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).

[enviousintheeverafter]

To me, religion, any religion, is a way of life someone chooses to follow. It is that person's philosophy of life. Therefore, religion falls under the umbrella of philosophy, as does atheism, Zen, the Masons or communism.

Only in the broadest sense of the term "philosophy"- they don't fall under the umbrella of philosophy in the sense that Plato, Aristotle, Descartes, Wittgenstein etc are philosophy. I don't really see what's helpful about conflating such radically different projects by referring to them with the same (vague) term. Better to observe that philosophy and religion, while being fundamentally distinct, are nevertheless related to each in various ways.

[2Dbunk]

enviousintheeverafter wrote: Only in the broadest sense of "philosophy," critiquing 2Dbunk--

Sorry for being a generalist. I know the devil is in the details (pun intended). Mine was just a suggestion, highlighting the consensus that we are literally experiencing hell right here on earth. The various religions have done little to point the way, so mickiel shouldn't blame philosophy!

[mickiel]

enviousintheeverafter wrote: Only in the broadest sense of "philosophy," critiquing 2Dbunk--

Sorry for being a generalist. I know the devil is in the details (pun intended). Mine was just a suggestion, highlighting the consensus that we are literally experiencing hell right here on earth. The various religions have done little to point the way, so mickiel shouldn't blame philosophy!

I don't blame philosophy, I would blame religion, if I did not know any better. The earth is experiencing all its troubles, because God himself wishes that.

Nothing can happen that God does not want to happen.

[mickiel]

Christianity has never recovered from Roman philosophy; its in its system permanently.

[Man_With_A_Plan]

"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.

He influenced western Christianity, yes, but Christianity existed well beyond the confines of Western Europe. The Orthodox Church wasn't influenced by really any western philosophers at all. In fact, when St. Augustine was first translated into Greek (the 14th century, about 1,000 years after he had died), some Greek Orthodox theologians went as far as to call him a heretic. Many of the western ideas about hell, sin, and so on are foreign to Orthodox Christianity.

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).

I wouldn't call it 'shocking,' considering that church fathers from the earliest centuries openly praised Aristotle, Plato and others. They never "denied" being pagans. In fact, Augustine wrote an entire autobiography about his life and adventures in Manichaeism before converting to Christianity. Justin Martyr suggested that Aristotle was practically Christian in thought. I believe it was St. Basil who wrote that the philosophers had "kernels of truth" that could be siphoned for. The church fathers universally believed that God had revealed himself even in pagan religions and that elements of truth, even if obscured in shadows and images, could be ascertained.

The only people who may be surprised by this are those who aren't aware of history, perhaps.

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).

Mr. Viola seems like he's appealing through sensationalism.

(I can do the same: Christianity appeared at just the right time and place in human history to spread around the world, thus fulfilling Jesus' prophecy, "All nations will hear my Name." Koine Greek was the lingua franca of the empire, allowing Christian writings to disseminate quickly and easily between populations who otherwise would have had to contend with a language barrier that would have extinguished the religion's spread. Why, golly, Christianity is the only religion in human history that has truly spread worldwide exactly as its founder said it would, thus verifying his prophecy, thus verifying Christianity!)

Having actually spent a number of years reading early Church fathers both within and outside the Roman Empire (yes, Christianity existed in the Assyrian Empire, and even in western India, by the turn of the second century), it's easy to dismiss Mr. Viola as another in a long line of sensationalists looking to cash in on people's credulity and desire for the "hidden" or "conspiratorial" by misdirecting with half-truths and distorted facts.

For example, one popular claim among these conspiracy theorists is that the Council of Nicea "invented a new Christianity." Not only does this make no sense when you consider that the bishops present were willing, just a few years prior, to give their lives for their doctines (one bishop present had had his limbs and tongue cut off by Romans for refusing to deny Christ), but when the Assyrian bishops learned of the Council of Nicea in the year 410 (85 years after it had convened), they held a council of their own and accepted Nicea on the basis that Nicea's canons were in accordance with the faith they themselves already professed.

Whenever I come across a new theory, I ask two questions. Does it have any significant publication history in peer-reviewed journals, and does the mainstream community accept it?

If the answer is a 'no' to both (as it is with, say, ancient astronauts, young earth creationism, and the Christ myth theory), then it's best to take it with a grain of salt.

Just my opinion.

[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.

He influenced western Christianity, yes, but Christianity existed well beyond the confines of Western Europe. The Orthodox Church wasn't influenced by really any western philosophers at all. In fact, when St. Augustine was first translated into Greek (the 14th century, about 1,000 years after he had died), some Greek Orthodox theologians went as far as to call him a heretic. Many of the western ideas about hell, sin, and so on are foreign to Orthodox Christianity.

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).

