In The New Testament And The People of God, Tom Wright gives an excellent summary of dualism. He writes:
“It is often said that some types of Judaism are characterized by ‘dualism’….The problem with this is that the word ‘dualism’ is used in several quite different senses, by no means always differentiated. Furthermore, the word ‘dualism’ itself is heavily loaded in some circles, often indicating disapproval; but several of the things which are asserted to be ‘dualistic’ are perfectly normal features of most if not all biblical theology, and we must make a careful distinction between that which the great majority of Jews accepted as normal and that with which some, exceptionally, flirted.”
“It is often said that some types of Judaism are characterized by ‘dualism’….The problem with this is that the word ‘dualism’ is used in several quite different senses, by no means always differentiated. Furthermore, the word ‘dualism’ itself is heavily loaded in some circles, often indicating disapproval; but several of the things which are asserted to be ‘dualistic’ are perfectly normal features of most if not all biblical theology, and we must make a careful distinction between that which the great majority of Jews accepted as normal and that with which some, exceptionally, flirted.”
“I propose therefore that, to begin with, we refer to
‘dualities’, rather than ‘dualisms’, and save the latter term for certain
specific dualities."
"There are at least ten types of duality, as follows:”
“1. Theological/ ontological duality. The postulation of heavenly beings other than the one God, even if these beings exist at his behest and to do his will [angels, sp]. This belief is called ‘dualism’ in some recent scholarship.”
"There are at least ten types of duality, as follows:”
“1. Theological/ ontological duality. The postulation of heavenly beings other than the one God, even if these beings exist at his behest and to do his will [angels, sp]. This belief is called ‘dualism’ in some recent scholarship.”
“2. Theological/ cosmological duality. If pantheism is a
classic form of monism [one god consisting of all creation, sp], the
differentiation between the creator God and the created order is often seen as
itself a sort of ‘dualism.’”
“3. Moral duality. The positing of a firm distinction
between good and evil, e.g. in the realm of human behavior. Most religions
maintain some such distinction, but some forms of pantheism have tried to
remove it, not least by labelling it ‘dualism’ and associating it with other
dualisms that are deemed to be unwelcome.”
“4. Eschatological duality. The distinction between the
present age and the age to come, usually reckoning the present age as evil and
the age to come as good.”
“5. Theological/ moral
duality. Expressed classically in Zoroastrianism and some forms of Gnosticism, this view postulates that
there are two ultimate sources of all that is: a good god and a bad god. In
‘hard’ versions, the two are locked in struggle for ever; in ‘soft’ versions,
the good one will eventually win.”
“6. Cosmological duality. The classic position of Plato: the
world of material things is the secondary copy or shadow of the ‘real’ world of
the Forms, which are perceived by the enlightened mind. In many different
versions, this view filtered down as a
mainline belief of the Greco-Roman (and the modern Western) world: that which can be observed in the physical
world is secondary and shabby compared with that which can be experienced by
the mind or spirit. (In some modern versions the order is reversed, putting
the material first and the spiritual second).”
“7. Anthropological
duality. The human-centred version of cosmological dualism. Humans are
bipartite creatures, a combination of body and soul, which are arranged in a
hierarchy: soul ahead of body in many
religions and philosophies, body ahead of soul in many political agendas.”
“8. Epistemological duality. The attempt to differentiate
sharply between that which can be known by means of human observation and/ or
reason and that which can be known only through divine revelation.”
“9. Sectarian duality. The clear division of those who
belong to one socio-cultural-religious group from those who belong to another.”
“10. Psychological duality. Humans have two inclinations, a
good one and a bad one; these are locked in combat, and the human must choose
the good and resist the evil.”
“Where did first-century Judaism stand in relation to these
bewildering and often-confused types of duality? There are at least four types
that are embraced by most Jews of the period, and at least three that are
usually rejected, with possibility of debate about the other three.”
“…In rejecting pantheism Judaism embraced the distinction
between the creator God and the created world (# 2). This reveals itself in the
normal biblical language about heaven and earth: heaven is created by the one
creator in order to be the location of himself and his entourage, whereas earth
is where humans live. This is not,
however, to be equated with cosmological duality (# 6), on which see below.”
“It is, further, clear throughout Judaism that a distinction was maintained between good and evil in the realm of human actions: even Josephus [a first century Jew], with his strong doctrine of divine providence, clearly thinks that some humans act wickedly (# 3).”
“It is, further, clear throughout Judaism that a distinction was maintained between good and evil in the realm of human actions: even Josephus [a first century Jew], with his strong doctrine of divine providence, clearly thinks that some humans act wickedly (# 3).”
“Many if not most Jewish writings of the period show a
belief in angels and other ‘supernatural’ beings (# 1).”
“Virtually all second-temple Jews, with the possible
exception only of the aristocracy, believed that they were living in a ‘present
age’ which was a time of sorrow and exile, and which would be succeeded by an
‘age to come’ in which wrongs would be righted and Israel’s God would set up his
kingdom (# 4).”
“If any or all of
this deserves to be called ‘dualism’, then most first-century Jews (and most
early Christians) were dualists. However, I think this would be a confusing
conclusion. The word ‘dualism’ has obtained its primary force in modern
discussion from three of the other types, which were emphatically rejected by
most Jews of the period.”
“In respect of # 5, we will search for a long time through
first-century Jewish literature without finding any evidence of the belief that
there is an evil force which is equal
in power to the creator God, and when we do find such evidence we are justified
in supposing that the majority of Jews would have regarded the idea as outside
the limit of legitimate speculation. Type number 5 is thus widely rejected.”
