There are those denominations who contend that Christians adopted the concept of the immortal soul from the Greeks. Ironically, they have no problems with adopting the use of allegory, which originates from Greek thought. There are many verses I could use to challenge such a position, but for the sake of brevity, I will restrict it to just two: one from the Old Testament and one from the New Testament.
It’s easy to dispel this accusation alone from the account of the Witch of Endor summoning the spirit or ghost of Samuel (1Sa 28). Whether it was actually the spirit of Samuel or a demon, trick, or hallucination is not what’s relevant. The point is, it clearly demonstrates that the ancient Israelites understood the concept of an immortal, disembodied spirit (soul) existing apart from the body by at least 1010 BC. This was well before Greek influence and Hellenization began around 332 BC and peaked from 175 to 167 BC in Judea.
In the New Testament, we find the story, or parable, spoken about by Jesus of the rich man and Lazarus (Luke 16:19-31). Again, whether it’s meant to be taken literally or figuratively is not what’s important. What is important is that the rich man and Lazarus are depicted as having souls that live on beyond the grave, just as the spirit of Samuel. If the concept of the immortal soul came from the Greeks, it wouldn’t explain why Jesus thought to include such pagan ideas in his sermon. It also doesn’t explain why he never refuted it as being a false pagan concept. In fact, nowhere in the Bible will you find such a repudiation.
Do similarities exist between the Greek concept of the immortal soul and the dominant Christian belief in an immortal soul? Sure, just as similarities can be found between the Hebrews’ understanding of the underworld, Sheol, and that of their Mesopotamian and Levantine neighbors. However, just because similarities exist does not prove borrowing. There are many biblical motifs, for example, that share similar themes with pagan motifs without adoption. Also, similarities don’t automatically invalidate something as untrue. The Genesis flood account mirrors the Chaldean flood tradition as told in the Epic of Gilgamesh. However, no one would accuse Moses, the supposed writer of Genesis, of adopting pagan flood traditions.
And while there are some Christian theologians who were in part influenced by Aristotle's understanding of the soul, such as Thomas Aquinas, it wasn’t without justification. Thomas Aquinas’ rationale was that even pagans could discover the truth through philosophical reasoning, and if something is true, it belongs to the Lord, no matter the source. Therefore, it wasn’t so much borrowing as arriving at similar conclusions. In the same way, many ancient Greek philosophers also came to believe in the existence of a supreme being, because it was reasonable and logical to do so. Yet, no one would argue that Christians got their ideas about God from the Greeks, and rightfully so.
Moreover, whatever similarities exist, there exists a multitude of differences. The Greeks may have believed in disembodied souls but not bodily resurrection like the Christians. Nor did Christians believe in eternal disembodied souls as the Greeks did. Likewise, the Egyptians believed in the concept of the soul, but it vastly differed from Christian belief. They believed the soul was comprised of multiple components, wasn't fully disembodied, and could even come back to the tomb to revisit the body and partake of food and drink offerings. So, to say that Christians got their ideas of the soul and the afterlife from the pagans ignores the major differences between them.
There is another explanation why the Old Testament writers focused so little on the soul and why there is a much bigger emphasis on the afterlife, heaven, and eternal rewards in the New Testament. It is due to progressive revelation. Not everything was revealed to the Old Testament saints. They didn't know, for instance, that the Messiah would be born of a virgin, though they were given hints. Nor did they foresee the church age or the inclusion of the gentiles. Such things would have been alien to them. Therefore, more was revealed to the New Testament writers, including greater insights into the soul and afterlife.
It’s easy to dispel this accusation alone from the account of the Witch of Endor summoning the spirit or ghost of Samuel (1Sa 28). Whether it was actually the spirit of Samuel or a demon, trick, or hallucination is not what’s relevant. The point is, it clearly demonstrates that the ancient Israelites understood the concept of an immortal, disembodied spirit (soul) existing apart from the body by at least 1010 BC. This was well before Greek influence and Hellenization began around 332 BC and peaked from 175 to 167 BC in Judea.
In the New Testament, we find the story, or parable, spoken about by Jesus of the rich man and Lazarus (Luke 16:19-31). Again, whether it’s meant to be taken literally or figuratively is not what’s important. What is important is that the rich man and Lazarus are depicted as having souls that live on beyond the grave, just as the spirit of Samuel. If the concept of the immortal soul came from the Greeks, it wouldn’t explain why Jesus thought to include such pagan ideas in his sermon. It also doesn’t explain why he never refuted it as being a false pagan concept. In fact, nowhere in the Bible will you find such a repudiation.
Do similarities exist between the Greek concept of the immortal soul and the dominant Christian belief in an immortal soul? Sure, just as similarities can be found between the Hebrews’ understanding of the underworld, Sheol, and that of their Mesopotamian and Levantine neighbors. However, just because similarities exist does not prove borrowing. There are many biblical motifs, for example, that share similar themes with pagan motifs without adoption. Also, similarities don’t automatically invalidate something as untrue. The Genesis flood account mirrors the Chaldean flood tradition as told in the Epic of Gilgamesh. However, no one would accuse Moses, the supposed writer of Genesis, of adopting pagan flood traditions.
And while there are some Christian theologians who were in part influenced by Aristotle's understanding of the soul, such as Thomas Aquinas, it wasn’t without justification. Thomas Aquinas’ rationale was that even pagans could discover the truth through philosophical reasoning, and if something is true, it belongs to the Lord, no matter the source. Therefore, it wasn’t so much borrowing as arriving at similar conclusions. In the same way, many ancient Greek philosophers also came to believe in the existence of a supreme being, because it was reasonable and logical to do so. Yet, no one would argue that Christians got their ideas about God from the Greeks, and rightfully so.
Moreover, whatever similarities exist, there exists a multitude of differences. The Greeks may have believed in disembodied souls but not bodily resurrection like the Christians. Nor did Christians believe in eternal disembodied souls as the Greeks did. Likewise, the Egyptians believed in the concept of the soul, but it vastly differed from Christian belief. They believed the soul was comprised of multiple components, wasn't fully disembodied, and could even come back to the tomb to revisit the body and partake of food and drink offerings. So, to say that Christians got their ideas of the soul and the afterlife from the pagans ignores the major differences between them.
There is another explanation why the Old Testament writers focused so little on the soul and why there is a much bigger emphasis on the afterlife, heaven, and eternal rewards in the New Testament. It is due to progressive revelation. Not everything was revealed to the Old Testament saints. They didn't know, for instance, that the Messiah would be born of a virgin, though they were given hints. Nor did they foresee the church age or the inclusion of the gentiles. Such things would have been alien to them. Therefore, more was revealed to the New Testament writers, including greater insights into the soul and afterlife.
