Socrates as a
Prophet
by
Damien F. Mackey
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
My argument here will be that the ‘Socrates’ of Greek
tradition, arose from the biblical prophet Zechariah, whose multi-identifications
include the prophet Jeremiah.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Introduction
For the substance
of this article to be fully appreciated, one needs to be aware of the basic
thrust of (but preferably to have read) my
(i):
basing myself on the
Fathers of the Church who had “appreciated at least the seminal impact that the
Hebrews had had upon Greco-Roman thinking, though without their having taken
the extra step that I [took there] of actually recognising the most famous
early western (supposedly) philosophers as being originally Hebrew”,
and my:
(ii):
in which I tentatively extended my
identifying of the great prophet Jeremiah to include the prophet Zechariah.
In (i) I had re-identified several of the
most prominent pre-Socratic philosophers, in their true origins, as Israelites
(Hebrews). For instance, Pythagoras as Joseph of the Book of Genesis (who was,
in turn, the genius Imhotep of 3rd dynasty Egyptian history). The
matter could not be left there with the pre-Socratics, though, for as I stated
(emphasis added):
My purpose in this article
will be to try to restore the original in relation to [certain pre-Socratic
philosophers] {leaving aside at this stage the more important Socratics,
Socrates, Plato and Aristotle, whose
proper identities will really need to be established}, and thereby to
uncover the original artisans of wisdom, giving the precedence to Hebrew Hochmah (Wisdom) over Greek Sophia (from whence we get our word philosophy).
In other words, to complete this radical work
of historico-philosophical re-orientation, one would need to be able to mount a
case also for that most famous trinity of ‘Greek’ philosophy, Socrates, Plato and Aristotle, to have
been, originally, famous biblical characters. My argument here will be that the
‘Socrates’ of Greek tradition, arose from the biblical prophet Zechariah, whose
multi-identifications include the prophet Jeremiah. However, as in the case of
the prophet Mohammed, who, as I proposed in:
is essentially based upon the prophet Nehemiah
of Israel, Socrates, too, appears to be actually a composite mix of some famous
persons. Regarding Mohammed as a composite, I wrote in “The Serious Historical
Dislocation …”:
… something is seriously wrong
with many aspects of the received AD history. I, trying to make some sense of
this, looking to find a reliable golden thread, so to speak – and
especially interested in the case of Mohammed who had begun to seem to me like
something of a composite Israelite (or Jewish) holy man (traces there of Moses;
Tobit; Job; Jeremiah; and Jesus Christ) – nearly fell off my chair when I
read for the first time that there was a “Nehemiah” contemporaneous with the
Prophet Mohammed.
OK, no big deal with that,
insofar as there are, even today, people named “Nehemiah”.
But a “Nehemiah” doing just
what the biblical Nehemiah had done? ….
Socrates is also, as I shall be arguing along
most similar lines - though essentially based upon the prophet Jeremiah (and
his multi-identifications as according to my “A Case for Multi-identifying the Prophet Jeremiah”) - a composite figure of notable Israelites (Jews).
Era of Socrates
The era of history in which the prophet
Jeremiah and, supposedly, Socrates, emerge, pertains to the most active phase (c.
600-300 BC) of what is known as “The Axial Age”. This age has been defined as,
e.g.:
“… the enigmatic synchronous emergence of
cultural innovations and advances across Eurasia in the period of the Classical
Greeks and early Romans, the Prophets of Israel, the era of the Upanishads and Buddhism
in India, and Confucius in China”.
It is my belief that this cultural phenomenon
was basically the fructifying scattering of Israelite wisdom (Yahwism), permeating
both east and west due to disruption caused by wars and exiles, but especially as
a result of the Babylonian Captivity (c. 600 BC, conventional dating) at the
time of great sapiential minds such as the prophets Jeremiah and Daniel.
The conventional dates for Jeremiah are c.
650-570 BC.
