Chapter XVIII. That Plato Was Not Altogether Right in His Opinions Concerning Heaven and the Luminaries Therein

PLATO agrees with the Hebrews in the account which he gives of the heaven and its phenomena, according to which it was settled that they have had a beginning, as having been made by the Author of the universe, and that they partake of the corporeal and perishable substance; but he no longer agrees with the Hebrews when he enacts a law that men should worship them and believe them to be gods, speaking thus in the Epinomis:[1]

[PS.-PLATO] ’Whom then, O Megillus and Cleinias, do I ever with reverence speak of as god? Heaven, I suppose, which it is most right for us, like all others, daemons as well as gods, to honour, and to pray especially to it: and that it has also been the author of all other blessings to us all men would agree.’

Then lower down in the same work he adds this: [2]

‘But of the visible gods, who are the greatest and most honourable, and have the keenest sight in all directions, the first we must declare to be the nature of the stars, and all things that we perceive to have been created with them; and next to these and under them the daemons in order, and, as occupying a third and intermediate abode, an aerial race acting as our interpreters, whom we ought to honour much with prayers for the sake of their favourable intervention.’

Having hereby declared that the aforesaid beings are gods, he gives in the Timaeusa physical explanation of their original constitution, in the following description: [3]

[PLATO] ‘(Having arranged that) as fire is to air, so is air to water, and as air to water, so is water to earth, of these He combined and constituted a visible and tangible heaven. And for these reasons and out of these elements, such as I have described, being four in number, the body of the world was formed in harmony by due proportion, and from them gained a friendliness such that after having coalesced in itself it became indissoluble by any other except the author of its combination.’

Then he adds: [4]

‘And in the centre of it He set a soul, which He not only spread throughout, but also wrapped it round the body on the outside, and so formed one single and solitary heaven as a circle revolving in a circle.’

And again lower down he says in addition: [5]

‘In accordance then with reason and this purpose of God for the birth of time, that time might begin, sun, and moon, and five other luminaries, which are surnamed planets, have been created in order to define and preserve the reckonings of time: and, after having made their several bodies, God set them in the orbits traversed by the revolution of “the other.” ‘

Also he adds: [6]

‘And the bodies bound together by animated bonds became living beings, and learned the law appointed for them.’

In the tenth Book also of the Lawshe gives a general explanation concerning every kind of soul, speaking as follows: [7]

‘All things, however, that partake of soul are subject to change, as possessing in themselves the cause of change. And when they have changed they move on in the order and law of their destiny: if they have made only small change in their moral characters, they make small changes of place on the surface of the ground; but if they have fallen away more frequently and culpably, they pass into the abyss.’

So then if ‘all things which partake of soul are liable to change, as possessing the cause of change in themselves,’ and if heaven, and sun, and moon are, according to Plato himself, partakers of soul, then these also must change, ‘as possessing the cause of change in themselves,’ according to his statement. How then does he say on the other hand that they are eternal and therefore gods, although existing in a mortal body, and liable to be dissolved? At least he says again in the Timaeus:[8]

‘When therefore all gods, both those which are visible in their revolutions and those which appear only as far as they choose, had been created, the author of this universe spake to them as follows:

‘Ye gods and sons of gods, the works whereof I am the creator and father, are indissoluble save by My will. Therefore though all that is bound may be dissolved, yet only an evil being would wish to dissolve that which is well composed and in right condition. Wherefore also since ye have come into existence, though ye are not altogether immortal nor indissoluble, nevertheless ye shall not be dissolved nor incur the fate of death, since in My will ye have found a still stronger and more valid bond than those by which ye were bound together at the time of your creation.’

So speaks Plato. With good reason therefore do Moses and the Hebrew oracles forbid to worship these and to regard them as gods; but leading us upward to the God who is King of all, the very creator of sun and moon and stars and the whole heaven and world, who by a divine word combined and fitted all things together, he bids us by his law to believe in Him alone as God, and to ascribe the honour of worship to Him only, saying, ‘Lest, when thou see the sun and moon and all the stars and all the host of heaven, thou be deceived and worship them.’ [9]

This command is interpreted and explained at large by Philo, the man so learned in the affairs of the Hebrews, speaking thus word for word: [10]

[PHILO] ‘Some supposed that sun and moon and the other luminaries are gods of absolute power, to whom they attributed the causes of all things that are made. But Moses thought that the world was both created, and was the greatest of all States, having rulers and subjects, the rulers being all in heaven, such as are planets and fixed stars, and the subjects being the natures beneath the moon, in the air, and near the earth.

‘But the so-called rulers, he thought, were not independent, but deputies of one universal Father, by imitating whose superintendence they succeed in ruling every thing in creation in accordance with justice and law. But they who did not discern Him who sits as charioteer ascribed the causes of all things which are done in the world to those who are yoked under Him, as if they worked independently. But the most sacred Lawgiver changes their ignorance into knowledge, when He speaks thus: ‘’Lest, when thou beholdest the sun and the moon and the stars and all the host of heaven, thou be deceived and worship them.” [11]

‘With well-directed aim and nobly did he call the acceptance of the above-mentioned as gods a deception. For they saw that the seasons of the year, in which the generations of animals and plants and fruits are brought to completion in definite periods, of time are settled by the advance and retreat of the Sun; they saw also that the Moon as handmaid and successor of the Sun had taken up by night the care and superintendence of the same as the Sun by day, and that the other luminaries in accordance with their sympathy towards things terrestrial were working and doing countless services for the permanence of the whole; and so they fell into an endless delusion in supposing that these were the only gods.

‘Whereas if they had been attentive to walk by the unerring path they would have learned at once that in the same way as sense is the servant of mind, so also were all who can be perceived by sense made ministers of Him whom mind alone can perceive.’

Also he further says: [12]

‘So having transcended by reason all visible being, let us go on to the dignity of Him who is without bodily form and invisible, and can be apprehended by thought alone, who is not only the God of the worlds both of thought and sense, but also the Creator of all things. But if any one assign the worship of the Eternal Maker to another younger and begotten being, let him be written down as a madman and guilty of the greatest impiety.’

These are the truly genuine and divine teachings of the Hebrew religion which we have preferred to their vain philosophy. Why need I enlarge further, and bring to light the other errors of Plato, when it is easy from what has been already said to guess also what points I have now passed over in silence? It was not, however, for the sake of accusing him that I was led to speak of these things, since for my part I very greatly admire the man, and esteem him as a friend above all the Greeks, and honour him as one whose sentiments are dear and congenial to myself, although not the same throughout; but I wished to show in what his intelligence falls short in comparison with Moses and the Hebrew prophets.

And yet to one prepared to find fault it were easy to pass censure on countless points, such as his solemn and sapient regulations with regard to women in the Republic,or such as his fine phrases about unnatural love in the Phaedrus. If, however, you desire to listen to these subjects also, take and read his utterances which follow: [13]