The Apostle Paul and Epicurus [Excerpt]

In the first five Christian centuries, it was neo-Platonic philosophy that had the most impact on the development of a systematic Christian theology. Undoubtedly the most significant element of this synthesis was the acceptance of Greek humanism by thinkers such as first Justin Martyr and then later Thomas Aquinas and Erasmus.

Outside of the logos doctrine of John, scholarly work on the influences of Greek philosophy on the New Testament writers is not widely known or appreciated. David L. Balch’s book Let Wives Be Submissive contains the proposal that Aristotle’s ethics is behind the views expressed in 1 Pet. 2:11-3:12. The most interesting work, however, is Norman W. DeWitt’s book St. Paul and Epicurus. It is DeWitt’s thesis that the philosophy of Epicurus, although never explicitly mentioned, is Paul’s main target in his epistles.

Paul’s home city Tarsus was ruled by Epicureans in the second century B.C.E.; and Epicureanism was the court philosophy of the notorious Syrian king, Antiochus Epiphanes (174-167 B.C.E.). Their main tools were textbooks and manuals, many of which a well-educated Hellenistic Jew like Paul would have undoubtedly read. Like Paul, Epicurus composed many epistles to his friends, admonishing them and making the correct doctrine clear.

Scholars have known for a long time that Paul’s Greek vocabulary differs substantially from that of the Gospel writers. The following words are used rarely, if not at all, by the Gospel writers, but were standard words in Epicurean texts:

Makarismos (cf. Gal. 4:15): technical term in Epicurean philosophy for unalloyed joy, the ultimate end of a life of right reason and right action. Recall that Aristotle also used it in Book 10 of his Nicomachean Ethics to describe the highest state of contemplation.

Calculus (cf. Philip. 4:8): usually rendered as “think” or “meditate.” It was used widely by the Epicureans. It does not occur in the New Testament except in Paul. “Meditate on these things” is repeated in Epicurean texts (e.g., p. 80).

Autarkes (cf. Philip. 4:11-12): used by many of the Hellenistic philosophies but used only by Paul in the New Testament. Paul’s meaning here is the same as Epicurus’ conception of autarkes–being content with little or with what the circumstances provide.

Aidios (cf. Rom. 1:20): “eternal” as in God’s eternal power. It is used by Epicurus to describe his atoms. The only New Testament writer besides Paul to use it is the author of Jude. It almost seems as if Paul deliberately used this Epicurean technical term to “twit” the Epicureans in their mistaken belief in the incorruptibility of nature.

Nouthetesis (cf. 1 Thes. 5:12): “admonition” in this sense is a technical term straight from Epicurean manuals. Its sense is “correction without blame or reprimand.”

Although there are no direct references to Epicurus, DeWitt has gathered an impressive list of allusions that are in his opinion unmistakable in their indication. Here are just some of them:

“Peace and Safety” (1 Thes. 5:3). These were the watchwords of all Epicureans and DeWitt is convinced that Paul’s reference is specific: that he is predicting the destruction of the many Epicureans he encountered in his travels in Asia Minor.

“Their god is the belly” (Philip. 3:19). DeWitt is convinced the reference is specific to the Epicureans and not just general paganism. Anti-Epicurean phrases like these were due to the common mistake of taking the following quote by the Epicurean Metrodorus out of context: “The pleasure of the stomach is the beginning and the root of all good, and in this the things of wisdom and the refinements of life have their standard of reference.” Metrodorus was starting a genetic approach to ethics and was talking specifically about infants and their first sensations in life.

“Elements of the World” (Gal. 4:3). The Greek here is ta stoicheia. DeWitt prefers the King James translation because it correctly describes ta stoichea in physical terms. Again, most of Paul’s converts in Asia Minor would have been former Epicureans and they would have been “enslaved” by the theory of the atoms.

Although Paul and Epicurus come to decidedly different conclusions about the solution to the human predicament, they do, according to DeWitt, share some common ground. Both Paul and Epicurus use the Greek word psyche as a mortal, fully corruptible soul. In contradistinction to the Gospel writers, who use psyche equivocally for humans, Jesus, and God, Paul makes it clear that all humans from Adam onward had only the mortal psyche until the coming of Christ, who is then able to miraculously bestow the immortality spirit (pneuma) upon us (cf. 1 Cor. 2:14; 15:45).

DeWitt’s contention that Paul did not believe in eternal torment for unbelievers is perhaps the most controversial claim in his book. DeWitt takes Paul literally when he says that “the wages of sin is death” and takes Paul’s silence about Hell as proof that he meant simple and physical death in this verse. DeWitt also uses 1 Cor. 15:26: “The last enemy to be destroyed is death.” It goes without saying that the Epicureans rejected the idea of Hell.

DeWitt goes to great lengths in comparing Paul’s famous passages on faith, hope, and charity in 1 Cor. 13 with similar doctrines in the manuals of Epicurus. DeWitt thinks that it is significant that the Gospel writers do not use the noun “hope” at all. It is, however, a common word in the ethics of Epicurus, along with faith and love.

Ultimately the philosophies of these two figures diverge radically. Although Paul uses Epicurean terminology concerning peace of mind and related concepts, the two ways to blessedness are quite different. Epicurus thought that happiness in this life could be achieved by any person using right reason. Paul of course believed that humans could not possibly save themselves and that faith in Jesus Christ was the only medium for human salvation.

—Prof. Nick Gier, The Apostle Paul and Epicurus, (https://www.webpages.uidaho.edu/ngier/103/paulepicure.htm).