The court of the gentiles, or, A discourse touching the original of human literature, both philologie and philosophie, from the Scriptures and Jewish church. Part 2, Of philosophie in order to a demonstration of 1. The perfection of Gods word and church light, 2. The imperfection of natures light and mischief of vain philosophie, 3. The right use of human learning and especially sound philosophie / by Theoph. Gale ...

CHAP. V. Plato's Pythagorick, and Socratick mode of Philo∣sophizing, with the Original of both from the Jewish Church.

Plato's Pythagorick, and Symbolick mode of Philosophizing: The advantages of Symbols, as well for the illustration of truth, as for the delighting of phansie, and fixing the memorie. The regular use of Symbols, not so much for pleasure, as truth. Plato's Symbolick mode of Philosophizing from the Jews. How far Plato affected the Socra∣tick mode of Philosophizing, with his differen••e there-from. 1. Plato was more Dogmatick than Socrates. 2. Plato's mode of Dialogi∣zing was more Symbolick, and Metaphorick than that of Socrates. Plato's mode of Philosophizing by Dialogues of Jewish original. Luke 5.21.22. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Luke 6.8. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Luke 11.35. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, to dispute by Questions. Luke 22.68 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 if I propose any Arguments, &c.

§. 1. HAving given some Historical account of the Platonists, both Old, and New, with the particular advantages they had to acquaint themselves with Jewish, and Christian Mysteries, we now proceed to the Essential parts of Platonick Philosophie, and their tradu∣ction from the sacred Scriptures.* 1.1 First, as for the Forme, or Mode of Plato's Philosophizings, it is partly Pythagorick, or Symbolick; partly Socratick, with somewhat peculiar, and proper to himself: Of each

distinctly. 1. That Plato abounded much in the Pythagorick, or Symbolick mode of Philosophizing, is evident to any, that is verst in his Philosophie. So Vossius de philos. sect. cap. 12. §. 16.. Plato ac∣cording to the Pythagorean mode, very oft abounds in Symbolick Philoso∣phie. The like Cael. Rodig. lib. 9. cap. 12. He is no Platonist, who thinks that Plato must not be understood Allegorically, unless he will with Aristotle triumph over Plato's words, and not regard his profound sense. So Serranus on Plato's 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 symposium, or Dialogue of Love.

It was (saies he) the mode of the Ancient Philosophers to represent Truth by certain 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Symbols, and hidden Images. That Plato followed these, is put beyond doubt by this his Symposiack Disputa∣tion, in which he makes express mention of Hesiod, and Homer, with whom we find the first true rudiments of Ancient Philosophie. And truly this mode of Philosophizing was accurately polished by the Pythagoreans, the whole of whose Philosophie was wrapped up in the covert of Symbols, or Allegories.

The like he mentions in his Preface to Plato, where he also gives us the advantages of this Symbo∣lick mode of Philosophizing.

It was (saies he) the Ancient man∣ner of Philosophers, to set forth Truth by Symbolick Images. That Plato followed this custome is no way to be doubted, whilst he discourseth of Learning received from them. Neither are there want∣ing reasons which encline unto such a method of teaching: For 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, such a Symbolick Image of things, is exceeding efficatious to strike mens minds, who are greatly moved with such Images. For seeing the truth of things lies wrapt up in much obscuritie, we more compendiously, and safely arrive unto it by such Corporeal gradati∣ons; she lying couched under these shadows, does more powerfully insinuate into mens minds. Neither is there wanting pleasure (the guide, and promotor of Disquisition) in such Symbolick studies, and indagations. These Corporeal Images, and designations of things by their Notes, doe very much conduce in like manner to Memorie, which being excited by the Novitie, Beautie, and matter of admira∣tion which it finds in these Symbols, receives a more deep, firme, and constant impression of these things wrapped up therein.

The like he mentions again in Plato's Symposium, fol. 167. shewing how this 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, or Image-coyning Philosophie, leads men gradually, and sweetly, yet most powerfully towards the contemplation of the 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 First Being, &c. And indeed Plato himself gives us the

best account of the many excellent advantages,* 1.2 which accrew by this Symbolick imitation, if duely regulated, and managed: so Plato Phaedr. fol. 229. tells us,

that under the covert of his Fables, Ttuth lay wrap'd up, and therefore we must not acquiesce in the Symbol, or Fable, but make enquirie after that truth, which lay hid under it. So in his Repub. 6. fol. 510. Plato, admonisheth us so to read his 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, or Allegorick Images, as not to terminate in the Images them∣selves, but to penetrate unto the things couched under, and repre∣sented by these Symbolick Images. But more fully in his Repub. 10. fol. 598, &c. he acquaints us that this his ••ymbolick imitation did only represent the Image, or Shadow of the thing which is far remote from the truth, as a Limner gives the Picture of a man; and therefore he, that would get the true knowledge of the thing, must not acquiesce in the Symbolick Image, but search after the thing it self.

