This has been a refreshing of history for me, very interesting new and old knowledge. I figure Chris will enjoy the following link, but even if you aren't interested in history, you might appreciate learning some interesting things under the title "Comparing Greek and Chinese Philosophy and Science" at http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/~nsivin/comp.html
With that as my background reference in this post, I want to bring up other aspects related to the OP, towards understanding of how world cultures handle biblical philosophy.
I got onto that for several reasons while studying Chris' OP statement about Greek influence on early Christians. I attended a large church several years ago that began supporting "out-of-denomination" missionaries, much of it via cash and donations of goods shipped to the Philippines, then smuggled into places like interior China. Chinese pastors usually never left their area, so depended on outside contacts through another ministry that supports them directly. We lost track of them, assuming something dire happened, and eventually stopped being contacted for support. But when that ministry was going well, the primary missionary, who only occasionally visited inland China to see his family, visited us to give a fresh report and teach us how to help without interfering in safety of home pastors there.
The main idea I remember most is by whatever means get the scriptures to those people. Regardless of language they would be able to read and preach, even if all they get is commentary on scriptures without even mentioning scriptures. The Chinese minister's English was labored, being a master of Mandarin, assuring us that even though the people there in deep inland China only knew Mandarin they could get English directly translated to their dialect, then preach it as they took it literally. The link I gave helps explain how the Chinese went in a very different direction from the Greek and Hebrew thought processes around 400 AD when Augustine was alive, today quite more different than yet are able to figure out the scriptures to get the intended message. They can do that without any knowledge of Hebrew or Greek culture, unaffected by outside philosophies, and come here to America preaching the gospel in far greater depth than most American preachers. "Orthodox" Jews today have done quite well in preserving at least an historical remembrance of their legacy, devoid for the most part of Greek philosophy.
I say that because much of the ancient Chinese culture has survived alongside their own modern ideas, and so has the Hebrew culture, though also now divided into sects such as Orthodox Jews, Reformed Jews, and conservative Jews. I note that around the time of Augustine and Aquinas there was no significant example of Aristotelian society, having vanished, and the Roman society was becoming but history, also failed. So it was that no society of their day existed to give a heavy credit to Greek philosophers as influential enough to permanently affect subjects like immutability of God, or to shape Christian doctrine.
The point I'm trying to get to is it isn't necessary in any culture to master the Hebrew culture or any philosophy to let the true Interpreter of holy scriptures, the Holy Spirit, to deliver God's unchanged message. The gospel is being read and cherished all around the world with no help from outside teachers, developing their own teachers as they learn from God through scriptures and His anointing.
That is a reason why I believe it's important to read the scriptures first as a literal message, taken literally, assuming a metaphorical message only if a literal reading doesn't make sense even if there's an apparent
disagreement with other scriptures. Give it extra study to sort out any discrepancy. God is capable of guiding the reader to realize the difference like He does for new Christians separated from the rest of us. However, if the metaphoric interpretation produces an out of context message not making sense of the surrounding text, then it should be discarded. Any non-Christian philosophical interpretation of scriptures ought to be discarded, especially if tainted by Aristotle. Look up what he had to say about pursuit of happiness
, by his estimation the greatest pursuit of humankind. Philosophies such as his helped solidify humanism, not Hebrew or Christian thinking. Does that mean rejecting anything from St Augustine or Aquinas? No. Practically all their contributions were free of Platonic/Aristotelian/Manichaeism thinking he studied in his youth, discarded upon conversion to Christ. The man was brilliant, able to safely take into consideration many perspectives, like some Christians today are willing to study science perspectives that support evolution, so that we can be better equipped to discuss that. It would be interesting to find some major doctrine of his, or Aquinas, that demonstrate a significant influence from Aristotle more than what is gleaned directly from the Bible.
Be fishers of men