THEOLOGY
The Stoics are not greatly concerned with theology, nor religious, but they assert there is a god (often not capitalized). God’s existence is proven both ontologically according to Zeno and cosmologically according to Cleanthes. They believe the likelihood of god’s existence is further supported by the near universal belief of humans that god exists.
The god of Stoicism is more impersonal than in traditional religions. It is often referred to as logos, the creative fire, Nature, and “the Soul of the World.” God is a ‘craftsman,’ but not anthropomorphic. God is the source of rational, formless principles that are ungenerated and indestructible as against passive matter and form which are both generated and destructible. God is also called the “Lawgiver, Mind, Order, and even Destiny. God sustains the universe, is immortal, rational, perfect in happiness, immune to all bad, and divine. In a single word, the Stoic god is Providence (pronia).
METAPHYSICS
The metaphysics of the Stoics follows directly from this impersonal theology. Stoics believe in a natural determinism originating from god wherein attention to the smallest details in the whole design leads to certain ends by natural means, especially in reference to those ends connected with human purpose. These final ends are considered good and the order of the cosmos includes a benevolent care of mankind.4
Within this framework, the Stoics position human freedom as actions not driven by natural determinism. Still fate is instantiated in human experience and choice as factors of ‘co-fate’ (naturally occurring events) influence outcomes of all human action. 
Human freedom is a key element in Stoic philosophy as when collated with god’s perfect design and natural determinism, the “fundamental injunction” of Stoicism is to live in harmony with Nature, which is the virtual definition of virtue for them.5 In addition, as rational beings, humans have a spark of divinity and recognizing the divinity (reason) in oneself is the means to happiness.
CONCLUSION
In summary, ultimate reality for the Stoics, includes Truth, the infinitely cycling material world, Providence, Fate, and the shared divinity of all rational creatures. This description seems to correlate well with the experience of being human, and is thus psychologically comforting. As the universe is ultimately good, the Stoic picture is incontrovertibly optimistic despite the usually negative connotation attributed to the word fate. Virtue and happiness involve conducting one’s life in harmony with Nature and recognizing the divinity in oneself. It is no surprise that the emerging Christianity of the late Roman period incorporates Stoicism and its philosophy remains with us today. Moreover Stoic doctrines transcend culture, for example Providence echoes the Tao and ‘grasp’ mirrors the means to knowledge in Zen.
Next time we look at Neoplatinism, especially as presented by Plotinus.
——————————————————————
4 Edwards, Paul (editor), The Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Macmillan Publishing Co., Inc. & The Free Press, 1972. Volume 8, page 21.
5Ibid., page 19.
In our pursuit of the various concepts of ultimate reality developed by the ancient Greeks we come now to the Stoics. Building on the thoughts of Heraclitus, the Atomists, and the Cynics, Zeno of Citium (336-265 B.C.E.) founded one of the most eminent philosophies in human history through his lectures on the Painted Porch (Stoa Poikile) in Athens. Stoicism evolved as a philosophy over the subsequent 400 years and thus variations in its understanding of ultimate reality appeared over that time. Throughout, the Stoics were typically more concerned about ethics than metaphysics, but a few fundamental principles underpin their teachings on the latter.
This incredibly abbreviated description of the mind of Aristotle is by no means sufficient for the reader’s full understanding, and thus I urge consulting the original texts where time spent will be well rewarded. In the words of Louise Ropes Loomis, the great 20th century classics scholar, “Remembering that his surviving works are condensed and often disjointed summaries of academic lectures, which he certainly never expected would outlast him…” we see “the encyclopedic scope of his activity and the tireless power of his mind, that penetrated so far into so many subjects of human thought and knowledge, in the brief space of the thirteen years at the Lyceum.”9
“It is clear from what has been said that there is a substance that is eternal and unmovable and separate from sensible things. It has been shown that this substance cannot have any magnitude, but is without parts and indivisible…But it has also been shown that it is impassive and unalterable; for all other changes are posterior to change and place.” – Aristotle, Metaphysics (1073a).1
Aristotle disassembles entities into substrate and form – for example, a chair is made of wood (substrate) arranged into a particular furniture piece (form), thus warranting the designation ‘substance.’ A substance can be the recipient of characteristics, but changing characteristics does not change the substance – consider the example of the chair where changing the color neither changes the wood nor the structure of the chair. Substances do not come into existence ex nihilo, rather their potential existence becomes actual – Aristotle’s first kind of change. Potential is actualized by virtue of four causes: (1) material, (2) formal, (3) efficient, and (4) final. Material and formal causes are the “what” (the wood and structure of the chair), efficient cause is the “how” (the worker’s building the chair) and final cause is the “why” (the chair as intended for sitting upon).
The second kind of change in the universe is motion which has three possible causes: Nature (e.g. the growth of a tree), force (e.g. gravity) or free will (e.g. human activities). Aristotle blends Heraclitus’ ‘change’ with Parmenides’ “constancy’ – thus, for example, when we throw a ball, it changes place or moves, but the ball itself is intact and remains a ball. A key point here is that a retrograde analysis of motion in the universe leads to a prime mover with free will.
