its miracles, and the parity of its doctrines, was daily gaining credit even in the schools of Alexandria; and saw that, like the rising sun, it was likely soon to eclipse every inferior light; despairing of being able either to refute its claims by argument, or to stem its progress by authority, they determined to oppose it by every effort of ingenuity and artifice. In order to support the declining credit of their own schools, they incorporated Christian ideas and principles into their new system. Several fathers of the Christian church themselves, such as Pantaenus, Clemens Alexandrinus, and the author of the work called the Shepherd of Hernias, by studying philosophy in the Alexandrian school, injudiciously favored the views of their opponents, and from their sacred magazine contributed their share toward that confused mass of opinions, Egyptian, Oriental, Pythagoric, Platonic, and Christian, which, about the close of the second century, rose up into the ECLECTIC SYSTEM." (Enfield's Hist. of Phil., p: 326.)

Alas that the church of Christ should have left the simple truth of the Holy Bible to learn wisdom and doctrine from the "vain philosophy" of heathenism! But such was the sad fact. From this time we find innumerable errors mixing in with the pure truth of the Bible. This Eclectic school was started about one hundred years after the death of the last apostle, toward the close of the second century.

That the main object of this school was to reconcile and unite Christianity and heathen philosophy, particularly Platonic philosophy, is abundantly proved by the historians treating upon the subject. The learned Dr. Mosheim thus speaks of this school: "This [Eclectic] mode of philosophizing was changed near the close of the [second] century, when Ammonius Saccas, with great applause, opened a school at Alexandria, and laid the foundation for that sect which is called the New Platonic. This man was born and educated a Christian, and perhaps made pretensions to Christianity all his life. Being possessed of great fecundity of genius; as well as eloquence, he undertook to bring all systems of philosophy and religion into harmony; or, in other words, to teach a philosophy by which all philosophers, and the men of all religions, the Christian not excepted, might unite together and have fellowship." "The grand object of Ammonius, to bring all sects and religions into harmony, required him to do much violence to the sentiments and opinions of all parties,—philosophers, priests, and Christians; and particularly, by means of allegorical interpretations, to remove very many impediments out of his way." (Eccl. Hist., vol. i. pp. 111-113.)

Of this scheme Enfield says: "By combining into one system all the important tenets, both theological and philosophical, which were at that time received, either in the pagan or the Christian school, they hoped to confirm the heathen in their attachment to their old superstitions, and to reconcile the Christians to paganism."

"In the infancy of the Alexandrian school, not a few among the professors of Christianity suffered themselves to be so far deluded by the pretensions of this sect as to imagine that a coalition might, with great advantage, be formed between its system and that of Christianity; and this union seemed the more desirable as several philosophers of this sect became converts to the Christian faith. But the consequence was, that pagan ideas and opinions were by degrees mixed with the pure and simple doctrine of the gospel; the fanatical philosophy of Ammonius corrupted the pure religion of Christ; and his church became a field of contention, and a nursery of error." (Hist. of Phil., p. 344.)

The object they had in view is thus stated by Mosheim:—

"The Christian teachers were well aware of what essential benefit it would be in promoting their cause, not only with the multitude, but also amongst men of the higher orders, could the philosophers, whose authority and estimation with the world was unbounded, be brought to emhrace Christianity. With a view, therefore, of accomplishing this desirable object, they not only adopted the study of philosophy themselves, but became loud in their recommendation of it to others, declaring that the difference between Christianity and philosophy was but trifling, and consisted merely in the former being of a nature somewhat more perfect than the latter. And it is most certain that this klnd of conduct was so far productive of the desired effect as to cause not a few of the philosophers to enroll themselves under the Christian banner. Those who have perused the various works written by such of the ancient philosophers as had been induced to embrace Christianity, cannot have failed to remark that the Christian discipline was regarded by all of them in no other light than as a certain mode of philosophizing." (Commentaries, vol. i. cent. ii. sec. 26, pp. 346, 347.)

The effect of this was soon manifest. The above quoted author says: "Hence it came to pass that the greater part of these Platonists, upon comparing the Christian religion with the system of Ammonius, were led to imagine that nothing could be more easy than a transition from the one to the other, and, to the great detriment of the Christian cause, were induced to embrace Christianity without feeling it necessary to abandon scarcely any of their former principles." (Ibid.; sec. 32, p. 366.)

To us at this day it seems incredible that such a scheme should ever have been formed or that any Christians would have listened to it a moment. But when we remember that the apostles had been dead one hundred years, that the church had already degenerated to an alarming degree, that nearly all the Christian converts had themselves been pagans, that they brought into the church with them more or less attachment for their former pagan notions, and that their nearest friends and relatives were still pagans, it is not so remarkable that they were induced to look favorably upon such an effort. But it was the most fatal step the church ever took; it opened the doors for a flood of error to pour into the pure stream of gospel truth, and, alas! they have never been wholly separated since.