Plato, Aristotle, St. Augustine and St. Thomas: Masters of Theology
- Thread starter AuphirahQueen
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
I think the crux of a particular matter or subject is in making the correct distinction between what is allegory, literal, symbolic and perhaps prosaic (matter-of-fact) when contemplating God's word the Bible. Problems will ensue for example if one was to believe in the figurative narrative of say adam and eve rather than the literal sense of the first man and woman, some do this, which could possibly lead to an incorrect interpretation of the truth. Philosophy has its reliance on rational arguments, the dialectical method is discourse between two or more people holding different points of view about a subject, who wish to establish the truth of the matter guided by reasoned arguments.
Wikipedia is awash with philisophical discourse on plato and socratic dialogues.
Platonic love to you all
lol
Wikipedia is awash with philisophical discourse on plato and socratic dialogues.
Platonic love to you all
lol
D
I think the crux of a particular matter or subject is in making the correct distinction between what is allegory, literal, symbolic and perhaps prosaic (matter-of-fact) when contemplating God's word the Bible. Problems will ensue for example if one was to believe in the figurative narrative of say adam and eve rather than the literal sense of the first man and woman, some do this, which could possibly lead to an incorrect interpretation of the truth. Philosophy has its reliance on rational arguments, the dialectical method is discourse between two or more people holding different points of view about a subject, who wish to establish the truth of the matter guided by reasoned arguments.
Wikipedia is awash with philisophical discourse on plato and socratic dialogues.
Platonic love to you all
lol
Wikipedia is awash with philisophical discourse on plato and socratic dialogues.
Platonic love to you all
lol
It might bug folks that dont have any of it
Adam and Eve (or the two becoming one flesh) is a mystery speaking of Christ and the church (Ephes 5:32)
Last edited:
right.
what is born (origin,beginning,source) of the flesh is flesh, and profits nothing. (all philosophy and -ophies...)... pursuing them leads people astray like woman of other nations and other gods lead God's People astray and God gave very very very strict instructions in order to not be led astray and die.
what is born of the spirit is spirit, and gives life. be it even in babies, toddlers, adolescents, teens, 20's up..
the Father, ABBA, teaches by spirit the absolute truth, living truth, by grace in yahshua , not by man's in-gin-new-itty-bitty-brain of the flesh.
there are conditions specified by yahweh all through TORAH/ SCRIPTURE /ALL THAT FLOWS FROM HIM.
and he gives graces and he fulfills/accomplishes all that he says and in all who trust and rely on him faithfully living his life the way he tells them to.
what is born (origin,beginning,source) of the flesh is flesh, and profits nothing. (all philosophy and -ophies...)... pursuing them leads people astray like woman of other nations and other gods lead God's People astray and God gave very very very strict instructions in order to not be led astray and die.
what is born of the spirit is spirit, and gives life. be it even in babies, toddlers, adolescents, teens, 20's up..
the Father, ABBA, teaches by spirit the absolute truth, living truth, by grace in yahshua , not by man's in-gin-new-itty-bitty-brain of the flesh.
there are conditions specified by yahweh all through TORAH/ SCRIPTURE /ALL THAT FLOWS FROM HIM.
and he gives graces and he fulfills/accomplishes all that he says and in all who trust and rely on him faithfully living his life the way he tells them to.
ANYTHING they say that agrees with Scripture is RIGHT BECAUSE it agrees with Scripture.
ANYTHING they say that disagrees with Scripture is WRONG BECAUSE it disagrees with Scripture; so why waste time reading them when you can read Scripture directly; without needing to sift through their errors and lies.
ANYTHING they say that disagrees with Scripture is WRONG BECAUSE it disagrees with Scripture; so why waste time reading them when you can read Scripture directly; without needing to sift through their errors and lies.
A
A few things need clarification:
1. Christianity (e.g. God's new covenant) was the natural extension of and fulfillment of Judaism (e.g. God's old covenant).
2. Despite paganism and heresy existing in both Jewish antiquity and the more modern world God Himself birthed Christianity into, neither orthodox Judaism nor orthodox Christianity historically ever was nor presently is in any way whatsoever dependent on syncretization with paganism or heresy.
3. From Genesis to Revelations, biblical authors sometimes expressed the unique revelation that God was communicating through them in language their audience could understand.
1. Christianity (e.g. God's new covenant) was the natural extension of and fulfillment of Judaism (e.g. God's old covenant).
2. Despite paganism and heresy existing in both Jewish antiquity and the more modern world God Himself birthed Christianity into, neither orthodox Judaism nor orthodox Christianity historically ever was nor presently is in any way whatsoever dependent on syncretization with paganism or heresy.
3. From Genesis to Revelations, biblical authors sometimes expressed the unique revelation that God was communicating through them in language their audience could understand.
Allegorical approach is often seen as dangerous because people can make up their own minds, apply Scripture to their own lives as how it ministers to them... it takes control from the leaders of the church. When you can decide for yourself what Scripture says, instead of buying into doctrinal and how-to-live legalism, then you don't need the priest, pastor, preacher to tell you what to think - it's pure, spiritual liberty.
Doesn't bode well for those who need control for financial or political reasons. People who condemn allegorical thought, I've found, tend to be very legalistic, and think everyone should believe, live and worship a certain way - an army of religious robots.
Note, I am not saying all literal approach Christians are legalistic - just seems that kind of reading tends towards it. There are certainly plenty of liberal, or "freethinking" Christians that are dogmatic, as well.