The same he inculcates often; as in his de Legib. 2. fol. 669. where he laies down, and insists much upon, this general Principle, that in

such Symbolick Imitations, Truth, not pleasure, or delight must be the measure of our disquisitions, &c. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, All Imitation must be judged not by pleasure, or o∣pinion, but by Truth.

So in his de Legib. 5. as elsewhere, &c.

* 1.3§. 2. That Plato, as Pythagoras before him, traduced this Symbo∣lick mode of Philosophizing from the Jewish Church originally, is a ge∣neral presumpion of the Learned. So Serranus, in his Preface to Pla∣to's Images, addes:

All which Plato uttered not from himself, or his own humane reason, but from the more happie doctrine of Moses, and of the Prophets, &c. And more particularly he concludes thus; That Plato drew these Symbols from the doctrine of the Jews, i. e. from Moses, and the Prophets, all Antiquitie of Christian Doctors hath judged. But that he absteined industriously from nameing the Jews, because their name was odious among other Nations. Although he sometimes makes mention 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 of a Syrian, and Phenician fable, or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 of an ineffectual Mysterie, to shew, that he designed not the Egyptians only, but also their neighbours the Jews. Truely Plato might, when he was in Egypt, have conversation with the Jews, of whom there were great numbers in Egypt after their dissipa∣tion, and transmigration-. Lastly, whereas in those 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ineffable Mysteries he recites, there lies some footsteps of truth mixt with many trifles, who would not judge, he derived them immediately from the

Egyptians rather than from the Jewish Monuments? But that the Egyptians retained many things received by tradition from the Pa∣triarchs, Moses's most ancient Historie demonstrates. Neither is it to be doubted, but that they drew many things also from the clear foun∣tains of the Sacred Bible, which yet they Contaminated with their own muddie mixtures. Hence Plato acquired the name of the Al∣legorick Philosopher, because he used that peculiar way of teaching by 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Symbols, or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Idols, and from their more abstruse doctrine asserts many Paradoxes.

Thus Serranus: wherein he fully grants, that Plato's Symbolick mode of Philosophizing came original∣ly from the Jews, though immediately from the Egyptians. And the rea∣son he gives, why Plato could not derive them immediately from the Jews, is because the Scriptures were not translated into Greek 'till after Alexander's time. But this being granted (which Lud. Vives de∣nies) why might not Plato by reason of his skill in the Egyptian, and Phenician tongues understand the Scriptures, as well as the Egyptians? or else might he not understand them by an Interpreter, as Austin seems to grant, as before chap. 3. §. 4. That Plato, as Pythagoras, re∣ceived this Symbolick mode of Philosophizing from the Oriental parts, is well observed by Cudworth, Union of Christ pag. 28.

The Oriental Nations were wont to couch their greatest Mysteries, and pieces of Wisdom, which they conveighed by tradition one to the other, in the covert of some Fables, & thence Pythagoras, & Plato afterward brought that manner of Philosophizing into Europe, &c.

And the same Cud∣worth elsewhere gives some particular Fables, which Plato traduced from the Jews, as that of his Androgynon, or Conjunction of man and woman, as one flesh, which he makes to be but an imitation of Eve's being taken out of Adam's side, and joyned to him in Marri∣age, &c. Yea Serranus is enclined to think that Plato's whole 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, or Love Dialogue, was but an imitation of Solomons's Song. So Serranus on Plato's Symposium fol. 176.

Hence (saies he) as the holie Writer had his Epithalamium, namely his Canticles, so Plato his 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, or Love Dialogue, not that I would seem willing to compare Plato's 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Love Songs with Sacred 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, or Love Songs, but I am only willing to shew, that this manner of Teaching things otherwise true, and certain by Symbols, and Mysteries, was not unusual, &c.

See more of this Symbolick mode of Philosophizing, and it's traduction from the Jewish Church, Book 2. chap. 9. §. 2.

touching Pythagoras's Symbolick Philosophie, &c. Only there lay this difference betwixt Pythagoras and Plato, as to their use of Symbols. Pythagoras's Symbols were for the most part Enigmatical, answerable to the Egyptian Hierogliphicks, and the Jewish Enigmes, or Riddles: But Plato's Symbols are not so Enigmatick, and obscure as those of Py∣thagoras; but only Metaphorick, and Allegorick, answerable to the Jewish Types, and Parables. See more of this difference Book 2. chap. 2. §. 6, 7.

