|
|
|
Download Paper: Numenius.doc Marian Hillar Someone
estimated that there have been about 23,000 Christianities. I would venture to say further
that there are probably as many Christianities as there are believers claiming to be
Christians. Such a statement, however, is not productive for the evaluation of evolution
of a religion. It would be better if we could differentiate some general patterns in the
development of a key religious doctrine. It
seems that the evolution of Christianity can be analyzed in terms of four general
patterns: 1. Jewish messianism with the figure of the messiah as a
glorified man and the expected earthly Kingdom of God. This is the basic message of the
Gospels. 2. Hellenistic Christianity in its two forms: in one the messiah
figure was transformed into cosmic Greek Logos; and
the other Gnostic, in which Logos is only one of many divine manifestations. 3. Trinitarian or syncretic Christianity which tends to
reemphasize the unitarian character of the divinity
preserving the Greek triadic speculations and incorporating especially the Egyptian triune
doctrine. 4. Servetian unitarian Christianity which interprets divinity and
its manifestations as a historical, modalistic
process. My interest in studying Christianity is focused on the evolution
of this religion and finding the sources of theological doctrines and links between its
various stages. Justin
Martyr (114-165 C.E.) is the first Christian
apologist who speculated on religious matters in philosophical terms of his time and
developed one of the first systems of Christian theological thought.[i]
Due to his background in Greek schooling, he reinterpreted the story of the New Testament
in terms of Greek religious-philosophical concepts just like Philo reinterpreted the Old
Testament, and followed his road to Hellenization of the Hebrew myth. The primary
influence exerted on him was the writings of Philo of Alexandria, whom he mentions by name
three times in the Dialogue with Trypho,[ii] and the Greek Middle
Platonic philosopher Numenius. Justin's Triadic Formula When Justin mentions that Christians believe in the Triad -- the
Most true God who is the Father, the Second (God), and the Third (God) -- he refers
directly to the discussion among his contemporary Middle Platonists. We have testimony of
this discussion preserved in the fragments of the philosophical writings of Numenius of
Apamea in Syria (fl. ca 150 C.E.).[iii]
We know nothing about his life. Johannes Laurentius Lydus (ca 410-465 C.E.), a Byzantine philosopher, mentions his name with the sobriquet Roman which
would indicate that Numenius stayed in Rome.[iv] His name is mentioned
by Clement of Alexandria (ca 150-215 C.E.).[v]
Preserved fragments are from: On the Good, a work modeled on the dialogues of
Plato; a treatise, On the Infidelity of the Academy to Plato; On the Secrets of
Plato; On the Incorruptibility of the Soul. The
triadic speculations are nothing new. We find them in Greek philosophy, as well as in
Egyptian religion.[vi]
Particularly striking is the agreement of the Numenius doctrine with that presented in the
so-called Chaldaean Oracles.[vii] The reason probably
is because both the Numenius and the Chaldaean Oracles have the same source,
namely, the Platonic tradition via Xenocrates. This was the current theological doctrine
of the second century. Numenius, in turn, influenced the Christian apologist, Justin, the
Greek philosophers Plotinus and Porphyry, and
later Eusebius of Caesarea. Greek Sources of Justin's Theology Xenocrates
of Chalcedon[viii]
(d. 314 B.C.E.) was the second successor of
Plato in his Academy after Speusippus. We have only fragments of their writings and
testimonies left by others about their doctrines. They both elaborated further on the
existence of cosmic principles stated by Plato in his Philebus.[ix]
Eventually such speculations led to the abandonment of the theory of Ideas as separate
entities and to postulating the Ideas as the thoughts of the divine intellect. As
Pythagoras ascribed a great role to the numbers and Plato described the cosmos as an
expression of geometrical and mathematical regularities,[x] it seems that
Speusippus and Xenocrates substituted numbers for the Ideas just fusing the ideal and
mathematical entities. Xenocrates, however, claimed that there are no separate numbers
from sensible things.[xi]
Xenocrates's
philosophy constitutes an important transition to Middle Platonism. He derived everything
that exists from the supreme Monad identified with the Intellect and from the Non-One
(?ev?ov) which he identified with matter or the indefinite Dyad due to its multiplicity.[xii]
He tried to preserve the Platonic concept of Ideas as the models of things so he treated
them as numbers because just as numbers are defining things, so Ideas are defining matter.
