The Theology of Heraclitus: a Presocratic Pantheism

227rarae aves ilr ancient tioesr and E- seems to be no exception.Iiever!heless, in nany lrays ll . i6 put into an aobiguousposition tha! Dodds has caIIed that of the "modernis!", whereln one respect the thioker could be ca11ed an atheist sitrcehe lnpiously denles the accepted verELons of the gods, and inanother respect, he could be seen.as "puftlng piety on asound founalaciofl" (Dodds, Bacchae,104). The problen of labeIsaIId tags is, of course, our proble.o and not his, but hls contenpora!iesst1L1 night have appoved or d!sapproved of hi.stheories for reasons not so dlfferent fron rrhat Dodds desctibes.Eerce i.t nust be adoitted that fieraclitusr "tsodernlst"!endencies do leave hln open to a charge of inpletyor, $orss yet, ethelsE in !he op!oion of traditionallsts.Eveo so, it is evident !o the oore open Dlnd that such enlightenedviens do not necessarily presuppose a lack of re-119 lous fee1{ng,-I! 6ighl 6Iso be uorth noting that the exlstence ofrellglous feellng does not necessarlly presuppose a lack ofphilosophical acunen. Because the modern fashion favo!s theuon-religious side of philosophical lnqulry, lt ls a tenptatlodto apply oLrr Eodern clterla to ancient specula!1on.The resulEs can be rewardlng, bl]t the me!hod can also be nisleadins.The ldtte! result 1s i11us!ratecl in the recent i"rork)-{gaillet us quc!e Dodds (Bacchae,bei[g asked 'Eorr can bread be cod?' repliednot a daa der..oid of religious feellng".ru4-)J: IEe lrtstllnan wno'Whatelse lrould it be?' was