Those for Socrates are, in round figures, c.
470-400 BC.
{These figures will probably need to be
lowered significantly once a full revision of Persian and Greco-Roman history
has been achieved}
But we learned in “Re-Orienting to Zion” just
how flimsy are the facts and dates pertaining to the so-called Greek (Ionian) philosophers.
And indeed there is an ancient tradition that Plato (c. 430-350 BC,
conventional dating), the disciple of Socrates, had encountered the prophet
Jeremiah in Egypt. Thus Saint Ambrose (Ep.
34) suggested that Plato was educated in Hebraïc letters in Egypt by Jeremiah.
And along similar lines we read of a Jewish tradition, in Galus Unechama (http://parsha.blogspot.com.au/2009/08/yirmeyahu-and-plato-but-not-in-egypt.html):
When Jeremiah returned to Jerusalem from the Babylonian
exile and saw the ruins of the Holy Temple, he fell on the wood and stones,
weeping bitterly. At that moment, the renowned philosopher Plato passed by and
saw this.
He stopped and inquired, "Who is that crying over
there?"
"A Jewish sage," they replied.
So he approached Jeremiah and asked, "They say you
are a sage. Why, then, are you crying over wood and stones?"
Jeremiah answered, "They say of you that you are a
great philosopher. Do you have any philosophical questions that need answering?
"I do," admitted Plato, "but I don't think
there is anyone who can answer them for me."
"Ask," said Jeremiah, "and I will answer
them for you."
Plato proceeded to pose the questions that even he had no
answers for, and Jeremiah answered them all without hesitation. Asked the
astonished Plato, "Where did you learn such great wisdom?"
"From these wood and stones," the prophet
replied.
One difference in this English story is that Plato also asked
what the purpose was for crying about the past, and Yirmeyahu [Jeremiah] replies
that this is a very deep matter which Plato will not succeed in understanding,
for only a Jew is able to understand the depth of the matter of crying about
the past. ….
Though,
from a comparison of the above conventional dates, it would have been quite impossible
for Plato to have met, and been taught by, the prophet Jeremiah, I suspect that
the story actually has some truth. That Plato really was a younger contemporary
of Jeremiah, who, interestingly, was
in Egypt with the younger Baruch, his scribe – Baruch, in turn, thought by some
to have been the famous ‘eastern’ prophet Zoroaster himself (possibly, then, another
of those “Axial” connections). Thus: “The Arabic-Christian
legends identify [the biblical] Baruch with the eastern sage, Zoroaster, and
give much information concerning him”. (http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/2562-baruch)
Anyway, such legends open up some intriguing
possibilities for the identification of Plato, too, as an Israelite sage. And
that, in turn, would relieve the following sorts of tensions with which the likes
of Clement of Alexandria and Tertullian had had to grapple regarding Plato:
“According to Clement [of
Alexandria], Plato plagiarized revelation from the Hebrews; this gave the
Athenian’s highest ideas a flavor of divine authority in the estimation of
Clement”. (http://www.gospeltruth.net/gkphilo.htm).
Tertullian: “… free Jerusalem
from Athens and the church of Christ from the Academy
of Plato”. (De
praescriptione, vii)
To be able to confirm Socrates and Plato (and perhaps Aristotle as well)
as originally biblical characters, would also serve to relieve tensions
relating to the supposed pagan Greek (with all of its corruptions, e.g.
pederasty) foundations of much of Christian philosophy (Thomism).
The Evolution of
‘Socrates’
Though both the prototypal Socrates and
Mohammed are (according to my view) grounded historically in the
above-mentioned “Axial Age”, in which era the conventional Socrates - but not
Mohammed - is considered to have existed, the two underwent a
literary-historical evolution thereby picking up aspects of other characters
and eras not truly belonging to them. Striking Christian aspects, for instance,
such as Mohammed’s supposed ascension from Jerusalem into the seventh heaven.