* 1.4§. 3. Plato abounds also much, yea mostly in the Socratick mode of Philosophizing. So August. de Civit. l. 8. c. 4.

And because Pla∣to loved his Master Socrates with such a singular affection, he brings him in speaking almost in all his Discourses: yea those very things, which he had learnt from others, or had acquired by his own intelli∣gence, he tempers with, or wraps up under his Master Socrates's Iro∣nick mode, &c. Thus Austin; and more particularly, some few lines after he addes; And seeing he affects an observation of his Master Socrates's known mode of dissembling his own knowledge, and opinion, because this manner pleased him so much, hence it comes to passe, that it is very difficult to perceive Plato's opinion even concerning the most Weightie matters.

Touching Socrates's Dissimulation in conceleing his own sentiments, without positive affir∣mation, or Negation, under pretence of knowing nothing, thereby to draw forth (in an inductive way) and to confute the opinions of his oponents, see what precedeth touching the Socratick Philosophie, chap. 1. §. 6.

* 1.5This Mode of Discourse Plato very much affected, as it appears in his Dialogues, where he brings in Socrates discoursing after his o••n forme, yet not without a considerable difference from, or superaddition to his Masters Method: For first Socrates in his own Schole very seldome, or never asserts any thing Dogmatically; but under a modest pretension of ig∣norance he conceles his own judgment, with endeavours to evince, and confirme the Hypotheses he designes to prove from the concessions of his Opponents,* 1.6 which he draws forth by a powerful Induction. Hence Arcesilas the founder of the New Academie defends his 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 by the Authoritie of Socrates, as before chap. 4. §. 2. But now Plato, though he allowed in many natural, and abstruse Questions, an 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, or suspension, and thence 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 a probationarie mode of disputing pro, & con. yet he greatly asserted some things, and

strongly proved others, as necessarily true; whence the New Acade∣micks, and the Scepticks ever reputed Plato, and his Successors of the old Academie, as Dogmatists, as before chap. 4. §. 1, 2. Yea Am∣monius on Aristot. Categor. tells us, that Plato himself confuted this Sceptick 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 as that, which was most irrational, and absurd:* 1.7 of which else where. Secondly, Socrates's mode of Philosophizing was more plain, and familiar. 'Tis true, it had much of Ironie mixed with it, especially as to moral conversation, yet it did not render it cloudie, and obscure. But now Plato, though he imitates his Ma∣ster in Dialogizing, yet he mixeth therewith so many dark Symbols and Poetick Metaphors, as that he seems to act the part of a Poet, or Orator, rather than of a Philosopher. 'Tis confest, such Poetick, and Metaphorick flourishes, wherewith Plato's Dialogues so much a∣bound, are extream useful to illustrate, and brighten Truth, yet it cannot be denyed but that Aristotle's Syllogistick, naked, and closer mode of Disputing more conduceth to the Conviction, and Demonstra∣tion of Truth. Whence that old saying, Plato Teacheth, and Aristotle Proves. Hence also the Greeks usually stiled Plato 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Divine, and Aristotle 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, a Daemon. And they say, if Jupiter had been minded to discourse in Greek, he would have used Plato's tongue; so eloquently, and floridly is he conceived to have Philosophized. Yet learned Vossius de philos. sect. cap. 12. §. 15. gives him this dash.

Mean while (saies he) the discourse of Plato is lesse proper for Philosophie, For he fails in this (some 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 must pardon me) that he much delights in Metaphors, and those not beseeming, but presumptuous, and altogether Poetical, whereas a discourse more proper, or Metaphors more received, and common, agree better with Philosophie, &c.

But to give a just Character of Plato's mode of Philosophizing. It's evident, he had a most prodigious, and luxuriant Phansie, which could not confine it self to the severe Rules of artifici∣al Logick, and method; neither indeed was it the mode, or fashion of those times to dispute in Mode, and Figure; for this Forme of Syllo∣gizing owes it's original to his Scholar Aristotle, that great artificial Methodist. Before Aristotle, the great Logicians were those of the Ele∣atick Schole, Zeno the Eleatick, and his successors, whose mode of Disputing was by Dialogues, or Interrogations, and Answers, as it is evi∣dent by the Dialogues, which Zeno the Eleatick writ. This mode of Disputing was followed by Plato (who derived much of his Logick

