HOW THE GREEKS AND ROMANS OBTAINED THE DOCTRINE OF THE IMMORTALITY OF THE SOUL by Dudley Marvin Canright

Seventh-day Adventist Publishing Association · Battle Creek, Mich. · Nov 23, 1869

HOW THE GREEKS AND ROMANS OBTAINED THE DOCTRINE OF THE IMMORTALITY OF THE SOUL.

By Dudley Marvin Canright

That the Greeks and Romans received their religious doctrines and worship very largely from Egypt, is agreed by all historians. I have offered some evidence of this in the past, and will present more here. Alger writes: “It seems plain that the Greeks derived many of their notions concerning the fate and state of the dead, from Egypt.” Doctrine of a Future Life, p. 101. Herodotus says, “And indeed, the names of almost all the gods came from Egypt into Grecia.” Herod. II, 50. Another author thus remarks: “The ancient Egyptians are considered as the original inventors of the arts, science, and religion of Greece.” Elements of Mythology, p. 36. “The absurdities of Grecian polytheism, as we are abundantly assured, were derived principally from Egypt.” Mitford’s Greece. Vol. 1, p. 93.

The doctrine of the immortality of the soul, as we have seen, was a leading notion in the Egyptian religion. The Greeks receive this with the rest, but at a later date than most other parts of their system. Says Herodotus, “The Egyptians also were the first who asserted the doctrine that the soul of man is immortal. Some of the Greeks have adopted this opinion, some earlier, others later, as if it were their own.” Herod. II, 123. This is a very plain testimony as to where the Greeks obtained that doctrine. Also, this doctrine was not known among them till learned from Egypt; even then all did not at once receive it.

Two among the Greeks have been named as first teaching the soul’s immortality to their countrymen; viz., Orpheus and Pherecydes. As to Orpheus, his history is all in fable. Indeed it is not certain that such a man ever lived; much less that he introduced this doctrine among the Greeks. See Enfield’s History of Phil., p. 63.

The general testimony is in favor of Pherecydes as the first who taught the Greeks the notion. He lived about 600 years before Christ. Enfield’s History of Phil., p. 200. He learned his wisdom and his doctrines of the Egyptians. Josephus asserts this of him. In his books “Against Apion,” he says, “But then for those that first introduced philosophy [among the Greeks] and the consideration of things celestial and divine among them, such as Pherecydes the Syrian, and Pythagoras and Thales, all with one consent agree that they learned what they knew of the Egyptians and Chaldeans, and wrote but little. And these are the things which are supposed to be the oldest of all among the Greeks; and they have much ado to believe that the writings ascribed to those men are genuine.” Book I, Sec. 2. The reader will notice that the teachings of Pherecydes and Thales are among the oldest things taught the Greeks, so much so that they hardly know whether to believe them or not. This was only 600 years before Christ. Moses had legislated for Israel about 1000 years before that, and even David and Solomon had slept with their fathers for about 400 years when this philosopher first taught the Greeks about the soul’s immortality. So this doctrine was not very ancient among them. But I am anticipating. Enfield indorses the opinion of Josephus as above quoted, and says with him that Pherecydes learned his doctrine of the Egyptians. Of his doctrine he says, “Another tenet which is, by the universal consent of the ancients, ascribed to Pherecydes, is that of the immortality of the soul, for which he was, perhaps, indebted to the Egyptians. Cicero says that he was the first philosopher in whose writings this doctrine appeared. He also is said, and not improbably, to have taught the doctrine of the transmigration of the soul; for this was a tenet commonly received among the Egyptians, and afterwards taught by the Pythagorians.” Hist. of Phil., p. 210.

He not only borrowed the doctrine of the immortality of the soul, and the transmigration of souls, from the Egyptians, and taught it to the Greeks; but he added to it a refinement of his own, unknown till he first broached it, this was the idea that the soul is a part of God. It was called the TO EN, the one. Mr. Warburton has argued this point at some length to show that this doctrine was of Grecian, and not of Egyptian origin, and that Pherecydes, and Thales, his contemporary, were the inventors of it. In this he is probably correct. Divine Lega., Vol. II, pp. 238–240.

This being true, we have found the date of another important step in the history of this doctrine. All agree that the Greek philosophers much improved the doctrines which they learned from Egypt. This was one of the first of these improvements.