Frequent claims that the Prophet Mohammed copied from Judaïsm and Christianity
- such as e.g. the Christian Apocryphal source “The Infancy Gospel” and Gnostic
Christians about the Crucifixion of Jesus Christ - would need to be modified
substantially, according to my reconstructions, so as not to include the “Axial
Age” Mohammed as a copier (since he was originally a prophet of Israel anyway).
No, these borrowings from Christianity had occurred instead, I say, during the
long evolution of the system known today as Islam.
For likenesses between Jesus Christ and
Socrates, see my next section below.
Socrates and Jeremiah were also alike in many
ways. Both, called to special work by oracular or divine power, reacted with
great humility and self-distrust. And, whenever Socrates or
Jeremiah encountered any who would smugly claim to have been well instructed,
and who would boast of their own sufficiency, they never failed to chastise the
vanity of such persons.
Again, the Book of Jeremiah can at times employ
a method of teaching known as ‘Socratic’:
“Then came the word of the Lord unto
Jeremiah, saying, Behold, I am the Lord, the God of all flesh: is there
anything too hard for me?” - Jeremiah 32:26, 27. THIS method of questioning the
person to be instructed is known to teachers as the Socratic method. Socrates
was wont, not so much to state a fact, as to ask a question and draw out
thoughts from those whom he taught.
Similarly in the case of Zechariah, as we
read in another place, “God
used what we today call the Socratic method to teach Zechariah [my Jeremiah alter ego] and the readers of this book”
(http://www.muslimhope.com/BibleAnswers/zech.htm)
And
perhaps to none of the Old Testament prophets more than Jeremiah would apply
the description ‘gadfly’, for which Socrates the truth-loving philosopher is so
famous (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_gadfly):
The Book of Jeremiah uses a similar analogy as a political metaphor.
"Egypt is a very fair heifer; the gad-fly cometh, it cometh from the
north." (46:20, Darby Bible)
Could this last be the actual
prompt for the ‘Socratic’ concept?
Socrates and Jeremiah were
very humane individuals - Jeremiah’s constant concern for the widow and orphan
- men of profound righteousness, always trying to do all that was good for the
people.
Both Socrates and Jeremiah
were hated for having challenged the gods of the society; Jeremiah, of course,
being a loyal Yahwist.
Socrates, like Jeremiah, had
followers or disciples who also were inspired by him and were willing to go
into exile and defy the government for him.
As for the origin of the
Greek name ‘Socrates’, or ‘Sokrates’, well I should consider that it must have arisen
- according to my revised context - from the Hebrew name ‘Zechariah’ of which
‘Sokrates’ is a most adequate transliteration (allowing, of course, for a
typically Greek ending to have replaced the typically Hebrew one).
But can the prophet
Jeremiah also have been a martyr, as the philosopher Socrates was so famously said
to have been?
The Christian legend (pseudo-Epiphanius,
"De Vitis Prophetarum"; Basset, "Apocryphen Ethiopiens," i.
25-29), according to which Jeremiah was stoned by his compatriots in Egypt
because he reproached them with their evil deeds, became known to the Jews
through Ibn Yaḥya ("Shalshelet ha-Ḳabbalah," ed. princeps, p. 99b);
this account of Jeremiah's martyrdom, however, may have come originally from
Jewish sources.
Jeremiah’s life was so full of suffering and persecution,
however, that we shall discover in The
Jerome Biblical Commentary (19:98), for
instance, the designation of the substantial block of Jeremiah 36:1-45:5, as the “Martyrdom of
Jeremiah”. And, whilst neither Jeremiah nor
his alter ego (as I think) Zechariah
is recorded in Scripture as having suffered a life-ending martyrdom, there was
an earlier prophet Zechariah who assuredly did. And his end was brought about
most interestingly, in light of the above, by stoning (2 Chronicles 24:20-21 (NRSV):
Then the spirit of God took
possession of Zechariah son of the priest Jehoiada; he stood above the people and said to
them, ‘Thus says God: Why do you transgress the commandments of the Lord, so
that you cannot prosper? Because you have forsaken the Lord, he has also
forsaken you.’ But they conspired against him, and by command of the king they
stoned him to death in the court of the house of the Lord.
