I think the N.T. is deeply deeply Jewish and deeply deeply Greek. The fact that the NT was written in Greek assures that tension and synergy. Diligently translating a cultural and religious tradition into another language usually creates a life giving hybrid. In my experience pretty much by definition. And certainly by experience. Missionaries like Paul seem to understand that intuitively when at their best and most thoughtful.

I think the church at its best always returns to its reconciled and culturally hybrid roots. And I’m guessing the church at its best in the days to come will always look forward to its culturally hybrid and reconciled future as it continues to cross cultures.

As Beth mentions, various respected old timey Greeks held pretty much every view of the body and the afterlife. That kind of openness was characteristic of paganism which was arguably more democratic both philosophically and politically than the Christian historical tradition was until the development of modern western cultures that arose out of a cross between neo-pagan (Enlightenment) and Christian thought.

If the church bought into a spiritualized ‘by and bye’ and disrespected the body and the environment I’m not sure the fault lies with letting ‘the Greeks’ into church practice and theology by way of a cultural Trojan horse.

Maybe the problem lies with misunderstanding what both the Jews and the Greeks in all their richness had to teach and oversimplifying each.

Or in other words, ignorance and fundamentalism.

I’d love to see more thoughtful Protestant theologians make those their target than poor Plato.

Aristotle was Greek, and yet did not bifurcate reality so that the material world was something to be “escaped.” In fact, his view of the cosmos was far more fit to speak about the incarnation, as theologians like Thomas Aquinas later demonstrated. Much better, then, to say, “… but there have been times when the PLATONIC view was very influential.”

Here Wright is careful to limit his statement to the Hebrew view OF THE COSMOS, but others are not always so clear. Many Protestants I know have the idea that the church is at its best when it is “Hebrew,” period, as opposed to “Gentile + Hebrew.”

Catholic Christians would certainly question that exclusivity, seeing Jesus as the Logos, in which there is neither “Greek” nor “Hebrew.” Moreover, at least one great theologian of the early church by the name of Paul seemed to have agreed!