I wouldn't call it 'shocking,' considering that church fathers from the earliest centuries openly praised Aristotle, Plato and others. They never "denied" being pagans. In fact, Augustine wrote an entire autobiography about his life and adventures in Manichaeism before converting to Christianity. Justin Martyr suggested that Aristotle was practically Christian in thought. I believe it was St. Basil who wrote that the philosophers had "kernels of truth" that could be siphoned for. The church fathers universally believed that God had revealed himself even in pagan religions and that elements of truth, even if obscured in shadows and images, could be ascertained.

The only people who may be surprised by this are those who aren't aware of history, perhaps.

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).

Mr. Viola seems like he's appealing through sensationalism.

(I can do the same: Christianity appeared at just the right time and place in human history to spread around the world, thus fulfilling Jesus' prophecy, "All nations will hear my Name." Koine Greek was the lingua franca of the empire, allowing Christian writings to disseminate quickly and easily between populations who otherwise would have had to contend with a language barrier that would have extinguished the religion's spread. Why, golly, Christianity is the only religion in human history that has truly spread worldwide exactly as its founder said it would, thus verifying his prophecy, thus verifying Christianity!)

Having actually spent a number of years reading early Church fathers both within and outside the Roman Empire (yes, Christianity existed in the Assyrian Empire, and even in western India, by the turn of the second century), it's easy to dismiss Mr. Viola as another in a long line of sensationalists looking to cash in on people's credulity and desire for the "hidden" or "conspiratorial" by misdirecting with half-truths and distorted facts.

For example, one popular claim among these conspiracy theorists is that the Council of Nicea "invented a new Christianity." Not only does this make no sense when you consider that the bishops present were willing, just a few years prior, to give their lives for their doctines (one bishop present had had his limbs and tongue cut off by Romans for refusing to deny Christ), but when the Assyrian bishops learned of the Council of Nicea in the year 410 (85 years after it had convened), they held a council of their own and accepted Nicea on the basis that Nicea's canons were in accordance with the faith they themselves already professed.

Whenever I come across a new theory, I ask two questions. Does it have any significant publication history in peer-reviewed journals, and does the mainstream community accept it?

If the answer is a 'no' to both (as it is with, say, ancient astronauts, young earth creationism, and the Christ myth theory), then it's best to take it with a grain of salt.

Just my opinion.

Well your opinion was an excellent post in my view. Taking it with a grain of salt is wise. I think the council of Nicea was very prominent in history and left its mark. It was a selfish mark for sure. Roman Catholic Christians are different from other Christians in other groups. But they were the first Christians. Their imprint is still on humanity, and I think they are the largest group of Christians.

[Man_With_A_Plan]

[Replying to post 36 by mickiel]

I would have to disagree that Roman Catholicism was the original Christianity.

[mickiel]

[Replying to post 36 by mickiel]

I would have to disagree that Roman Catholicism was the original Christianity.

Well I say that because it was the Romans who named Christianity, they did not name themselves that. Acts 11:26. Jesus started the church in Rome, it originated in Rome and branched out from there. Can you offer a different origin?

[Man_With_A_Plan]

[Replying to post 36 by mickiel]

I would have to disagree that Roman Catholicism was the original Christianity.

Well I say that because it was the Romans who named Christianity, they did not name themselves that. Acts 11:26. Jesus started the church in Rome, it originated in Rome and branched out from there. Can you offer a different origin?

Acts 11:26 mentions Antioch, which is in Turkey. It doesn't mention Jesus being in Rome.

The papacy and the doctrines associated with it are foreign to early Christianity. From about the second century, the Roman bishops began to claim divine authority and jurisdiction over the entire Church, but the rest of the Church didn't accept this.

I would say that western Christianity was heavily influenced by Latin philosophy, but the resulting doctrines didn't really spread beyond there. The Orthodox church never was under Rome's jurisdiction, nor did the Orthodox faith ever believe in "original sin" or "purgatory" or "indulgences" or a distinction between "mortal sin" and "venial sin" or hell as a "fiery abode of torture."

[mickiel]

[Replying to post 36 by mickiel]

I would have to disagree that Roman Catholicism was the original Christianity.

Well I say that because it was the Romans who named Christianity, they did not name themselves that. Acts 11:26. Jesus started the church in Rome, it originated in Rome and branched out from there. Can you offer a different origin?

Acts 11:26 mentions Antioch, which is in Turkey. It doesn't mention Jesus being in Rome.

The papacy and the doctrines associated with it are foreign to early Christianity. From about the second century, the Roman bishops began to claim divine authority and jurisdiction over the entire Church, but the rest of the Church didn't accept this.

I would say that western Christianity was heavily influenced by Latin philosophy, but the resulting doctrines didn't really spread beyond there. The Orthodox church never was under Rome's jurisdiction, nor did the Orthodox faith ever believe in "original sin" or "purgatory" or "indulgences" or a distinction between "mortal sin" and "venial sin" or hell as a "fiery abode of torture."

Antioch was a city of Rome.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antioch