Perhaps the death by martyrdom in the
Old Testament (Catholic) Scriptures that most resembles that of Socrates, is
that of the venerable and aged Eleazer in 2 Maccabees 6:18-31.
More striking, too, are the oft-noted
comparisons between the trial and death of Jesus Christ and that of the
philosopher Socrates, a supposed “pagan foreshadowing of Jesus” (see next section). A major
reason for the similarities between Jesus and Socrates I would attribute,
though, to the fact that the prophet Jeremiah (Zechariah), my original
‘Socrates’, was perhaps the most Christ-like of all the Old Testament prophets.
Thus Morgan Elizabeth: “A majority of the
heroes of the Old Testament resemble Christ in some manner, prophets, priests,
and kings. Yet perhaps the most Christ-like of them all is the prophet Jeremiah”.
(http://elizabethayers.wordpress.com/2013/05/07/jeremiah-jesus/).
A browsing of the Internet will quickly reveal there to
be an abundance of articles and comments on this very subject - one easy to grasp one being Patty Bowling’s highly
useful “Comparison
Between Jeremiah And Christ” (http://www.summit1.org/gun08/gun04.htm)
The original Socrates,
according to what I am arguing here, well-predated Jesus Christ, but was very
much a type of Him. Hence the similarities. Moreover, due to the literary
evolution of ‘Socrates’ down through the centuries, the original or prototype
came to be invested with - just like Mohammed - Jesus-like aspects. Of
necessity some of these, however, cannot justifiably be attributed to the original.
Socrates and Jesus Christ
Much has been written over many centuries
concerning comparisons between Socrates and Jesus Christ, beginning with Justin
Martyr. Thus we read in Peter Leithart’s intriguing article, “The Hemlock and
the Cross”
Already in the second
century, Justin the Martyr was struck by the similarities between Socrates and
Jesus. When the world was full of demonic myths, “Socrates endeavored, by true
reason and examination, to bring these things to light,” only to be condemned
“as an atheist and a profane person.” To be sure, Justin notes many differences
between Jesus and Socrates. While Socrates died for exhorting men to become
acquainted with the unknown God, “no one trusted in Socrates so as to die for
this doctrine.” While Socrates taught philosophers and scholars, Christ’s
philosophy is known among “artisans and people entirely uneducated.” Despite
these differences, Justin argued that the same Logos that was at work in
Socrates took flesh in Jesus, who also condemned the demons and met with the
same fate. This meant for Justin that Socrates was a pagan foreshadowing of Jesus.
Long before the Logos became incarnate, it was clear from the experience of
Socrates and others that the demons would not put up with anyone devoted to “a
reasonable and earnest life.” ….
Was Socrates a Prophet?
Similarities between Socrates and Jesus Christ.
It is common knowledge that
Socrates has long been regarded as one of the wisest men that has ever lived.
Many have been inspired by his ideas and techniques throughout time trying to
depict his beliefs. While listening and participating in class discussions and
reading Plato’s “Euthyphro”, “The Apology”, and “Crito,” I could not help but
notice the similarities between Socrates, and Jesus Christ. Jesus Christ is the
founder of Christianity and considered the ultimate prophet: the Son of God.
Although bringing religion into the same topic as Socrates can be a little
controversial, I believe that if Jesus was considered a prophet, one could make
the case that Socrates was a prophet as well.