The next great name in antiquity that appears in the history of this doctrine, is Pythagoras. He was a Greek, born B. C. 550. The exact date is not certain. Anthon. He was the disciple of Pherecydes. Enfield. “It is probable that his first journey from the Grecian islands was to Egypt, the country at that time celebrated, above all others, for that kind of wisdom which best suited the genius and temper of Pythagoras.” Hist. of Phil., p. 212. He passed twenty-two years in Egypt (Ibid.) and used great diligence in learning the doctrines of the priests. After traveling through many cities of Greece, he finally went to Crotona in Magna Græcia, where he established a flourishing school, which was attended by hundreds. Ibid. The school, or sect, thus founded by him, was called the Italic, or Pythagoric sect. Of his visit to Egypt, and the result, Warburton says, “The last sort of people who went for instruction, were the philosophers, properly so-called. . . . The first [as well as the most famous] of this class, and who gave philosophy its name and character, was Pythagoras. He and Plato, with others, traveled into Egypt, like their predecessors. . . . The ancients tell us of their long abode there; their hard condition of admittance into the sacred colleges; and their bringing away with them all the secret science of the priesthood. The result of all was, and it is worth our observation, that, from this time, the Greek sophists (now called Philosophers) began to cultivate the belief of a future state of rewards and punishments; and at the very same time, the practice of the double doctrine; which two principles were the distinguishing badges of their doctrine.” Divine Legation, Vol. II, pp. 108, 109.

Yes, these observations are important. 1. Pythagoras went into Egypt. 2. There they learned the doctrines of the priests. 3. The result was, that from that time, the Greek philosophers began to cultivate this belief. Then they had not cultivated that belief before; much less had the people. There is an abundance of evidence to show that he is correct in these statements.

We will now briefly inquire into Pythagoras’ doctrine concerning man and the soul. He seems to have made some advancement upon the doctrine of his master, Pherecydes. He taught that God was the great fountain or universal mind, from whence emanated the mind or souls of all intelligent beings; that the soul existed before it animated this body; that it will transmigrate through different bodies till it returns to God, its original source, and is re-absorbed into his presence. Like all before him, he still held the soul to be material. With regard to his idea of God, Enfield says, “He does not seem to have had the idea of a pure spirit.” Hist. of Phil., p. 228. Enfield has thoroughly discussed the whole subject, so I glean the following extracts from him: “The account which we have given of the Pythagoric doctrine, concerning the Divine nature, is confirmed by Cicero, who asserts that Pythagoras conceived God to be a soul pervading all nature, of which every human soul is a portion. (Ibid.) Concerning man, the Pythagorians taught that, consisting of an elementary nature, and a divine or rational principle, he is a microcosm, or compendium, of the universe; that his soul is a self-moving principle, composed of two parts, the rational, which is a portion of the soul of the world, seated in the brain, and the irrational, which includes the passions, and is seated in the heart; that man participates in both these with the brutes, which are incapable of acting rationally, that the sensitive soul, thumos, perishes, but the rational mind, phren, is immortal, because the source whence it is derived is immortal; that after the rational mind is freed from the chains of the body, it assumes an ethereal vehicle, and passes into the regions of the dead, where it remains till it is sent back to this world, to be the inhabitant of some other body, brutal or human; and that after suffering successive purgations, when it is sufficiently purified, it is received among the gods, and returns to the eternal source from which it proceeded.” Ibid., p. 230.

1. We learn that Pythagoras retained all the advance steps which his master Pherecydes had made on the ancient faith. 2. He added much of his own theorizing. 3. He introduced a subtle mode of philosophizing, which confused the mind more than it enlightened it. He used many subtle divisions and distinctions, which were unknown before. He was the first one who assumed the name of philosopher. 4. He began to decry “gross matter” as corrupt, and far removed from God. 5. Yet he still held God, demons, and souls, to be material, but they were of subtle, ethereal substance. The discovery that mind is entirely independent of matter, was reserved for another philosopher, born about 50 years later than Pythagoras. This was Anaxagoras, one of the successors of Pythagoras in the Ionic school. Of this fact Enfield testifies thus: “Plutarch confirms this account of the doctrine of Anaxagoras, and shows wherein it differed from that of his predecessors. ‘The Ionic philosophers,’ says he, ‘who appeared before Anaxagoras, made fate, or blind necessity, that is, the fortuitous, or necessary motion of the particles of matter, the first principle in nature; but Anaxagoras affirmed that a pure mind, perfectly free from all material concretions, governs the universe.’ From these and other concurrent testimonies, it clearly appears that Anaxagoras was the first among the Greeks who conceived mind as detached from matter, and as acting upon it with intelligence and design in the formation of the universe. ‘The infinite mind, or deity, which his predecessors had confounded with matter, making them one universe, Anaxagoras conceived to have a separate and independent existence, and to be simple, pure intelligence, capable of forming the eternal mass of matter, according to his pleasure.’” Ibid., p. 87.

These facts are worthy of our notice. They show the gradual tendency among the ancients, to condemn matter, separate the mind from all dependence upon it, and finally to arrive at the conclusion that it is purely spiritual, and immaterial. But it required ages of philosophy to arrive at this conclusion! Anaxagoras broached his opinion as above stated, about 450 B. C. Even he did not arrive at the notion that man’s soul is purely spiritual and immaterial. This was reserved for another great philosopher, as we shall soon see. These things show what thorough materialists all the ancients were, and how long it took to philosophize themselves out of it. It was not till common sense, and sober reason were laid aside for “vain philosophy” and subtle sophistry, that they arrived at this sublime conclusion!

D. M. CANRIGHT.