“Equally, Philo [heavily influenced Greek thinking Jew] again
provides the exception that proves the rule when it comes to types # 6 and # 7:
Jews in general did not divide the world
rigidly into the physical and the noumenal/ spiritual, and even Philo himself
shows at various points that, even if the ‘real meaning’ of a passage of
scripture, or a Jewish ritual, is to be found in a spiritualized sphere, the
material sense and performance are by no means to be despised or neglected.”
“Most Jews would have
rejected both in favor of a more integrated cosmology and anthropology. Most
Jews would have held that heaven and earth, though themselves distinct, both
reveal the divine glory; humans, though thoroughly at home in the space– time
universe, are also open to the world of heaven, to the presence and influence
of the divine. Worship and prayer are not attempts to reach across a void, but
the conscious opening of human life to the God-dimension which is ever
present.”
“The remaining three types are harder.”
“With reference to epistemological duality (# 8), it is
clear that many Jews of this period did make a fairly sharp distinction between
what can be known by human observation and/ or reason and what can only be
known by divine revelation. This distinction has a long history, going back
(for instance) to the story of Joseph in Genesis 41: 14– 28.”
“An apocalypse claims to unveil secrets otherwise
unknowable; a pesher commentary, the ‘true’ hidden meaning of a biblical
prophecy; a discussion of halakah, that which was given orally by Israel’s God to Moses on Mount
Sinai; a Philonic allegory, the secret hidden meaning of the text.
Even Josephus appears to place considerable value on the ability to foretell
the future, an ability which he claimed for himself as well as for others.”
“Yet many Jews, such as Josephus himself, make the attempt
to see what Israel’s
God is doing within the ordinary world of observation, and devise logical rules
whereby, with the aid of human reason, truth and holiness can be perceived. We
will therefore probably not go far wrong if we postulate a wide spectrum of
opinion on type 8.”
“Similarly, sectarian duality (# 9) is obviously
embraced by some, notably the Essenes and, to some extent, the Pharisees, and
is rejected by those Jews who were in favor of a relaxed attitude towards their
pagan neighbors.”
“Finally,
psychological duality (# 10) was held by the rabbis [post A.D. 70], with
their doctrine of the two ‘inclinations.’ But there is little early evidence for it.”
“These distinctions
between different types of duality, and the analysis I have suggested, is not
simply undertaken out of curiosity or for the sake of intellectual tidiness. It
is most important in understanding the theological options that lay before
first-century Jews, and the close interrelation of those options with the
socio-political reality that they faced.”
“It may therefore help if we set out these types of duality
in their three columns. Those on the left are more or less normal to all
mainline Judaism; those on the right, definitely marginal. Those in the center
are held by some, but not all.”
It is only those on
the right, I propose, that deserve the title ‘dualism’ proper; only they posit
a radical split in the whole of reality.”
LEFT: (REGULARLY
ACCEPTED AMONG 1ST CENTURY JEWS):
“1. Theological/ ontological duality. The postulation of
heavenly beings other than the one god, even if these beings exist at his
behest and to do his will [angels, sp]. This belief is called ‘dualism’ in some
recent scholarship.”
“2. Theological/ cosmological duality. If pantheism is a
classic form of monism [one god in consisting of all creation], the
differentiation between the creator god and the created order is often seen as
itself a sort of ‘dualism.’”
“3. Moral duality. The positing of a firm distinction
between good and evil, e.g. in the realm of human behavior. Most religions
maintain some such distinction, but some forms of pantheism have tried to
remove it, not least by labelling it ‘dualism’ and associating it with other
dualisms that are deemed to be unwelcome.”
“4. Eschatological duality. The distinction between the
present age and the age to come, usually reckoning the present age as evil and
the age to come as good.”
CENTER: (POSSIBLY
ACCEPTED AMONG 1ST CENTURY JEWS):
“8. Epistemological duality. The attempt to differentiate sharply between that which can be known by means of human observation and/ or reason and that which can be known only through divine revelation.”
“8. Epistemological duality. The attempt to differentiate sharply between that which can be known by means of human observation and/ or reason and that which can be known only through divine revelation.”
“9. Sectarian duality. The clear division of those who
belong to one socio-cultural-religious group from those who belong to another.”
“10. Psychological duality. Humans have two inclinations, a
good one and a bad one; these are locked in combat, and the human must choose
the good and resist the evil.”
RIGHT: (MARGINALLY
ACCEPTED AMONG 1ST CENTURY JEWS):
“5. Theological/ moral duality. Expressed classically in Zoroastrianism and some forms of Gnosticism, this view postulates that there are two ultimate sources of all that is: a good god and a bad god. In ‘hard’ versions, the two are locked in struggle for ever; in ‘soft’ versions, the good one will eventually win.”
“5. Theological/ moral duality. Expressed classically in Zoroastrianism and some forms of Gnosticism, this view postulates that there are two ultimate sources of all that is: a good god and a bad god. In ‘hard’ versions, the two are locked in struggle for ever; in ‘soft’ versions, the good one will eventually win.”
“6. Cosmological duality. The classic position of Plato: the
world of material things is the secondary copy or shadow of the ‘real’ world of
the Forms, which are perceived by the enlightened mind. In many different
versions, this view filtered down as a
mainline belief of the Greco-Roman (and the modern Western) world: that which can be observed in the physical
world is secondary and shabby compared with that which can be experienced by
the mind or spirit. (In some modern versions the order is reversed, putting
the material first and the spiritual second).”
“7. Anthropological
duality. The human-centred version of cosmological dualism. Humans are
bipartite creatures, a combination of body and soul, which are arranged in a
hierarchy: soul ahead of body in many
religions and philosophies, body ahead of soul in many political agendas.”
_____________________________
Wright, N. T. (2013-03-21). The New Testament and the People of God: Volume 1. Kindle Edition. (edited).
No comments:
Post a Comment