Paul and the Giants of Philosophy:  Reading the Apostle in Greco-Roman Context, Edited by Joseph R. Dodson and David E. Briones (IVP, 2019)

Paul proclaimed the gospel to a culture shaped by philosophical traditions. This book offers a series of very accessible studies into how he did that.

Paul and the Giants of Philosophy compares the apostle to Socrates (briefly), Plato, Aristotle, Epicureans and, of course, the Stoics. Most of the sample philosophers are his predecessors or his contemporary Seneca. Plutarch (ca. 45–120 CE) is the only thinker considered who comes after Paul. So the book really is setting Paul in his context.

There is a long history of comparing Paul, and Christianity, to the ancient philosophers. Some of the early Christian teachers emphasised how similar they were. Justin Martyr thought Socrates was a Christian before Christ. Tertullian, on the other hand, famously insisted that Athens (philosophy) has nothing in common with Jerusalem (the gospel). Medieval theology often appropriated neoplatonic and Aristotelian philosophy. Luther viewed reason (as used in scholastic theology) as “the Devil’s whore”. Twentieth century biblical scholarship went through a period in which much New Testament thought was assumed to be a pale reflection of Graeco-Roman thought. Often, at least in popular teaching, Paul’s rejection of philosophy as “empty deception” which threatens to take Christians captive (Col 2:8) is the basis for taking a Tertullian/Luther view of Paul and philosophy. Slavoj Žižek the atheist Slovenian Marxist philosopher is well known for his fascination with Paul.

Paul and the Giants of Philosophy is a different approach. It shows ways in which Paul is similar to some of the thinkers in his context, but also shows ways in which the gospel is radically different to them. Seeing Paul against this context helps to highlight important aspects of his thought.

We may wonder if Paul knew the philosophical traditions well. Several authors make the point that it is not necessary to assume he had studied the texts. Many of the ideas were “in the air”. Few Australian churches are filled with people who have read Nietzsche, Freud, Darwin, Sartre or Foucault (to choose a few big names), and pastors may or may not have read them. Yet our culture is shaped by their thinking and good preaching will engage with their ideas, even if the source is not identified. It was much the same in the ancient world,

This book offers short easily read chapters. Most compare Paul and a philosopher on a particular topic. There are chapters on both Epictetus and Seneca (both Stoics) and suffering; Aristotle on friendship; Philodemus (an Epicurean) on dealing with the weak; Seneca on slavery; Epictetus on the individual and community; Plutarch on faith; Seneca on gifts-giving and obligation. Two general chapters compare Paul’s view of the good life and the afterlife with a range of thinkers. Two chapters compare Paul’s use of letters and his account of his heavenly vision (2 Cor 12) with representative philosophers. R. Dean Anderson considers Paul’s quote from the Phaenomena of Aratus: “For we too are his offspring.” (Acts 17:28). The closing chapter considers the challenge of making these comparisons.

Each chapter has points of interest, here I can just mention a few highlights for me.

Justin Allison shows that Paul’s discussion of the strong and weak has parallels with Philodemus. The philosopher proposes that the weak need “frank criticism” from a caring and sensitive teacher to help correct their thinking to become self-sufficient. Paul calls the strong and the weak to serve one another in dependence on God.

David Briones notes that Paul and Aristotle value friendship (though Paul does not use the word). For Aristotle friendship is reciprocal, two virtuous people are committed to each other and do good for each other (and themselves at the same time). Paul knows a bigger reality. God creates and sustains friendships through his gifts, especially the gift of friendship with him through Christ. In Christian friendship is mutually beneficial but that is not the basis of friendship.

Ben C. Dunson considers Epictetus, a Stoic, and his views of individuals and communities. Epictetus considered the indivudal to be primary. Happiness was achieved by self-mastery and inner contentment irrespective of physical or social circumstances. He did think that self-control produces virtues which enabled the individual to serve others. Pursuit of individual happiness brings freedom to serve; a focus on looking after others makes ones happiness depend on something which cannot be controlled. Paul links individual and community in a very different way because it has been shaped by salvation in Christ. He views the individual believer as existing in the body of Christ. That means that what happens to others should affect us. We owe each other a debt of love (Rom 13:8a-b ESV; cf. Rom 15:1) and we suffer and rejoice with each other (Rom 12:15).

Timothy Brookins’ chapter on slavery is the best short study I have read on the topic. He points out that as a Stoic Seneca held that slave and master share the same natural status and he suggested ways in which slaves should be treated as equals. Yet he never suggested freedom for slaves, and his Stoicism meant social status is a matter of indifference which did not need to be changed. Paul was no position to promote abolition in the Roman empire, but the gospel leads him in that direction. He told Onesimus that Philemon is now his brother, and by implication no longer his slave. He hinted that Philemon could release Onesimus , though leaving the decision for Onesimus and his church.

Briones’ second chapter is perhaps the most suprising of the book. He argues that the ideal of a ‘pure gift’ with no expectation of reciprocation is a “modern myth” and not Paul’s approach. He summaries Seneca’s view that the pattern of generous giving and grateful response is the rhythm of healthy social life. The giver thinks of the recipient’s interests first but also takes their own interest into account. He argues from Philippians that Paul’s view is similar. Believers should put the interests of others first, but that does not eliminate their self-interest. (The translation of Philippians 2:4 is a key in this discussion). Christ gave generously knowing he would be exalted. Believers have received gifts from God, and share these with one another, creating and fulfilling obligations which bind them together in unity.

Jeanette Hagen Pifer takes on the tricky issue of “faith” comparing Paul to Plutarch. In Greek thought the word pistis could be used about a “rational” exercise, a matter of understanding. Here it meant a kind of “hopeful optimism” about an idea or a thing, but not absolute certainty. Philosophers often used this word to describe an intellectually weak understanding, and urged people to seek knowledge rather than be satisfied with faith. On the other hand, the word could be used to describe a relationship of trust and the trustworthiness of humans and gods.

Both Plutarch and Paul treat faith as relational. Plutarch points out the need for people to be trustworthy in all sorts of situations. In religion, he presents faithfulness as imitating a god so as to develop the same virtues. Paul’s view of faith is even more directed at others. He does not think we can generate faith, but that faith exists as we look to God’s faithfulness to us in Christ. This faith does not so much lead us to imitate God (or at least only secondarily); primarily it connects us to God so we share in what he has done in the cross and resurrection of Christ.

Along with particular insights, the whole book helps to show Paul as a contextual theologian. He warned his readers against being taken captive by the “empty deception” of philosophy (Col 2:8). That did not mean that he ignored the philosophical milieu. There were even points of similarity and connection. Yet the gospel critiques the surrounding culture and offers a radically different view of life based on the death and resurrection of Christ. When we appreciate the alternatives of the first century, the gospel alternative shines brightly.

Paul and the Giants of Philosophy offers new insights into Paul’s message. It is also an introduction to the philosophical background of the New Testament and recommended reading for anyone interested in Christianity and philosophy. It also has the potential to stimulate preachers and teachers to follow Paul’s example and show the wonder of the gospel in relation to the philosophies of our age.

A shorter version of this review was published on The Gospel Coalition Australia site.