from the Eleatick Schole) only to render his Philosophie more Beau∣tiful, and grateful, he clotheth her after the Oriental fashion, with many Metaphorick Images, and Symbolick shaddows. For that this Symbolick way of Philosophizing was most in fashion amongst all the Oriental Philosophers, especially the Jews, Egyptians, and Phenicians has been before proved. This garbe Plato (as Pythagoras) most affect∣ed, as that, which suited best with his 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Pregnant Mimetick Phancie, which greatly recreated it self in those Jewish Mysteries, he had gleaned up in his Oriental travels, but not through∣ly understanding the same, he wraps them up under Symbolick, and Metaphorick shadows, thereby to render them more intelligible, and delightful. That, which made Aristotle reject this Symbolick mode of Philosophizing, was the humour of rejecting all Oriental Jewish Tradi∣tions, which his discursive reason could not comprehend. To conclude, we have a full, though but brief Character of Plato's Philosophick mode given us by Jerom. lib. 1. advers. Jovin. where he stiles Plato's works

Divine, Profound, yet not easily to be understood by Raw, young wits, &c.

Though Plato's Mythologick, Symbolick, and Alle∣gorick Images render his Notions to such, as do not understand them, more cloudie, and dark; yet when they are understood, they give a very beautiful glosse, or amiable face unto Truth: answerable to Christ's Parables, which to the unbelieving Jews were but Riddles, yet as he explained them to his own Disciples, they were very lively, and signi∣ficant.

* 1.8§. 4. That this Socratick, Platonick mode of Philosophizing by Dialogues, or Interrogations, and Answers was exactly the same with, and, as we may presume, originally from the Jewish mode of Ratiocinati∣on, is evident by what footsteps we find hereof in the sacred Scriptures, where we find the words 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 frequently used to express the Jewish mode of Disputation: so Luke 5. 21. Luke (who was exactly skilled in the Greek Dialect) expresseth the Scribes, and Pharisees their disputings against Christ by 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 to Dialogize, or to reason by Interrogations, and Answers. So agen v. 22. 'Tis said that Jesus knowing their 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Reasonings by Dialogues, he said 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, why doe you Dialogize, or rea∣son by Dialogues, &c. The like we find Luke 6.8. He knew that thoughts 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, their reasonings, or conferences, &c. We might produce Multitudes of Scriptures of the same import, which

clearly discover, that the Jewish mode of Disputing was by Dia∣logues, or by Interrogations, and Answers. This is farther confirm∣ed, not only from the import of words, but also from the thing it self. For we find those Disputes which were betwixt Christ, and the Jewish Doctors, to be carryed on by way of Dialogue, or conference, by questions, and replies. So in that famous Disputation betwixt Christ, and the Pharisees, Luke 11.53. 'tis said the Scribes and Pha∣risees began to urge him vehemently, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, i. e. to urge him vehemently for an extemporarie replie to their interrogations. Thence it follows [and to provoke him to speak.] 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.

This word, saies Grotius, is one of those wherein Luke discovers his intimate skill in the Greek: for 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is a word evidently taken from the Scholes, where the Masters mere wont to place their riper Di∣sciples over the younger, that so the former might pose the latter by Interrogations, which was stiled 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. There∣fore Luke does Learnedly use this word to shew, that the Pharisees used all endeavours to draw from Christ's Mouth many replies. The Syriack does rightly express the sense by a word that signifies to En∣snare, and the Arabick by a word that imports to make one Dispute. What they designed thereby is evident by what follows, verse 54. Laying wait for him, and seeking to catch (〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉) something out of his mouth. By which it's apparent, this their dispute was managed by Interrogations.

So agen Luke 22.68. saies Christ, If I ask you, &c, [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉] which Grotius renders [If I pro∣pose any argument]

For (addes he) the Hebrews, as well as the Greeks, were wont to dispute by Interrogations.

But more of this, when we come to Plato's Logick.

Notes

• * 1.1

  Plato's Symbo∣lick mode of Philosophi∣zing.
• * 1.2

  How Symbo∣lick Philoso∣phie ought to be regulated.
• * 1.3

  Plato's Symbo∣lick mode of Philosophizing from the Jews.
• * 1.4

  Plato affects the Socratick mode of Phi∣losophizing yet with some superaddition of his own.
• * 1.5

  Wherein Plato differed from Socrates, as to his mode of Philosophiz∣ing.
• * 1.6

  1 Socrates was more Aporema∣tick, but Plato more Dogma∣tick.
• * 1.7

  Plato's mode of Philoso∣phizing dif∣ferent from Socrates i•• point of Sym∣bols, and Alle∣gories.
• * 1.8

  This Platonick mode of rea∣soning by Di∣alogues of Jewish origin.