some biblical ideas I found in seneca , though he was pre-christian

[amorphous_constellation]

So now being done with volume I of his moral letters , and having read the happy life, I found a couple points where bible - like metaphor or reasoning seems to be employed. Other people have noticed this as well, if you do a search for it , but these are just a few points that stuck out to me. So the dilemma is, if seneca was unfamiliar with christianity or judaism , it would call into question the novelty of the ideas , and reduce them to common memes , per his time.

The man was , so far as I can tell, some kind of agnostic pagan who thought that, at best we earn our soul in life and that that is our reward. At least that is the principal theme I take from him

The first one on the idea of building foundations

"Suppose that two buildings have been erected, unlike as to their foundations, but equal in height and in grandeur. One is built on faultless ground, and the process of erection goes right ahead. In the other case, the foundations have exhausted the building materials, for they have been sunk into soft and shifting ground and much labour has been wasted in reaching the solid rock. As one looks at both of them, one sees clearly what progress the former has made, but the larger and more difficult part of the latter is hidden. So with men's dispositions ; some are pliable and easy to manage, but others have to be laboriously wrought out by hand, so to speak, and are wholly employed in the making of their own foundations." (1)

So , this is pretty much a mirror passage to the ideas starting in Matthew 7:24 , and both paragraphs almost have the same exact rhythm

A principle difference , is that Seneca does not view, in my opinion, a 'solid construction' as an act of hard work. Jesus on the hand, emphasizes the struggle in life. And so I think that Jesus , would say that to build a good work is hard, just as you may struggle and fail. Seneca associates the building of a solid work with a sense of ease , and I think this may have to with the fact that he defines virtue differently

The next point on the idea of straightening warped wood

"But I do not despair even of a hardened sinner. There is nothing that will not surrender to persistent treatment, to concentrated and careful attention ; however much the timber may be bent, you can make it straight again. Heat unbends curved beams, and wood that grew naturally in another shape is fashioned artificially according to our needs." (2)

This idea appears as a very noticeable verse from ecclesiastes where the inverse is true. It becomes a very noticeable new testament theme, that the things which are bent will be straightened. It coincides very well with the new progressive idea, however the metaphorical mechanisms are precisely similar to ecclesiastes 1:15

The next point relates to Jesus sowing seeds

"Words should be scattered like seed ; no matter how small the seed may be, if it has once found favourable ground, it unfolds its strength and from an insignificant thing spreads to its greatest growth." (3)

So that is very similar to the language of Jesus about sowing seeds. The word can be as small as a mustard seed and still fill the universe, but it must find favorable ground, for otherwise the word will not grow. Very striking how similar this one sentence is to all of that, though seneca utters it very nonchalantly at the end of a random letter

------------------------------------------------------------

(1) Seneca, Lucius Annaeus. Ad Lucilium Epistulae Morales. Translated by Richard Gummere Ph.D, vol. 1, G.P. Putnam’s Sons, 1917, p. 347.

(2) Seneca, Lucius Annaeus. Ad Lucilium Epistulae Morales. Translated by Richard Gummere Ph.D, vol. 1, G.P. Putnam’s Sons, 1917, p. 333.

(3) Seneca, Lucius Annaeus. Ad Lucilium Epistulae Morales. Translated by Richard Gummere Ph.D, vol. 1, G.P. Putnam’s Sons, 1917, p. 257.

 

[QuestioningMind]

So now being done with volume I of his moral letters , and having read the happy life, I found a couple points where bible - like metaphor or reasoning seems to be employed. Other people have noticed this as well, if you do a search for it , but these are just a few points that stuck out to me. So the dilemma is, if seneca was unfamiliar with christianity or judaism , it would call into question the novelty of the ideas , and reduce them to common memes , per his time.

The man was , so far as I can tell, some kind of agnostic pagan who thought that, at best we earn our soul in life and that that is our reward. At least that is the principal theme I take from him

The first one on the idea of building foundations

"Suppose that two buildings have been erected, unlike as to their foundations, but equal in height and in grandeur. One is built on faultless ground, and the process of erection goes right ahead. In the other case, the foundations have exhausted the building materials, for they have been sunk into soft and shifting ground and much labour has been wasted in reaching the solid rock. As one looks at both of them, one sees clearly what progress the former has made, but the larger and more difficult part of the latter is hidden. So with men's dispositions ; some are pliable and easy to manage, but others have to be laboriously wrought out by hand, so to speak, and are wholly employed in the making of their own foundations." (1)

So , this is pretty much a mirror passage to the ideas starting in Matthew 7:24 , and both paragraphs almost have the same exact rhythm