Also, I believe there's should be order - but people can disagree and still be orderly. I doubt you will find any church where every memember thinks/believes exactly the same things - many are holding back their true thoughts for fear of being stigmatized. (There's a number of reason why one wouldn't just go to another church - family/friends go to that one, it's the closest, they like some people there, it's a family tradition and expected, etc.)
I talked to a man in a Lutheran church one time, that said he really like it, but whispered that he didn't think the pastor should be called Reverend - and it was clear that he kept that to himself, but he took what he didn't like and focused on the good.
Doesn't bode well for those who need control for financial or political reasons. People who condemn allegorical thought, I've found, tend to be very legalistic, and think everyone should believe, live and worship a certain way - an army of religious robots.
Note, I am not saying all literal approach Christians are legalistic - just seems that kind of reading tends towards it. There are certainly plenty of liberal, or "freethinking" Christians that are dogmatic, as well.
Also, I believe there's should be order - but people can disagree and still be orderly. I doubt you will find any church where every memember thinks/believes exactly the same things - many are holding back their true thoughts for fear of being stigmatized. (There's a number of reason why one wouldn't just go to another church - family/friends go to that one, it's the closest, they like some people there, it's a family tradition and expected, etc.)
I talked to a man in a Lutheran church one time, that said he really like it, but whispered that he didn't think the pastor should be called Reverend - and it was clear that he kept that to himself, but he took what he didn't like and focused on the good.
Last edited:
Jeremiah 8 Holman Christian Standard Bible (HCSB)
Punishment for Judah’s Leaders
8 “How can you claim, ‘We are wise;
the law of the Lord is with us’?
In fact, the lying pen of scribes
has produced falsehood.
Read Matthew 23: JESUS called scribes and Pharisees vipers, snakes, hypocrites, and unclean.
Punishment for Judah’s Leaders
8 “How can you claim, ‘We are wise;
the law of the Lord is with us’?
In fact, the lying pen of scribes
has produced falsehood.
Read Matthew 23: JESUS called scribes and Pharisees vipers, snakes, hypocrites, and unclean.
- In the New Testament era, scribes were often associated with the sect of the Pharisees, although not all Pharisees were scribes (see Matthew5:20; 12:38). They were teachers of the people (Mark 1:22) and interpreters of the Law.
The root meaning of the name "scribe" is "one who writes" (compare to "scribble" or "inscribe"). The original occupation of a scribe was to make copies of official documents in the age before printing. They would also write letters, decrees and other documents.Jeremiah 8:8
speaks of "the pen of the scribes." In Esther 8:9
, the king's scribes were called and "it was written according to all that Mordecai commanded unto the Jews." Because the scribe could write, he could also keep financial records and he would sometimes be used in that area (2Kings 12:10
). Since the scribes often worked closely with the king, some scribes gained authority beyond that of simply copying documents. In2Kings 25:19
, "the principal scribe of the host" actually "mustered the people of the land" and prepared them for battle. The scribes were often considered to be wise by reason of their learning. An uncle of king David named Jonathan was "a counselor, a wise man, and a scribe."
What is a Scribe? | Learn The Bible
Scribes [T] anciently held various important offices in the public affairs of the nation. The Hebrew word so rendered (sopher) is first used to designate the holder of some military office (Judg. 5:14 ; A.V., "pen of the writer;" RSV, "the marshal's staff;" marg., "the staff of the scribe"). The scribes acted as secretaries of state, whose business it was to prepare and issue decrees in the name of the king ( 2 Samuel 8:17 ; 20:25 ; 1 Chronicles 18:16 ; 24:6 ; 1 Kings 4:3 ; 2 Kings 12:9-11 ; 18:18-37 , etc.). They discharged various other important public duties as men of high authority and influence in the affairs of state.
Scribes - Definition and Meaning, Bible Dictionary
HMMMM !! Interesting that the scribes worked for the state, emperor, and the king. Who was the king at that time I believe the senate voted for Caesar to be king. The same group of folks who schemed, plotted, betrayed, and murdered JESUS CHRIST. Let's not blame all on Judas. Jews, Rome, and Judas all participated in the death of JESUS CHRIST! Why would any true believer trust scribes during JESUS time period. Only the HOLY SPIRIT shall reveal Truth.
Last edited:
I think the most obvious influence of Plato and Aristotle in the catholic theology is the duality body-soul, where the soul is considered superior to the body and the body is despised and punished (through penitences) as if sin and evil come from the body itself (and not from the heart).
Another influence is the virtue of honor (actually the sin of pride disguised as virtue) who cannot turn the other cheek when it is offended but has to protect its honor and take revenge. For example, God was offended by Adam (in Garden Eden) and God has to punish this offense by sacrificing His Son (this belief can be found in the catholic catechism and in the protestant too because protestants were first catholics; Augustin of Hippo is considered a protestant avant la lettre).
Another influence is the virtue of honor (actually the sin of pride disguised as virtue) who cannot turn the other cheek when it is offended but has to protect its honor and take revenge. For example, God was offended by Adam (in Garden Eden) and God has to punish this offense by sacrificing His Son (this belief can be found in the catholic catechism and in the protestant too because protestants were first catholics; Augustin of Hippo is considered a protestant avant la lettre).
I don't disagree, but the Christian form of ascetism you speak of has more sources than the Greek philosophers. If I remember correctly, Gnostics, Zoroastrians, and various pagan sects held similar beliefs. It seems to be a common trait among unregenerate man to view the corporeal as fundamentally evil, the ultimate good, or the ultimate manifestation of existence.