After researching some of the
stories of Jesus, and using the information from class I have found some
similarities between Socrates and Jesus. To start off, Both Socrates and Jesus
were told they were significant by some sort of divine power. For Socrates, an
oracle had told him that he was the wisest of men and he took it upon himself
to test this theory. For Jesus it had been prophesied before his time as
well as during his life by God. He believed himself to be the Son of God, was
visited by the Holy Spirit, Angels, and Satan. These divine forces passed on
information to them that required a mission on their part to do what is right
and to establish some sort of societal change. Socrates needed to examine life,
he had to philosophize. He had to figure out what made life worth living and
what aspects of life meant in of itself. Why were they significant? Because
through obtaining the knowledge of the examined life everyone would be able to
understand what was wrong with the established order and themselves. For this
reason Socrates could not stop these teachings. In the story of Jesus, he was
sent to earth to save us all from original sin. God sent him to earth so that
he could die for us and reconcile our sins. They both were unique and were
perceived as a threat to the society that surrounded them.
Another similarity between
Jesus and Socrates is that they were both considered to be “Corrupting
society”. This was the very reason that Socrates and Jesus were brought to
trial. In a democratic society, Socrates tried to make people think about and
question what the purpose of society’s set of morals and virtues. Jesus tried
to make people question their religious beliefs and introduced concepts of
faith, and a different kind of worship for God. For the established order at
the time they were causing too much attention. Both Socrates and Jesus either
introduced new gods or challenged the gods of the society. Jesus claimed that
there was one God, the almighty, Creator of heaven and earth. Jesus spoke with
authority and performed miracles for everyone to see and hear. Many people
lived in the limited human mindset and tried to determine the word of God, but
Jesus claimed to be the word of God, the “King of the Jews” which made him a
threat and he was viewed as attempting to overthrow a monarchy. Socrates was
charged with some sort of heresy by not believing in the cities’ gods and was accused
of being an atheist despite having a clear belief in divine power. Like Jesus,
Socrates is seen as one who has more knowledge than anyone else. Because like
Jesus, he was extraordinary with the power of rhetoric and was able to make
people question the gods that they believed in. Socrates claimed that gods such
as Zeus were not in control of everything that took place in this world and
that there was no “will of the gods.” This was regarded as an attack on the
Athenian government, for if you did not believe in the cities’ gods, you were
not considered a citizen.
Socrates and Jesus were very
humane individuals. They believed in the righteous and tried to do all that was
good for the people. They both tried to inspire people to think for themselves
and to use their knowledge for the good of others. This trait is what made both
Jesus and Socrates wise teachers of their day. Jesus had a group of disciples
that believed in him and were willing to sacrifice material possessions to
follow his teachings. Socrates also had followers who also were inspired by him
and were willing to go into exile and defy the government for him. They used
simplistic ideas such as analogies, metaphors and parables to convey their
teachings to their followers and their logic. An example can be seen in the
discussion between Socrates and Euthyphro regarding piety through the story of
Zeus and Cronus or comparing the concept of knowledge to tending for horses and
cattle. Jesus also did this by using quotes such as “I am the vine, you are the
branches”. He essentially established himself as the root and called his
followers “branches” so that they could spread his word and establish
Christianity throughout the world.
In addition to both of them
having disciples or followers, Socrates and Jesus each had one person who
questioned their beliefs and actions and who betrayed them in some way. Judas
Iscariot betrayed Jesus for 30 pieces of silver and all of his disciples
questioned him on the night of the last supper (the night before he died) and
were unable to understand why Jesus would not try to run away or escape his
eventual execution. In Plato’s Crito, Crito visits Socrates on what can be
considered the night before his death and questions why Socrates is content
with remaining in the prison and offers him an escape route which would allow
Socrates and his followers to leave the country and live in exile.
