Socrates and Jesus

[Phantasmal]

Jesus and Socrates invite comparison as two of the greatest teachers in history and as seminal figures in the story of freedom.

Both were true philosophers, lovers of wisdom who saw their teaching as a vocation—not a career—and who lived and died as witnesses to the truth. Both brought messages of individual liberation and salvation to societies rooted in communal concepts of freedom.

As lovers of wisdom, Both Socrates and Jesus were concerned with the individual’s soul:

1. Socrates turned from the study of science to the soul.
2. Jesus had no interest in a political kingdom of God; his kingdom of God was in the individual’s soul.

The teachings of both Socrates and Jesus aimed at leading the individual to ethical decisions.

Both aroused bitter enmity among their peers—Sophists and Pharisees. Both were tried and sentenced to death by a jury of their peers on charges of blasphemy and treason.

Socrates was charged:
1. With blasphemy or atheism: refusing to believe in the gods of Athens, but in new, different divinities.
2. With treason: corrupting the young.

Jesus was convicted:
1. Of blasphemy before the Jewish Sanhedrin.
2. Of treason, for claiming to be king of the Jews, before the Roman governor Pontius Pilate.

In each case, the charges were completely false. Both Socrates and Jesus were the victims of envy and slander. The most effective form of slander, “the Big Lie,” was used against both teachers.

The real reason that both teachers were convicted and executed was that both Socrates and Jesus struck at the heart of the community.

Neither Socrates or Jesus published. Why did Socrates and Jesus not publish?
1. Publication is an act of finality. It suggests that you know the truth.
2. The true philosopher is always searching for the truth, and in this search, there is no earthly finality.

Both proved even more powerful in death than in life. Since neither Socrates nor Jesus published anything their posthumous impact could be achieved only by others institutionalizing them. Plato institutionalized Socrates, while Saint Paul institutionalized Jesus:

1. Plato reduced the message of Socrates to writing and, along with Aristotle, laid the foundation of the modern university.
2. St. Paul interpreted the message of Jesus in a form comprehensible. to Greeks and Romans and laid the foundation for the Christian church.




Source credit: Professor Rufus Fears, University of Oklahoma

That’s a very interesting comparison. Thanks

[Phantasmal]

There is no serious scholar of religious studies who would agree that Jesus of Nazareth never existed. The balance of scholarly evidence is there was a Jewish philosopher by that name.
https://www.justplainpolitics.com/sh...45#post3207445

The authors of the Gospels were highly educated Greek speakers, suggesting they were Hellenic Jews or Hellenistic gentiles - rendering us unsurprised that elements of Greek thought crops up in the NT. The premise of the immortal soul goes back to Socrates and Plato.

He may have been an itinerant preacher, but I believe his status and influence were elevated by Paul and then Constantine.

[Iolo/Penderyn]

I think the key differences were that Jesus stood for working people and his first followers shared all things in common whereas Socrates was heavily in with the oligarchs and disliked democracy, which is why the Athenians saw him off after they'd suffered the Thirty Tyrants..

[Cypress]

I think the key differences were that Jesus stood for working people and his first followers shared all things in common whereas Socrates was heavily in with the oligarchs and disliked democracy, which is why the Athenians saw him off after they'd suffered the Thirty Tyrants..

thanks for that insight

I do not think it is quite accurate to say Socrates was openly hostile to Athenian democracy. Though that is what his enemies who wanted him executed would have the citizens of Athens believe.

In Plato's Republic, Socrates identifies democracy as one of the three forms of "good" government, along with aristocracy, and monarchy. The bad forms of governments were tyranny, oligarchy, anarchy. According to Plato, Socrates did have many criticisms of Athenian democracy, that is was inferior to a well run aristocracy --- but at the end of the day he and Plato knew that the freedom of speech and freedom of conscience they enjoyed would probably only be found in a democracy.

[Iolo/Penderyn]

Big difference. Jesus was a Jew in Roman control. Socrates was a free man.

Socrates was not religious.

Socrates believed he had a 'daemon' that told him truths. I never know what 'religious' means, other than that it tends to concern the god concept in one form or another, and it's pretty late in human history that that assumption gets dubious.

[Phantasmal]

thanks for that insight

I do not think it is quite accurate to say Socrates was openly hostile to Athenian democracy. Though that is what his enemies who wanted him executed would have the citizens of Athens believe.