A principle difference , is that Seneca does not view, in my opinion, a 'solid construction' as an act of hard work. Jesus on the hand, emphasizes the struggle in life. And so I think that Jesus , would say that to build a good work is hard, just as you may struggle and fail. Seneca associates the building of a solid work with a sense of ease , and I think this may have to with the fact that he defines virtue differently

The next point on the idea of straightening warped wood

"But I do not despair even of a hardened sinner. There is nothing that will not surrender to persistent treatment, to concentrated and careful attention ; however much the timber may be bent, you can make it straight again. Heat unbends curved beams, and wood that grew naturally in another shape is fashioned artificially according to our needs." (2)

This idea appears as a very noticeable verse from ecclesiastes where the inverse is true. It becomes a very noticeable new testament theme, that the things which are bent will be straightened. It coincides very well with the new progressive idea, however the metaphorical mechanisms are precisely similar to ecclesiastes 1:15

The next point relates to Jesus sowing seeds

"Words should be scattered like seed ; no matter how small the seed may be, if it has once found favourable ground, it unfolds its strength and from an insignificant thing spreads to its greatest growth." (3)

So that is very similar to the language of Jesus about sowing seeds. The word can be as small as a mustard seed and still fill the universe, but it must find favorable ground, for otherwise the word will not grow. Very striking how similar this one sentence is to all of that, though seneca utters it very nonchalantly at the end of a random letter

------------------------------------------------------------

(1) Seneca, Lucius Annaeus. Ad Lucilium Epistulae Morales. Translated by Richard Gummere Ph.D, vol. 1, G.P. Putnam’s Sons, 1917, p. 347.

(2) Seneca, Lucius Annaeus. Ad Lucilium Epistulae Morales. Translated by Richard Gummere Ph.D, vol. 1, G.P. Putnam’s Sons, 1917, p. 333.

(3) Seneca, Lucius Annaeus. Ad Lucilium Epistulae Morales. Translated by Richard Gummere Ph.D, vol. 1, G.P. Putnam’s Sons, 1917, p. 257.

If Seneca came first them you've actually found some Seneca is biblical ideas.

 

[Estro Felino]

Because the Pagan world underwent a crisis called "the crisis of the late Ancient Age", which started with the birth of the Roman Empire.
That is pagan philosophers were more and more interested in a spiritual change, in a renewal of consciousness. Which took place independently from Christianity.

 

[exchemist]

So now being done with volume I of his moral letters , and having read the happy life, I found a couple points where bible - like metaphor or reasoning seems to be employed. Other people have noticed this as well, if you do a search for it , but these are just a few points that stuck out to me. So the dilemma is, if seneca was unfamiliar with christianity or judaism , it would call into question the novelty of the ideas , and reduce them to common memes , per his time.

The man was , so far as I can tell, some kind of agnostic pagan who thought that, at best we earn our soul in life and that that is our reward. At least that is the principal theme I take from him

The first one on the idea of building foundations

"Suppose that two buildings have been erected, unlike as to their foundations, but equal in height and in grandeur. One is built on faultless ground, and the process of erection goes right ahead. In the other case, the foundations have exhausted the building materials, for they have been sunk into soft and shifting ground and much labour has been wasted in reaching the solid rock. As one looks at both of them, one sees clearly what progress the former has made, but the larger and more difficult part of the latter is hidden. So with men's dispositions ; some are pliable and easy to manage, but others have to be laboriously wrought out by hand, so to speak, and are wholly employed in the making of their own foundations." (1)

So , this is pretty much a mirror passage to the ideas starting in Matthew 7:24 , and both paragraphs almost have the same exact rhythm

A principle difference , is that Seneca does not view, in my opinion, a 'solid construction' as an act of hard work. Jesus on the hand, emphasizes the struggle in life. And so I think that Jesus , would say that to build a good work is hard, just as you may struggle and fail. Seneca associates the building of a solid work with a sense of ease , and I think this may have to with the fact that he defines virtue differently

The next point on the idea of straightening warped wood

"But I do not despair even of a hardened sinner. There is nothing that will not surrender to persistent treatment, to concentrated and careful attention ; however much the timber may be bent, you can make it straight again. Heat unbends curved beams, and wood that grew naturally in another shape is fashioned artificially according to our needs." (2)

This idea appears as a very noticeable verse from ecclesiastes where the inverse is true. It becomes a very noticeable new testament theme, that the things which are bent will be straightened. It coincides very well with the new progressive idea, however the metaphorical mechanisms are precisely similar to ecclesiastes 1:15

The next point relates to Jesus sowing seeds

"Words should be scattered like seed ; no matter how small the seed may be, if it has once found favourable ground, it unfolds its strength and from an insignificant thing spreads to its greatest growth." (3)

So that is very similar to the language of Jesus about sowing seeds. The word can be as small as a mustard seed and still fill the universe, but it must find favorable ground, for otherwise the word will not grow. Very striking how similar this one sentence is to all of that, though seneca utters it very nonchalantly at the end of a random letter

------------------------------------------------------------

(1) Seneca, Lucius Annaeus. Ad Lucilium Epistulae Morales. Translated by Richard Gummere Ph.D, vol. 1, G.P. Putnam’s Sons, 1917, p. 347.