Socrates and Jesus Christ were
both given a trial. In these trials they were given the chance to speak and to
convince the “jury” that their teachings were truths and why they were right
and why they couldn’t stop doing what they believed. In Plato’s The Apology,
Socrates confronts Meletus (the judge of the established order) and has a
debate with him about how he is benefiting society. Socrates proves that
Meletus is contradicting himself and that neither one of them truly knows who
is corrupting the youth and society, but his fate is determined by the entire
council that sentences him to death. Jesus is brought before Pontius Pilate along
with many of the citizens of Judea. He is also given the opportunity to speak
and to defend himself. Like Socrates he tries to convince the established order
that he is not corrupting the people, but enlightening them bringing them truth
and faith. Although Pontius Pilate sees no reason for him to be executed,
Pilate allows the people and the rest of the government to crucify Jesus. Both
Socrates and Jesus were “legally” executed.
The dictionary defines a
Prophet as a person who speaks for God or a Deity, or by divine inspiration. I
believe that like Jesus, Socrates could be considered a prophet. ….
Jesus
Christ and Socrates
The first
point that I wish to be noted is that there is a great deal of doubt about the
historical Socrates, which is surprising given his cardinal value in human
thinking. But such doubt is, as we saw in our PHILOSOPHY section, a common
characteristic in regard to the so-called history of ancient philosophers. The
historical problem of Socrates has become classical, with various books having
been written about it. Thus we read in The Encyclopedia of Philosophy [Kidd, I., "Socrates", The Encyclopedia of
Philosophy, Vol. 7 (Collier Macmillan, London, 1972), p. 480]:
Socrates
… of Athens … was perhaps the most original, influential, and controversial
figure in the history of Greek thought. Very little is known about his life.
… There is no agreement … on whether anything certain can be said of the
historical life of Socrates. This controversy is known as the Socratic problem,
which arises because Socrates wrote nothing on philosophy…. Not only a
historical problem is involved in the nature of the evidence, but also a
philosophical puzzle in the character of Socrates embedded in Plato's
dialogues.
Such
comparisons are common because Socrates, like Jesus, is regarded as 'a
watershed in human thinking'. Philosophy before Socrates was 'pre-Socratic':
he was the 'hinge', or the orientation point, for most subsequent
thinkers and the direct inspiration for Plato. Professor A. Taylor has written
[Socrates, Peter
Davies, London, p. 9]:
In the
case of both the historical figures whose influence on the life of humanity has
been the profoundest, Jesus and Socrates, indisputable facts are exceptionally
rare; perhaps there is only one statement about each which a man ought not deny
without forfeiting his claim to be counted among the sane. It is certain that
Jesus 'suffered under Pontius Pilate', and no less certain that Socrates
was put to death at Athens on a charge of impiety in the 'year of Laches'
(399 BC) [sic].
With
regard to the last, we are happy to be numbered amongst the ‘insane’.
And,
according to T. Glover [The Ancient World, Penguin Books, 1965, p. 310]:
Socrates was famous for making men define their
thoughts and be clear in their minds as to what they are saying. Similarly, it
is to be noted how apt Jesus is to use a question to make men think. Someone
has counted some hundred and fifty questions in St. Luke. As in Socrates … so
in Jesus, the attentive listener can catch something of humour amongst his most
serious utterances; not wit of course, but the subtler, more universal, happier
thing, that speaks of peace of mind whatever the contrasts and contradictions
it sees….
Their
influence is all the more remarkable when one considers that neither Jesus nor
Socrates wrote anything down. But their disciples did. "In Xenophon and
Plato, some have said, Socrates had his St. Mark and St. John" [Burn, op. cit., p. 310].
Glover
has linked Jesus and Socrates when writing about the genuine teacher [op. cit., pp. 305-306]:
He realizes that, to achieve what he wants, the
teacher must stamp something indelible on the memory – his words or his
personality, or both; and it should be noted that, though [Jesus] wrote nothing
down … no man's words are so well remembered. Nor so fertile; for he, like
Socrates, used the analogy of sowing, and aimed at planting something in the
mind that would root itself there and grow, and he trusted to its development.
What was
Socrates' practical method? It took the form of 'dialectic' or conversation.
