Christianity as a philosophy....

[Zarathustra]

I wasn't sure where to post this, as it was kind of borderline, I chose the Christianity section, if any Moderators feel otherwise, feel free to move it.

Now, I'm not a Christian, but I do own a Bible. I'll pick it up and read some of it every so often (I'm fond of the book of Daniel ). I look at the Bible and I see parable after parable, I see double meanings in many chapters, the entire "story-line" seems allegorical in and of itself. As such, I've always treated the Bible as a story to outline a philosophy.

(Note: I am a Christian by neither religion nor philosophy)

A book outlining a philosophy as, dare I say, depressing, as Christianity, would probably be a hard sell. Saying "wouldn't this be a cool way to live?" will get less attention than saying "this guy was the SON OF GOD! He died so that we might be saved! He TOLD us to live this way! Let's do it!"

The Bible teaches teaches Christianity in the same way Nietzsche's Thus Spake Zarathustra taught of the Superman and Bach's Illusions taught of the importance of outlook and perceptions to life. They all had main characters who had some religious significance: Jesus was the Son of God, Zarathustra was a very wise holy man, and Donald was a self-described (and by example) Messiah.

Before you argue that those authors were simply copying the Bible, I will say that such is not the nature of this thread

Is a Christian philosopher, as opposed to theologist, still considered a Christian? Why/not?

[MagusYanam]

I don't know... theology is fun, since I like trying to think my way through tough questions. But as a Christian, I would have to say that Christianity is not just a statement of belief, it's a way of life and thus a philosophy in itself. Christianity is a way that shows courtesy and love toward others and an openness of mind and heart. (BTW, I don't see how this is depressing, but perhaps we have different conceptions of the Christian philosophy. I would greatly appreciate your insights on this issue, Zarathustra.)

I think Christianity has been given a bad rep by its reduction in some circles to a statement of, in essence, 'you accept Jesus as your Saviour or you go to Hell'. It reduces to a condition what should be a direction and makes static a faith which should be dynamic. Furthermore, it doesn't seem consistent with the courtesy, love and open-heartedness that seem to me to be the hallmarks of the Christian philosophy.

So, in answer, yes - I think those who have a Christian philosophy should be considered Christian by definition.

[Zarathustra]

Thank you for your input, MagusYanam.

As far as the "depressing part"; every now and again I go to a Christian (Catholic? I can never remember the hierarchy) mass and it's always: "Hi everyone....let's read from the Scriptures...let's stand up and drone along to some songs...let's repent all of our sins...let's read some more Scripture...let's repent all of our sins that we committed during the last Scripture reading". Even during the Christmas and Easter masses: "Hooray! Jesus is alive! Let's ask forgiveness because we are all very very bad people"

Heh, sorry about the semi-rant there

As far as the courtesy and love: I'm cool with that.

Though, I'm not so sure about the open-mindedness: the Bible seems to profess a more or less strict code of morals, and all of the violators are cast into that Lake of Fire.

[MagusYanam]

Heh, sorry about the semi-rant there

Hey, it's OK by me. I've made a few in my time, that's for sure. Some even on related threads. (I can't believe I just used an emoticon. What's the world coming to?)

The open-mindedness, open-heartedness bit I get from the most basic principle of Christianity, and one which I think transcends all other scripture: Love thy neighbour and love thy God (that's not a quote). In my book, loving my neighbour means (among other things) listening to them and taking their opinions seriously, regardless of their (non-)belief.

And yes, unfortunately there is a depressing streak in Christianity that denies the capacity for goodness in man. I don't think this is central, however some Christians might disagree.

I agree with you wholeheartedly on another issue here. What is it with the hymnals in some churches? I was in an Anabaptist church during my childhood back in Madison and the music there was great (a cappella). Then I went to a Lutheran church in my teen years and some of the music was just plain awful.

[Zarathustra]

Well said, Magus, I agree.

Do other Christians have essentially the same view, and that would account for the lack of responses. Because, I would really like to hear an argument for the opposing opinion.

[Dilettante]

Hi, Zarathustra and MagusYanam!

I don't know what you mean by "philosophy" but certainly Christianity did not start out as a philosophical system. In the early days it was just a lifestyle. Soon there were many different Christian sects, and some of them included practices the mention of which would perhaps make many of today's Christians faint.
Later, and especially when Christianity became the official religion of the Roman Empire, it became necessary to build a Christian intellectual edifice and this was done by borrowing ideas from people like Plato and Aristotle. Christian philosophers are definitely Christian.
As for the depressing aspects, of course there are some. Even though I had always heard that Christians were supposed to be happy people, some are pretty gloomy types. I think that really irritated Nietzsche. One of my favorite books in the Bible is Quohelet or Ecclesiastes. It's depressing, but it's also beautiful. And it's curious in that it never once mentions God. It's the Bible's Godless book I guess...
Christianity often does not make sense. It goes against the grain to love your enemies, let alone not to protect yourself against evil, as the NT commands you to do. But the "trump card" in Christianity is not its sensibility, it's not its ethical content (a case could be made that Spinoza's ethics are in some ways better). It's the Incarnation. It puts God at your level. Unfortunately it's also incomprehensible, like the Trinity.
Sorry I'm rambling...I don't know if I have really answered anything.

[Zarathustra]

Thank you for your input, Dilettante.

I'm not sure that you really did answer anything ( ) but your response did make sense.

By philosophy I mean, as opposed to a religion. Following the teachings, but not believing Jesus is God. If that helps any.

[Dilettante]

I understand. I would say someone who follows the teachings of Jesus but does not believe he was God is not a Christian in any strict sense of the word, but that is not to say that he or she would be denied salvation by a just, benevolent God.

Is that an answer?

[Zarathustra]

That better qualifies as an answer

However, according to the American Heritage Dictionary:

Chris-tian ( P ) Pronunciation Key (krschn)
adj.

1. Professing belief in Jesus as Christ or following the religion based on the life and teachings of Jesus.
2. Relating to or derived from Jesus or Jesus's teachings.
3. Manifesting the qualities or spirit of Jesus; Christlike.
4. Relating to or characteristic of Christianity or its adherents.
5. Showing a loving concern for others; humane.

# 2, 3 and 5 seem to suggest a simple philosophy would suffice to qualify as a Christian.

Unless by "strict" you mean the definitions from literalists, fundamentalists, and/or the Vatican

[Dilettante]

Agreed: by "strict" I meant "strictly religious" or pertaining to religion. But you're right. There are, however, wider meanings of the word which are legitimate also. I guess it's become a vague term which needs qualification (religiously Christian/culturally Christian, etc.)

As an example, I know some Catholic Atheists.