What did philosophy really do to Christianity?

[mickiel]

"One of the most influential professors in the shaping of contemporary theology was Peter Abelard, (1079-1142). He is partly responsible for giving us modern theology. His teachings set the table and prepared the menu for scholastic philosophers like Thomas Aquinas, ( 1225-1274). Even before this Christianity became steeped in the thoughts of Plato and Aristotle.

The shocking historical fact is that many of the Christian church fathers were pagan philosophers and orators prior to their conversions, and the Christian faith soon began to take on a philosophical bent." ( Frank Viola pg.202).

( Much of this thread will draw from Frank Violas " Pagan Christianity", Eusebius" The history of the church", Boggs " The Christian Saga" and Rowdon " Theological education in historical perspective.") And from my own views of course. And I will draw on a few websites and articles, which I will always list the references.

Viola states, on Pg.203, " Within a century and a half after Christianity and Philosophy first came into contact, the ideas and methods of Philosophy had flowed in such mass into Christianity, and filled so large a place in it, as to have made it no less a Philosophy than a religion." Which when I read, was absolutely stunning!

When Philosophy got into the Christian bloodstream, especially Pagan philosophy, the Christian Theological Education system has never recovered from it. The fusion of Pagan and Christian elements, became a " Theology unto itself"; ( The term " Theology" used to describe Pagan beliefs).

[Man_With_A_Plan]

I think we were predestined to live in sin, which is why it has happened, the free will doctrine is just a way of trying to excuse God from having human history play out as it has. Human history is just the unfolding of God's predestined will; God knew exactly what he was doing. Free will is man's effort to put responsibility for life in human hands; God is responsible for how things have played out.

And we are most fortunate of that. Under God's responsibility, we all make it, under human responsibility, much of humanity is condemned.

The theme of creation appears often in Jewish history and writings. The tales are different, but the central message is that God created us and at some point our species chose to exit the harmony we had with God.

God knew it would happen but that doesn't mean predestination, though I could see how the Protestant reformers (well, some of them) could see things so simply.

I see that as contradiction; God knowing is predestination.

According to Merriam-Webster, predestination is "the belief that everything that will happen has already been decided by God or fate and cannot be changed."

[mickiel]

I think we were predestined to live in sin, which is why it has happened, the free will doctrine is just a way of trying to excuse God from having human history play out as it has. Human history is just the unfolding of God's predestined will; God knew exactly what he was doing. Free will is man's effort to put responsibility for life in human hands; God is responsible for how things have played out.

And we are most fortunate of that. Under God's responsibility, we all make it, under human responsibility, much of humanity is condemned.

The theme of creation appears often in Jewish history and writings. The tales are different, but the central message is that God created us and at some point our species chose to exit the harmony we had with God.

God knew it would happen but that doesn't mean predestination, though I could see how the Protestant reformers (well, some of them) could see things so simply.

I see that as contradiction; God knowing is predestination.

According to Merriam-Webster, predestination is "the belief that everything that will happen has already been decided by God or fate and cannot be changed."

Well I think it stands to reason that he decides it because he knows it.

[Man_With_A_Plan]

I think we were predestined to live in sin, which is why it has happened, the free will doctrine is just a way of trying to excuse God from having human history play out as it has. Human history is just the unfolding of God's predestined will; God knew exactly what he was doing. Free will is man's effort to put responsibility for life in human hands; God is responsible for how things have played out.

And we are most fortunate of that. Under God's responsibility, we all make it, under human responsibility, much of humanity is condemned.

The theme of creation appears often in Jewish history and writings. The tales are different, but the central message is that God created us and at some point our species chose to exit the harmony we had with God.

God knew it would happen but that doesn't mean predestination, though I could see how the Protestant reformers (well, some of them) could see things so simply.

I see that as contradiction; God knowing is predestination.

According to Merriam-Webster, predestination is "the belief that everything that will happen has already been decided by God or fate and cannot be changed."

Well I think it stands to reason that he decides it because he knows it.

If a parent says to their 18-yr-old child, "go into the world," knowing full well that the child will make mistakes, it's the parent's fault?

I admit that this is a simple analogy, though. The obvious argument one might make against this is that the parent could have shielded the child from mistakes in life by warning the child beforehand. I would completely agree with this argument, but this only proves that analogies, models and symbols are, by their nature as simple representations, prone to erroneous conclusions regarding the reality they represent; in other words, a reality can be represented by an analogy, but we can't assume that an analogy can [always] conclude new truths about that reality.

So we need to define what sin is. According to Christian teaching, when something contradicts the will of God, that thing is called sin (as opposed to when something contradicts our will, which is called "pain"). God allowed the human race to freely hurt him by separating itself from him, knowing full well we would.

Why did God allow this? Well, according to Christian teaching, God allowed this so that he might show his love for us by becoming man and bearing that pain. So in a very mysterious way beyond our current comprehension, all sin ever committed, past present and future, is born by Christ during his Passion and Crucifixion.

In the most literal sense, every time you and I contradict the will of God, we contribute to his suffering 2,000 years ago.