He would get into conversation with someone and try to elicit from him his
ideas on some subject – e.g. piety and impiety, the just and the unjust. The
wealthy, young Meno plunged straight in and asked him: 'Tell me, Socrates,
is virtue teachable or not?' [Plato, Meno, 70]. That is exactly the method
that Jesus employed with a very 'Meno-like' rich and young man who came
to him and asked: 'Teacher, what good must I do to have eternal life?' (Matthew
19:16). Jesus began his reply with the dialectical question: 'Why do you ask me
about what is good?' (var. 'Why do you call me good?'), leading into a
lengthy dialogue in which Jesus steers the young man towards a higher virtue
and knowledge.
Jesus'
attacks were aimed chiefly at the hypocrisy of the money-loving Scribes and
Pharisees. Similarly, Socrates had in his sights the money-loving Sophists (cf.
Plato's Protagoras), who denied the
absolute and objective character of Truth. Both Jesus and Socrates were able to
illustrate a point about virtue by writing on the ground. (Cf. John 8:6, 8;
Meno, 82). We are not told what Jesus actually wrote, or drew. But Socrates, in
classical Greek fashion, drew geometrical diagrams to illustrate his point. ….
Jesus
said: “many are called but few are chosen” (Matthew 22:14). Socrates said to
Simmias: “many bear the emblems, but the devotees are few” (Plato's Phaedo, 68C-69D).
Socrates
was supposedly possessed of particular robustness of body and powers of
endurance. His habits were spartan like those of Jesus. As a man, Socrates wore
the same garment winter and summer, and continued his habit of going barefoot.
He was very abstemious regarding his food and drink, and was remarkable for
living the life that he preached. From his youth upwards he was the recipient
of messages from his mysterious "voice" or sign. Jesus, too,
was the recipient of "a voice … from heaven" (Mark 1:10).
Plato in
his Symposium tells us of Socrates' long fits of abstraction, one
lasting the whole of a day and a night. Professor Taylor has interpreted these abstractions as ecstasies
or rapts [op. cit., pp. 46-47].
Jesus
would spend whole nights in prayer (e.g. Luke 6:12).
"…
within [Socrates]", Glover exclaimed [op. cit., p. 149], "there was a god indeed!"
Jesus insisted that he was divine: 'I tell you most solemnly, before Abraham
ever was, I AM' (John 8:58).
At the time of writing this
article, I had been wrestling with the possibility that Socrates was primarily
based on Jesus Christ, so striking where the likenesses. (Though to date
Socrates so late was really prohibitive). I even thought that the names of the
two could be reconciled (though, happily, I did also include the name ‘Zechariah’
at the time). Thus:
As to the
origins of the name, ‘Socrates’, it may derive from a Hebrew name like
Zechariah. But it is also very similar - when largely ignoring the changeable
vowels - to the name of Jesus Christ (especially when Socrates is given his
full name of Isocrates). Thus:
[I]
SO K Ra T e S
Ie Sou
ChRisTu S
However, I later went on to
correct this:
But we
have now concluded that Socrates was largely based on the prophet Jeremiah, who
was indeed a forerunner of Jesus Christ himself. ….
Despite
the conventional dating, I believe that the similarities between Jeremiah and
Socrates are so striking that I must conclude – based on the pattern that began
to emerge at the very beginning of this article, in the PHILOSOPHY section –
that Socrates is just the Greco-Roman version of an ancient prophet of Israel.
….
Returning to the main theme (same
article):
And 'their'
trials and deaths have often also been compared. There is something anomalous
about the callous slaying of Socrates at that particular era of Greek 'history',
when conditions would not really seem to have favoured it. Glover calls it "almost
unintelligible" [op. cit., p. 149]. G. Thomas has written an
entire book on The Trial [The Trial, Bantam Press, NY, 1987, p. 175], in which he seems
to be at a loss to account for many things, not least of which was why poor old
Socrates was martyred, and why they waited until he was 70 years of age to do
this.
