Is there a "Platonic influence" on Philippians 2:5-11?

Thursday, November 12, 2009, 7:42 AM

(Plato, detail from The School of Athens, Raphael, 1509–1510, Vatican City)

There are serious objections (historical, philological and philosophical) to reading Philippians 2:5-11 as the total or partial result of "Platonic influence".

[Historical] As already remarked in my textual analysis,[#] most scholars (and I with them), consider Philippians 2:5-11 a hymn of the Earliest Christianity, quoted by Paul. Paul's conversion is dated by many scholars to the period  AD 33 - AD 36 (see Wikipedia > Paul of Tarsus > Conversion and mission), quite early after the death of Jesus, the first Pentecost spoken of in Acts and the birth of the Church in Jerusalem. There is no evidence, either factual or circumstantial, that in this period there had been any Greek philosophical influence, not to mention Platonic, on the budding Christian movement (the "Way"), which, in the beginning, was strictly Palestinian Jewish.

[Philological] As already remarked in my textual analysis,[#] two words, both meaning form appear in this passage:

μορφή (morphē - G3444) used in the sense of "strong resemblance".

σχῆμα (schēma - G4976) used in the sense habitus, "aspect", "fashion".

In the NT, two other words expressing the notion of form are employed.

ἰδέα (idea - G2397) (which, in Trench's Synonyms (lxx. μορφή, σχῆμα, ἰδέα) is presented as a synonym of morphē and schēma) in the NT is used only once (in Matt 28:3: "His [of the angel that appeared to the "pious women" when they went to the tomb of Jesus "at dawn on the first day of the week"] appearance [ἰδέα, idea] was like lightning, and his clothes were white as snow.").

εἶδος (eidos - G1491), , used in John 5:37 ("And the Father who sent me has himself testified about me. You people have never heard his voice nor seen his form [εἶδος, eidos] at any time, ...").

Now, both the above words, ἰδέα (idea) and εἶδος (eidos), are extensively used by Plato: in fact they are the very "watermark" of his philosophy (see Wikipedia > Platonic realism > Forms).

Yet, in spite of both words being used in the NT, neither of them is used in Philippians 2:5-11, whereas they could have easily and equivalently been used instead of μορφή (morphē) and σχῆμα (schēma).

[Philosophical] Philo of Alexandria, aka Philo the Jew, joined Biblical exegesis and hermeneutics with his Middle-Platonic philosophy. In his works he developed the notion of the Logos as "Second God". Considering his lifespan (20 BCE - 50 CE), he could be considered a "suspect" of "Platonic influence" on Earliest Christianity, and consequently a potential "influence" on the hymn at Philippians 2:5-11. But there is no historical and/or textual evidence that he influenced any Christian author before Justin Martyr.

Besides, while the philosophical notion of Logos (λόγος, logos - G3056, see also logos at LSJ, A Greek-English Lexicon) reaches as far back as Heraclitus (c. 535–c. 475 BCE), who was the first to use this term in a philosophical sense, the notion of "Incarnation of the Logos" is totally alien to the Greek thought, and is first found in the Prologue to the Gospel of John (John 1:1-18).

Conclusion

Having substantially established that there are serious objections (historical, philological and philosophical) to reading  Philippians 2:5-11 as the total or partial result of "Platonic influence", I think that it is a matter of projection, started by the Greek Church Fathers and culminated in the heavily Platonizing Christianity of people like, e.g.  Augustine of Hippo, in the West, and the "Cappadocian Rascals" (aka "Cappadocian Fathers") in the East.

[#] See article “... Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father” (Phil 2:5-11)