They are the invisible, comprehensible by intellect, and incorporeal principles of the
sensible reality imparted from the supreme Monad. In
his theology, Xenocrates[xiii]
differentiated two cosmic principles as divinities -- the Monad and the Dyad. One was the
masculine divinity, and, as such, had a role of the Father and ruled in heaven. He
proclaimed it to be the one (singular) and the intellect. This was the supreme deity, the
First God, immovable and unchanging, called Zeus. The other
was the feminine divinity, that had a role of the Mother of Gods and ruled over the
gods beneath the heaven -- she was the Soul of the Universe. Clement of Alexandria
ascribed to Xenocrates the distinction between Zeus the supreme God, the Father, and the
other inferior God, the Son. Others, like
Tertullian, claimed that Xenocrates differentiated only two groups of Gods: the astral
Olympians and the Titans derived from earth. Thus the astral bodies would be the
instruments of the Monad, and the sublunar Titans and Demons linked to the invisible
corporeal elements would represent the manifestations of the Dyad. Numenius: Immediate Source of Justin's Theology Numenius
is most interesting because he developed further such concepts of Greek philosophical
tradition (as One, Demiurge, Father, Logos, Mother, World Soul) into a theological system
by introducing explicitly a system of hierarchical cosmic entities, two or three Gods,
interrelated by proschresis, which signifies a desired dependence and provenance.
Such a conception could have an appeal to the philosophically oriented early Christians
who operated within the framework of the biblical formulations. Moreover, Numenius was
acquainted with the Hebrew and Christian scriptural tradition,[xiv]
a fact which could have gained for him sympathy from the Christian side. Eusebius praised
Numenius for deriving his ideas from Plato and Moses. Numenius himself declared Plato to
be just "Moses who speaks the Attic language."[xv] There is a complete
correlation between the two systems, that of Justin and that of Numenius (Table 1). The major difference is in the identification by Justin of the historical Jesus with the Second
and subordinate Divinity, and his transformation into a cosmic being: Christ, Logos or Son
of God. The starting
point for Justin, as well as later for Tertullian, is the baptismal formula which had a
significance defined by its Hebrew and ritualistic original character. Justin and
Tertullian added to it a cosmic dimension and transferred it from the religious platform
to the philosophical level explaining it in cosmic ontological terms. Justin was
influenced by the triadic Middle Platonic solution of Numenius and adopted his cosmic
ontological concepts to Christian historical mythology. Tertullian will mix it later with
the Egyptian trinitarian pattern.[xvi] The
innovation which was introduced by Numenius to the Pythagorean-Platonic religious
doctrines was the introduction of a second transcendental and noetic entity between the
supreme being and the universe. He, undoubtedly influenced by Plato's statement about the
three principles in the universe transmitted by Xenocrates, derived the concept of the
three Gods from distinguishing "all things in their rank and order." First,
after thorough analysis of the Platonic concepts of Being and Becoming, he establishes,
that which exists is incorporeal and intelligible, and has the name of Substance and
Being.[xvii]
Having established that Existing Substance and the Idea are intelligible and the Mind is
their cause, Numenius concludes that the Mind alone is
Good.[xviii]
Now from the life-process of the supreme Divinity (Mind) he derives his statement
about the three Gods (or Minds): The First God, who exists in himself, is simple; for as He
absolutely deals with none but Himself, He is in no way divisible; however, the Second God
and the Third God are One. When however this (unity) is brought together with Matter,
which is Doubleness, the (One Divinity) indeed unites it, but is by Matter split, inasmuch
as Matter is full of desires, and in a flowing condition. But inasmuch as He is not only
in relation with the Intelligible, which would be more suitable to His own nature, He
forgets himself, while He gazes on Matter, and cares for it. He comes into touch with the
Perceptible, and busies Himself with it; He leads it up into His own nature, because He
was moved by desire for Matter.[xix] Thus the
First God is characterized as the First Mind, the Good-in-itself, Self-existence. He
exists in himself, is simple and not divisible.[xx] He does not create and
remains idle from all the labors of the creation as would a king.[xxi]
The
Second God, the Creator rules by passing through the heavens. What is his function? On his
passage the mind is projected down to earth on all who are destined to participate.