(2) Seneca, Lucius Annaeus. Ad Lucilium Epistulae Morales. Translated by Richard Gummere Ph.D, vol. 1, G.P. Putnam’s Sons, 1917, p. 333.

(3) Seneca, Lucius Annaeus. Ad Lucilium Epistulae Morales. Translated by Richard Gummere Ph.D, vol. 1, G.P. Putnam’s Sons, 1917, p. 257.

This is rather interesting.

I see Seneca (the Younger) was born in 4BC and died in 65AD. So his adulthood corresponds exactly to the time of Christ's preaching and then the earliest days of Christianity, when the gospels were being written. Wiki has an interesting section explaining Seneca was adopted by the early Christian church as a "proto-saint". They even invented an apocryphal link between him and St. Paul:
Seneca the Younger - Wikipedia

 

[amorphous_constellation]

Because the Pagan world underwent a crisis called "the crisis of the late Ancient Age", which started with the birth of the Roman Empire.
That is pagan philosophers were more and more interested in a spiritual change, in a renewal of consciousness. Which took place independently from Christianity.

This is rather interesting.

I see Seneca (the Younger) was born in 4BC and died in 65AD. So his adulthood corresponds exactly to the time of Christ's preaching and then the earliest days of Christianity, when the gospels were being written. Wiki has an interesting section explaining Seneca was adopted by the early Christian church as a "proto-saint". They even invented an apocryphal link between him and St. Paul:
Seneca the Younger - Wikipedia

what's striking to me in particular , is the parable of the wise and foolish builders part , that I quoted. It's simply too similar to the actual biblical parable to be randomly incidental. It isn't very pauline either. So something was in the water somehow or another .. and I don't know what to conclude

There are a few other analog ideas in the writing as well, that maybe I might post. In one of the books he comes close to the parable of the birds and flowers, and in another place, there is language that is like John

 

[exchemist]

what's striking to me in particular , is the parable of the wise and foolish builders part , that I quoted. It's simply too similar to the actual biblical parable to be randomly incidental. It isn't very pauline either. So something was in the water somehow or another .. and I don't know what to conclude

There are a few other analog ideas in the writing as well, that maybe I might post. In one of the books he comes close to the parable of the birds and flowers, and in another place, there is language that is like John

Yes but while the comparison is to houses built on rock and sand in both cases, the lesson drawn by Seneca is quite different from that drawn by Christ. Seneca says nothing about the house built on loose foundations being weak and falling. His point is that with some people there is a huge amount of work needed to get them into shape, while with others it is dead easy.

 

[1213]

So now being done with volume I of his moral letters , and having read the happy life, I found a couple points where bible - like metaphor or reasoning seems to be employed. Other people have noticed this as well, if you do a search for it , but these are just a few points that stuck out to me. So the dilemma is, if seneca was unfamiliar with christianity or judaism , it would call into question the novelty of the ideas ,....

I think those are common observations from nature that anyone could and probably many have seen. I think it is not reasonable to say they belong to any certain person in history, because anyone could have made the same observation. I think the difference is in how Jesus uses the common observation to point something that he thought is important.

 

[amorphous_constellation]

Yes but while the comparison is to houses built on rock and sand in both cases, the lesson drawn by Seneca is quite different from that drawn by Christ. Seneca says nothing about the house built on loose foundations being weak and falling. His point is that with some people there is a huge amount of work needed to get them into shape, while with others it is dead easy.

In the Christian case the saying seems to be referring to faith , but that is something that can be stressed even if it is 'built on the rock.' Assuming that Jesus built his faith on the rock , he still said 'why have you forsaken me?' I think with seneca it just referring to the construction of personality or character , which actually , perhaps might be stressed in much the same way at times

 

[amorphous_constellation]

I think those are common observations from nature that anyone could and probably many have seen. I think it is not reasonable to say they belong to any certain person in history, because anyone could have made the same observation. I think the difference is in how Jesus uses the common observation to point something that he thought is important.

well , though probably many are under the impression that these parables are more novel than that. You could also make the postulation that perhaps Seneca was conversing with christians .