Matthew Arnold (1822-1888), a literary figure of the Victorian era, comes alongside Browning and Tennyson. He is a poet, critic, religious thinker and pedagogue. He has twenty-four years’ experience as a school inspector. He gave her plenty of time to get to know the different classes and examine their behaviors and habits. This experience prompted him to write ‘Culture and Anarchy’. In his book, he has also dealt with various topics about true culture. In this book, he has discussed Hebraism and Hellenism.

In the conception of the theme, he discusses doing and thinking. His general opinion of human beings is that they prefer to act rather than think. He rejects it because mankind is in error and cannot always think correctly, but rarely comes forward in the process of reasoning and meditation, or is not correctly guided by the light of true reason. The nation follows the voice of its conscience and its best light, but it is not the light of true reason but darkness. In his opinion, the nation is energy or the ability to do things, but it is not intelligence or the ability to think correctly. That energy that has the sense of obligation and duty must be related to the best light.

It speaks of the great idea of ​​knowing and the great energy to act. Both are the most powerful forces and should be in harmony in the light of reason. So, they are Hebraism and Hellenism. Insists on the balance of both thought and action (Hellenism and Hebraism). The ultimate goal of Hellenism and Judaism is the same as the perfection and salvation of man. Furthermore, he argues that the supreme idea with Hellenism or the Greek Spirit is to see things as they really are, and the supreme idea with Hebraism or the Spirit of the Bible is conduct and obedience. He points out that Greek philosophy considers the body and its desires to be an impediment to right thinking, while Hebraism considers the body and its desires to be an obstacle to right action. The root idea of ​​both is the desire of reason and the will of God, and the desire of God’s love. Hebraism studies the universal order and observes the apparent magnificence of God in the order, while Hellenism follows it with a flexible activity. Thus, Hellenism achieves spontaneity of conscience with clarity of mind, and Hebraism achieves rigor of conscience with its clarity of thought. In short, Hebraism shows an emphasis on doing rather than knowing, and following God’s will. Its main idea is absolute obedience to the will of God.

Both Hellenism and Hebraism are directly connected to the lives of human beings. Hellenism maintains the emphasis on knowing or knowledge, while Hebraism strengthens its faith in doing. The ultimate goal of both is to participate in the divine life with knowledge and action. It describes that the Bible reveals the truth that grants God’s peace and freedom. The simple idea of ​​Hellenism is to get rid of ignorance and see things as they are and look for beauty in them. Socrates, as a Greek, affirms that the best man is the one who tries to perfect himself, and the happiest man is the one who feels that he is perfecting himself. He does not tell us how it should be done, and how to see things in their reality and beauty.

Now, Matthew Arnold turns to the sin that spoils the efforts to achieve Hellenism. He is of the opinion that sin is an obstacle to perfection because it brings obstacles to knowing ourselves; prevents the passage of man to perfection. He calls it a mysterious power that is hostile to man. The discipline of Holy Scripture teaches how to avoid and stop Sin. Therefore, Hellenism speaks of thinking clearly and seeing things in their essence and beauty; where as Hebraism speaks of becoming aware of sin and staying away from it.

In this treatise, Arnold asserts that there is plenty of Hellenism in the English nation, and emphasizes Hebraism, because it is based on conduct and self-control. He admits that the age is unable to govern itself in its quest for perfection, and the bright promise of the Greek ideal fades. Now, the obedience or submission must be to the rules of conduct, as expressed in the Holy Scripture (Bible). Hellenism puts its main emphasis on clear intelligence, while Hebraism maintains the main emphasis on firm obedience, the moral power and character.

Arnold speaks of the idea of ​​immortality illustrated by Saint Paul, the Christian saint, and Plato, the Greek philosopher, but both have left something unexplained. So the problem of the human spirit is still unsolved in both Hebraism and Hellenism. In this sense, the writer finds the triumph of the great movement of Christianity over the moral impulses of man. He accepts that the Renaissance revived Hellenism and the intellectual impulses of man in Europe and Puritanism embraced the blessings of both Hellenism and Hebraism. In the Reformation, there was more influence from Hebraism than from Hellenism. It was strong and there was a serious return to the Bible and to doing the will of God from the heart. The superiority of Puritanism over Catholicism was moral, as a result of its greater sincerity and greater seriousness. Arnold says that Puritanism’s mental attitude toward the Bible in no respect differs from Catholicism’s mental attitude toward the church.

The sixteenth century pitted Hellenism against Hebraism. Hebraism was renewed and purged, but Renaissance Hellenism lost its moral character. Keep in mind that Hellenism is of Indo-European growth and Hebraism is of Semitic growth. Those who belonged to the Indo-European stock showed their natural affinity with Hellenism. English Puritanism restored the conscience and moral sense of Hebraism to the English in the 16th century. He saved the nation from the moral callousness and lethargic rule of conduct that came with the Renaissance in the 16th century. It was a reaction of Judaism against Hellenism. If Hebraism defeated Hellenism, it showed that Hellenism was imperfect.

The defeat of Hellenism by early Christianity and the defeat of Hellenism by Puritanism was the result of the Renaissance emphasis on the progress of humanism and science. It inclined man to know himself and the world, to see things as they are and to the spontaneity of consciousness. Despite this, the main inclination of the English nation was towards rigor of conscience.
In conclusion, it must be added that the rule of life must be based on the theory of Hellenism and Hebraism because the ultimate goal of both is the perfection or salvation of man.