Whenever the divinity looks on any of us, life and animation of bodies is the result, and
whenever the divinity turns himself toward himself, all animation is extinguished.[xxii]
The Second
Divinity remains in a subordinate position to the First One. As the Creative Divinity he
is the principle of Becoming, so must the Good be principle of existing Being. And the
Creative Divinity is analogous to the First, so must Becoming be related to Being
(Substance), because he is his image and imitation.[xxiii] The
Second Divinity in this theory is the Demiurge who has a double character -- either he participates in the First God, then he
is called the Second God, or he turns himself to the matter and produces the World out of
formless matter (since his nature is being Creator), then he is called the Third God and
even may be regarded as the World. His
essence, too, inasmuch as he is the Good of Becoming, must be Good-in-itself connatural or
cognate (s?µf?tov) to the substance of the First God. Thus Numenius classifies the
Demiurge, the Second God, as analogous to the First God, his image and imitation. The
Second God and the Third God are one whenever he is united with the Matter (dyad). Because
the Second God not only remains in relation with the intelligible (appropriate for his
nature), but also with the perceptible, so, whenever he gazes on Matter, he forgets
himself and comes into touch with the perceptible moved by desire for Matter.[xxiv] In this
philosophy, since the First transcendental God was unknown to man, did not create, was
impassible, and contented himself with contemplation, the Second God was needed as an
agent of creation and animation. Moreover, if it was not necessary for the First God to
create, then he could be considered the Father of the Second God, the Demiurge. And it was
for reason of piety that Numenius denied the direct creative function to the First God.
The Demiurge rules in heaven, and is busy with both the intelligible
and the sensible, through him happens all that happens.[xxv] Just as the pilot who
sails at sea and looks to the sky to find his way, similarly does the Creator that is
linked to matter by many connections, regulates its harmony through ideas. By looking up
to God on high he receives his critical
judgment, but his impulsive motion from the desire for Matter.[xxvi]
And we humans
exist in our terrestrial life when the Intellect (animation) is sent down to us. When God
looks at us and turns to each one, the bodies become alive by uniting with his radiation
(divine nous). When God turns away, all that animation is extinguished while the
Intellect continues its blissful life.[xxvii] The
participatory relation between the First God and the Second God Numenius illustrates by
using several analogies: that of a farmer and planter, that of donor and receiver, of a
fire kindled from another fire, of knowledge partaken by the receiver from the donor.[xxviii]
This participation of the Second God in the First becomes still more pronounced as he
receives his goodness from the First by a process of thought so that the Good is One. He
really becomes one with the First God. This relation
to the First God remains in complete accord with the Platonic paradigm of Ideas: just as
humans and everything else are modeled on Ideas, so the Good which is the Idea of Good is
the Idea of the Demiurge.[xxix]
In another
fragment Numenius is reported to teach a triad formulated using another metaphor, namely
that there are three Gods -- the First whom he calls Father, the Second, whom he calls
Creator, and the Third -- Creation. Thus the Creator would be double -- as the First and the Second God. And using
poetic language, they could be described in terms of filial descendance as the
Fore-Father, Offspring or Son, and Descendant or Grandson.[xxx] Thus, in the final
analysis, the First God is the cause of everything and has absolute control. For though he
is impassible, he has an innate motion from which derives the order (i.e. beauty) of the
world, and the salvation of all.[xxxi] And he uses the
Second God who is his different function to organize the Matter, thus creating the world: Numenius relates the First (Mind) to that which is really alive;
and he says, that it thinks, out of desire for the Second
(God). The Second Mind he relates to the Intellect that becomes creative out of
desire for the Third; and the Third he relates to discursive Thinking, that is human
thinking.[xxxii] In
conclusion to this reasoning, Numenius declares that there are four entities (pragmata)
with the following names: 1. The First God who is the Good-in-itself, pure Intellect; 2. The good Demiurge, God Creator, his imitator; 3. The one Substance (Essence) which is shared by the two -- the
First God, and the Second God; 4. The copy of this Substance (Essence), the beautiful (i.e.
ordered) World which is beautified, i.e.
ordered from disorder, by its participation in the Beauty.[xxxiii]
Table 1 Comparison of the Two Systems:
|