This work of satire starts with Tennessee Ernie Ford’s 16 Tons and takes place in the near future in an assisted living facility of the One True Church. The building which had formerly been an abattoir and later a toilet distribution center has smart technology that monitors not only the residents’ medical condition, but also their behavior. We learn there has just been an annual Jubilee Revival with humorously titled workshops such as Your Suffering: Is It Enough? and God and Guns: What Would Jesus Pack? and thus the place is quiet “because its denizens languished in the satisfied exhaustion of exuberance, as they were fatigued by the aftereffects of excessive righteousness.”12 After a series of sermons in the grand hall by cleverly-named preachers assisted by a righteous parrot, the Jubilee closed with the famous Bible School Bowl in which contestants responded to a series of absurd multiple choice questions each of which had the same correct answer. But the denouement of the story is a debate about tithing fomented by the Devil. The hilarious narrative that follows should not be missed.
In Breen’s last story we are invited to a press conference by the Conseil Europeén pour lea Recherche Nucléaire (CERN) opening with a statement from Francois Kohelét14 in front of the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) which the author compares to a mandala15 The impeccably dressed Kohelét sports a Vandyke16 and tells the audience that CERN is now “prepared to uncover the secrets of the universe and usher in a new age of peace, wisdom, and prosperity.”17 He tells them that they are 300 meters underground in the Super Hadron Energy Output Laboratory (SHEOL) where scientists are able to look back to the beginning of the universe using a process called Molecular Output Linear Energy Collision Habitation (MOLECH18) With this ability and their analysis of quarks, Kohelét explains, science will uncover absolute truth. The three loops of the LHC are compared to the Holy Trinity and the subatomic particles to life, while the Higgs Boson which gives mass to all things carries the moniker of the “God Particle.” He scoffs at the questions from the press, especially with respect to what came before the big bang, stating with a straight face, “…God must prove to us that he exists.”19 However, after the conference a series of scientific findings confounds Kohelét with a message from Ecclesiastes.
16 A Vandyke beard is a short pointed beard which is often pictured on Saint Francis and the Devil.
Breen departs from the manuscript of the Bible starting with this story of a young 14th century Irish woman seduced by a man from whom she hears and then repeats “a blasphemy of the Holy Ghost” from which there is no divine forgiveness. When she learns of her eternal damnation, she pleads to become an anchorite, wherein she will be sealed in a 10 foot cube cell at the Church of the Blessed Virgin for life, without offering an explanation to the Bishop, who nonetheless agrees to permit her seclusion. Breen’s descriptions of her isolation are horrific, including the fact that the only opening to the outside world is a slit (called a squint) in one wall looking into the Church. She becomes famous for her sacrifice ostensibly to the Church and her community and receives many gifts from her grateful admirers. Towards the conclusion of the story she learns the Church is turning away from such martyrdom, and Breen relates her tragic end.
In this story set in the near future, a traveling evangelist named Ahab Bale9 and his wife are given a gold charm – the saharon – to support their mission by a poor, elderly follower named Anna Faunel10. They sell the priceless piece, once touched by the infant hand of Jesus, for $100,000,000 at auction and use the proceeds to fund an electronic ministry which becomes the greatest in America. Events in the world and in Christianity portend the story of Revelation, and Ahab decides to deliver the most important sermon of all time. Despite warnings from his aide, Micah,11 Ahab delivers his millenarial sermon full of gruesome descriptions of the fate of non-believers and half-believers. An ending worthy of a horror film completes the tale.
This science fiction-like short fictional piece imagines the gods of humanity as members of a divine club called the Cosmogony Society meeting on a distant planet. The treasures of the club are modern and prehistoric hunting trophies, living tapestries, and its polyglot library with precious original religious and philosophical masterpieces. The main speaker, a god named Hadad,1 recounts in brief the narrative of the Old and New Testaments. We are told that when the gods divided up Earth, JHWH insisted he would create humans as immortal beings (by their eating fruit from the Tree of Life) in a separate paradise (Eden). Hadad mocks JHWH who was repetitively surprised by human disobedience which he punished by driving them out of paradise and forcing them deeper and deeper into the realms of the other gods where they become progressively morally depraved. However Hadad seems to express admiration for JHWH’s solution of sending a deus ex machina2 to redeem mankind.
At one point, Cain comes upon Adam’s image originating from Sheol 4 but seen in a pool of water at the root of the mountain, Ekur.3 Their conversation is perhaps the most poignant of Breen’s entire book as Adam pleads with Cain to find a means of redemption and hope for humanity in the face of inevitable sin, death, and damnation. It is also here that Cain asks Adam about the mark on his forehead and is told, “It is a strange mark, it is one I have not seen before. I do not know it. Did God place it on you? If He did, then joy and sorrow and day and night are yours.”5 There is so much to this rich story, including the unfolding significance of Cain’s mark of opposites, but I will leave it for the reader to discover this treasure for himself of herself.
Modern Myths: Stories from the Bible by Michael Breen, published 2018.
Mike is a theist and religious, but not a churchgoer, nor particularly attached to a denomination. In addition to philosophy and theology he has an interest in mythology and psychology. He has been working on what he calls ‘counter-intuitive theology’ wherein the world is viewed as dominated by opposites (e.g. good and evil) and pervaded by a ‘paradoxical’ God who may not be aware of his omniscience and who is not fixed or static, but in the process of ‘becoming.’ God in his model is an invisible being manifested in time and space, and amoral, even reckless, perhaps without being conscious of this.