It's also Christian doctrine that these truths are only known to us in the dimmest shadows and imagery. The fullness of truth will be revealed when Christ returns in glory.

[mickiel]

I think we were predestined to live in sin, which is why it has happened, the free will doctrine is just a way of trying to excuse God from having human history play out as it has. Human history is just the unfolding of God's predestined will; God knew exactly what he was doing. Free will is man's effort to put responsibility for life in human hands; God is responsible for how things have played out.

And we are most fortunate of that. Under God's responsibility, we all make it, under human responsibility, much of humanity is condemned.

The theme of creation appears often in Jewish history and writings. The tales are different, but the central message is that God created us and at some point our species chose to exit the harmony we had with God.

God knew it would happen but that doesn't mean predestination, though I could see how the Protestant reformers (well, some of them) could see things so simply.

I see that as contradiction; God knowing is predestination.

According to Merriam-Webster, predestination is "the belief that everything that will happen has already been decided by God or fate and cannot be changed."

Well I think it stands to reason that he decides it because he knows it.

If a parent says to their 18-yr-old child, "go into the world," knowing full well that the child will make mistakes, it's the parent's fault?

I admit that this is a simple analogy, though. The obvious argument one might make against this is that the parent could have shielded the child from mistakes in life by warning the child beforehand. I would completely agree with this argument, but this only proves that analogies, models and symbols are, by their nature as simple representations, prone to erroneous conclusions regarding the reality they represent; in other words, a reality can be represented by an analogy, but we can't assume that an analogy can [always] conclude new truths about that reality.

So we need to define what sin is. According to Christian teaching, when something contradicts the will of God, that thing is called sin (as opposed to when something contradicts our will, which is called "pain"). God allowed the human race to freely hurt him by separating itself from him, knowing full well we would.

Why did God allow this? Well, according to Christian teaching, God allowed this so that he might show his love for us by becoming man and bearing that pain. So in a very mysterious way beyond our current comprehension, all sin ever committed, past present and future, is born by Christ during his Passion and Crucifixion.

In the most literal sense, every time you and I contradict the will of God, we contribute to his suffering 2,000 years ago.

It's also Christian doctrine that these truths are only known to us in the dimmest shadows and imagery. The fullness of truth will be revealed when Christ returns in glory.

Well I am not Christian so I don't hold to Christian doctrine, neither do I think they hold a monopoly on the truth. I think God is so powerful and organized, that human history is simply the unfolding of his predestined will. I think God holds life to be so important, that he does not leave it up to randomness and the will of his creations. But I do agree that things are way beyond our comprehension; there is much we simply do not see.

[dio9]

[Replying to post 49 by mickiel]

I agree Greek philosophy dominated the Christian spirit , which is originally Hebraic.

[mickiel]

[Replying to post 49 by mickiel]

I agree Greek philosophy dominated the Christian spirit , which is originally Hebraic.

Its one of the ways paganism entered the Christian church.

[GottaHavaWawa]

[Replying to mickiel]

Sorry, ignore this. I'm new and I'm not quite sure how this works yet. Thanks. I can't figure out how to delete comments.

[mickiel]

[Replying to post 49 by mickiel]

I agree Greek philosophy dominated the Christian spirit , which is originally Hebraic.

Its one of the ways paganism entered the Christian church.

Its the main way that paganism entered the church.

[Divine Insight]

When Philosophy got into the Christian bloodstream, especially Pagan philosophy, the Christian Theological Education system has never recovered from it. The fusion of Pagan and Christian elements, became a " Theology unto itself"; ( The term " Theology" used to describe Pagan beliefs).

It seems to me that there is a fundamental problem with the Christian theology entirely.

It's typically the Christian Stance that the Gospels in particular are the inspired word of God. And the Gospel Canon was also specifically inspired by and protected by God. Therefore the Gospels can be trusted to be the "Gospel Truth" because they have been inspired, protected, and canonized by God himself, through men of course. But still, since God is the one who is inspiring and protecting this, then it has to be correct.

The problem then with suggesting that Philosophy could come along and mess up God's inspired and protected message makes no sense. Where would God's Protection be then?

Also, isn't it already an extreme contradiction in Christianity that God could protect the Gospels to be the infallible truth when he couldn't keep his own priests and temples in order prior to Christianity? After all the corrupt Jewish Pharisees were in charge of God's Temple. Christ made it perfectly clear that the temple that these horribly corrupt Chief Priests were in charge of was indeed His Father's House.

So this Christian paradigm needs to have God failing at keeping his original religion in order, yet it claim that he should be able to keep the Gospels in perfect order.

It seems to me that this is already a major flaw in Christianity. A God who failed to keep is original religion in order, but can somehow keep his Gospels in perfect order?

I think Christianity itself has major problems. And trying to blame philosophy for bringing Pagan ideas into Christianity simply makes no sense. If that's possible, then there must not be any God who is protecting the truth of his religion.

[mickiel]

In my view , God never established a religion to represent him ,I do not see that in scripture. Jesus established a church ,but after he left that church slowly became mixed with paganism and philosophy , and morphed into something that Jesus is against.