The
supposed trial and death of Socrates may be something of a composite event; a
mix of the ‘martyrdom’ of Jeremiah; death of the aged Maccabean hero, Eleazer
(2 Maccabees 6:18-31); and the Passion and Death of Jesus Christ.
Eleazer,
for instance, has the Socrates-like aspects of being,
(i)
during
Greek rule (as the Macedonian Greeks were ruling Palestine in Maccabean times);
(ii)
"advanced in age";
(iii)
a witness
to "the young". Socrates was actually accused of 'corrupting
youth'.
(iv)
Socrates'
death by swallowing (viz. the 'hemlock') may be an echo of Eleazer's
refusal to swallow the pig's flesh.
(v)
Eleazer's
acquaintances of long-standing begged him to feign compliance by substituting
meat of his own, to save himself. Likewise, Crito begged Socrates to escape,
even to using bribery if necessary (Apologia, Scene II); but (vi) Eleazer
refused to do this out of honour, and instead faced death with courage; as did
Socrates.
Folklore
has sensed the similarity between the demise of Socrates and the end of the
earthly life of Jesus, and thus has Socrates warning Pontius Pilate's wife,
Claudia Procula, to save Jesus: "… in her premonitory dream Socrates
appeared to Pilate's wife and urged her to intercede on behalf of Jesus"
[ibid.]. (Cf. Matthew 27:19).
According
to H. Tredennick [trans. Plato. The Last Days of
Socrates (Penguin Books, 1969), p. 43]: "The first part of
the charge [against Socrates] – heresy – was no doubt primarily intended to
inflame prejudice. … The prosecution relied mainly on a powerful conjunction of
religious and political hostility". The same combination that Jesus
had to face. Anytus, the moving spirit in the prosecution of Socrates, has a
name a bit similar to Annas, father-in-law of the high-priest Caiaphas at the
time of Jesus' death.
Jesus'
disciple John "was known to the high priest" (John 18:13, 15). Meno
90b. Socrates: "Please help us, Anytus – Meno, who is a friend of your
family, and myself – to find out …". St. John was known to Caiaphas".
Socrates,
in good Greek fashion will – as we just saw – drink hemlock. He does not die on
a cross. Still, even that terrible death is depicted in Plato's The Republic,
Intro., # 362]: "The just man … will
be scourged, tortured, and imprisoned … and after enduring every humiliation he
will be crucified".
I submit
that this statement would not likely have been written before the Gospels.
Mixed
reflections of St. John's account of the Resurrection three days after Christ's
death, with the woman Mary Magdalene at the tomb, and her vision of two angels
in white (John 20:1-17), may have been picked up in Plato's Crito [43A], where the condemned
Socrates gives an account of a dream he had just had:
Crito: Why,
what was the dream about?
Socrates:
I thought I saw a gloriously beautiful woman dressed in white robes, who
came up to me and addressed me in these words: 'Socrates, To the pleasant land
of Phthia on the third day thou shalt come'.
…
Conclusion
I hope here that I have managed to answer the
intriguing question about the true identification of the enigmatic Socrates
such as posed in the following piece named ‘The Socratic Problem’
Socrates
is one of the most famous and influential figures in the western intellectual
tradition; but who was he? His disciples included the most influential
philosophers of his time, who are credited by historians of philosophy with
founding several schools; but what did he teach them? These questions
constitute the “Socratic Problem,” the attempt to discover the historical
individual behind the ancient accounts of Socrates and his philosophy. Socrates
wrote nothing; for our information we depend on four major sources. …. The
Socratic Problem stems in part from questions about the reliability of these
sources. ….
To learn about
the true ‘Socrates’ - the supposed cardinal philosopher of the classical Greeks
- assuredly a prophet, I suggest that one turn one’s gaze to the Old Testament
of the Hebrews, the source of Divine wisdom and philosophy.
