power of the deity seemed to John Stuart Mill the best explanation of the existing imperfections of the universe.
The other form of dualism is:
B. That which holds to the eternal existence of two antagonistic spirits, one evil and the other good In this view, matter is not a negative and imperfect substance, which nevertheless has self-existence, but is either the work or the instrument of a personal and positively malignant intelligence, which wages war against all good. This was the view of the Manicheans. Manichteanism is a compound of Christianity and the Persian doctrine of two eternal and opposite intelligences. Zoroaster, however, held matter to be pure, and to be the creation of the good Being. Mani apparently regarded matter as captive to the evil spirit, if not absolutely his creation.
The old story of Mani?s travels in Greece is wholly a mistake. Guericke, Church History, 1:185-187, maintains that Manicheanism contains no mixture of Platonic philosophy, has no connection with Judaism, and as a sect came into no direct relations with the Catholic Church. Harnoch, Wegweiser, 22, calls Manicheanism a compound of Gnosticism and Parsecism. Herzog, Encyclopadie, art.: Mani und die Manichaer, regards Manicheanism as the fruit, acme, and completion of Gnosticism. Gnosticism was a heresy in the church; Manicheanism, like New Platonism, was an anti-church. J. P. Lange: ?These opposing theories represent various pagan conceptions of the world which, after the manner of palimpsests, show through Christianity.? Isaac Taylor speaks of ?the creator of the carnivora?; and some modern Christians practically regard Satan as a second and equal God.
On the Religion of Zoroaster, see Hang, Essays on Parsees, 139-161, 302-309; also our quotations on pp. 347-349; Monier Williams, in I9th Century, Jan. 1881:155-177 ? Ahura Mazda was the creator of the universe. Matter was created by him and was neither identified with him or an emanation from him. In the divine nature here were two opposite, but not opposing, principles or forces, called ?twins? ? the one constructive and the other destructive; the one beneficent, the other maleficent. Zoroaster called these ?twins? also by the name of ?spirits,? and declared that ?these two spirits created, the one the reality, the other the non-reality.? Williams says that these two principles were conflicting only in name. The only antagonizing was between the resulting good and evil brought about by the free agent, man. See Jackson, Zoroaster.
<- Previous Table of Contents Next ->
Was this article helpful?