In Plato's Republic, Socrates identifies democracy as one of the three forms of "good" government, along with aristocracy, and monarchy. The bad forms of governments were tyranny, oligarchy, anarchy. According to Plato, Socrates did have many criticisms of Athenian democracy, that is was inferior to a well run aristocracy --- but at the end of the day he and Plato knew that the freedom of speech and freedom of conscience they enjoyed would probably only be found in a democracy.

It’s interesting that he would consider monarchy a good forum of government being there are both great and evil monarchs.

[Cypress]

He may have been an itinerant preacher, but I believe his status and influence were elevated by Paul and then Constantine.

too right you are.

Definitely. Jesus was probably a peasant from the provincial backwater of Galilee, and his ministry probably only had a couple dozen followers. In that sense, Paul took his message and, as you rightly state, he and Constantine really were the ones responsible for the global reach of Christianity.

[Cypress]

It’s interesting that he would consider monarchy a good forum of government being there are both great and evil monarchs.

True.

In the Republic, the idea was to have incorruptible philosopher-kings; people of unimpeachable virtue rule as monarchs

[Iolo/Penderyn]

thanks for that insight

I do not think it is quite accurate to say Socrates was openly hostile to Athenian democracy. Though that is what his enemies who wanted him executed would have the citizens of Athens believe.

In Plato's Republic, Socrates identifies democracy as one of the three forms of "good" government, along with aristocracy, and monarchy. The bad forms of governments were tyranny, oligarchy, anarchy. According to Plato, Socrates did have many criticisms of Athenian democracy, that is was inferior to a well run aristocracy --- but at the end of the day he and Plato knew that the freedom of speech and freedom of conscience they enjoyed would probably only be found in a democracy.

It is a clear fact though that Socrates supporters and students tended to come very largely from the Athenian aristocracy, though there were the odd exceptions. After what had been happening in Athens, that was not something that made for easy survival any more than being unenthusiastic for Roman rule did in Palestine, and clearly Socrates deliberate refusal to survive by proposing a lighter sentence and not going into exile deserve comparison with the events following on from the Entry into Jerusalem.

Along with the Buddha, I should say, these two seem to me to be the historical persons I find most interesting and most worth digging under the later detritus to learn more about.

[Phantasmal]

too right you are.

Definitely. Jesus was probably a peasant from the provincial backwater of Galilee, and his ministry probably only had a couple dozen followers. In that sense, Paul took his message and, as you rightly state, he and Constantine really were the ones responsible for the global reach of Christianity.

I have not studied the philosophers, I’ve read a few books on them, but my reading mostly centered on Judaism and early Christianity. My current interests centers around the present, history in the making.

[Matt Dillon]

I'm unsure what you're driving at. I never denied the existence of Christianity in Ethiopia.

You claimed Jesus never existed.

If Jesus never existed, how was there Christianity in Ethiopia?

[Cypress]

I have not studied the philosophers, I’ve read a few books on them, but my reading mostly centered on Judaism and early Christianity. My current interests centers around the present, history in the making.

I always appreciate you and your boundless curiosity

[Cypress]

It is a clear fact though that Socrates supporters and students tended to come very largely from the Athenian aristocracy, though there were the odd exceptions. After what had been happening in Athens, that was not something that made for easy survival any more than being unenthusiastic for Roman rule did in Palestine, and clearly Socrates deliberate refusal to survive by proposing a lighter sentence and not going into exile deserve comparison with the events following on from the Entry into Jerusalem.

Along with the Buddha, I should say, these two seem to me to be the historical persons I find most interesting and most worth digging under the later detritus to learn more about.

I completely agree that Socrates and Plato were predisposed to a rule by the aristocracy and had their reasons to harbor doubts about the Athenian democracy.

You and I are on the same page in finding Socrates" Jesus, and Siddhartha Guatama to be among the most compelling historical figures of antiquity. Jesus and Siddhartha seemingly have parallels too, as their message was one of individual spiritual liberation, a proto democratic posture, in the face of the elitist and communal practices of Greco Roman world and the Vedic Brahmanistic tradition

[Phantasmal]

You claimed Jesus never existed.

If Jesus never existed, how was there Christianity in Ethiopia?

The Ethiopians also believed in Osiris, Set, Tefnut and Shu, were they real people?

[Matt Dillon]

The Ethiopians also believed in Osiris, Set, Tefnut and Shu, were they real people?

Was that before or after 33 A.D.?

That's a rhetorical question.