01-11-2008, 08:03 PM | #51 |
Assistant to the Regional Manager
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: The Orgasmatron
Posts: 24,338
|
A rough translation is: The Hellenization of Christianity in the history of theology from Luther to the Present by Walter Glaive, date 1912.
__________________
Ἓν οἶδα ὅτι οὐδὲν οἶδα |
01-11-2008, 08:42 PM | #52 | |
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 10,665
|
Quote:
If the book says Luther originated the concept that doesn't surprise me (see my above post in response to Creekster). But try googling "Hellenzation of Christianity," and dig a little into authors' backgrounds, there is mostly LDS nexi. And there isn't all that much there there, either.
__________________
Interrupt all you like. We're involved in a complicated story here, and not everything is quite what it seems to be. —Paul Auster Last edited by SeattleUte; 01-11-2008 at 08:44 PM. |
|
01-11-2008, 08:49 PM | #53 | |
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 10,665
|
Quote:
__________________
Interrupt all you like. We're involved in a complicated story here, and not everything is quite what it seems to be. —Paul Auster |
|
01-11-2008, 08:56 PM | #54 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: the far corner of my mind
Posts: 8,711
|
Quote:
Your pity is touching. I am still trying to grasp the nexus of the problem. I think it may be this: We see the Greek influence (but thanks for your concern). We see the ideas of Chrisitnaity expressed in greek terms. We believe that the process of doing so led some early church leaders to apostasize from the truth (knowlingly or not) leaving the world without the complete truth. The lack of some truth caused other truth to be lost until there was a need for a restoration. Greek influence in and of itself didn't cause the apostasy, and in fact it may have served the religion well, in some ways and in some areas, but some part fo the apostasy did result from the Greek influence. DOes that make sense?
__________________
Sorry for th e tpyos. |
|
01-11-2008, 09:10 PM | #55 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: NOVA
Posts: 3,005
|
Quote:
__________________
太初有道 |
|
01-11-2008, 09:30 PM | #56 | |
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 10,665
|
Quote:
We realize the English, the Romans and the Greeks wrote about and practiced representative government before the advent of the United States. We recognize the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution owe a large debt to those prior peoples, and that the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution are shot through with influences of Enlightenment thinkers such as John Locke. We appreciate that George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Alexander Hamiolton, etc., spoke English, and were aware and in fact deeply influenced by these earlier traditions and thinkers. But there was this small group of people who thought representative government up themseves--or received it from God or whatever--and were not influenced in any way by their near or ancient forefathers. They lived in a vaccum created by God; they came from a lovely garden in Jackson County, Missouri, not from Europe. They were Lamanites, noble savages. And what's more, their type of representative government vanished from the earth shortly after they received it, and they left no writing describing it. There's not trace of their brilliant, inspired form of representative government. No, we can't tell you the characteristics of the pristine representative government we're talking about. All we have are the Constitution, the Declaration of Independence, the Federalist papers and so on written by erstwhile Englishmen (in English) that are corrupted by Enlgish and Roman and Greek ideas, by European ideas. All we know is that the type of representative government America has practiced is imperfect, and distorted and corrupted by the prior experiences with representative government of European and Classical peoples, though those ancient and near influences have had some marginal benefit on mankind.
__________________
Interrupt all you like. We're involved in a complicated story here, and not everything is quite what it seems to be. —Paul Auster Last edited by SeattleUte; 01-11-2008 at 09:39 PM. |
|
01-11-2008, 09:32 PM | #57 |
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 10,665
|
Son, have you had your eyes checked?
__________________
Interrupt all you like. We're involved in a complicated story here, and not everything is quite what it seems to be. —Paul Auster |
01-11-2008, 09:39 PM | #58 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,431
|
Just a note on FARMS and blaming Hellenization for the apostacy. I don't think FARMS is monothilic about this. For example, in the recently published FARMs book, Early Christians in Disarray, Noel B. Reynolds (a big name in FARMS) writes the following:
Quote:
Last edited by pelagius; 01-11-2008 at 10:07 PM. |
|
01-11-2008, 10:32 PM | #59 |
Assistant to the Regional Manager
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: The Orgasmatron
Posts: 24,338
|
Thanks for finding that as it confirms what I had believed.
__________________
Ἓν οἶδα ὅτι οὐδὲν οἶδα |
01-16-2008, 01:35 AM | #60 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Happy Valley, PA
Posts: 1,866
|
Quote:
The assertion of the "logos" as the principal guiding force for all creation is older than Plato and Aristotle, however: it is among the oldest concepts in presocratic Greek philosophy. Fragments from a 6th-5th century (BCE) Greek philosopher named Heraclitus (aptly called "the obscure") characterized the universe as being in a state of constant change or flux. His most famous maxim asserted that one could not step into the same river twice (the water having flowed on). [See Plato, Cratylus 402a for the quote.]. Governing the universe through all this change was the LOGOS: Heraclitus' Fragment 1 declares that all things happen (literally "come to be") according to the logos (γινομένων γὰρ πάντων κατὰ τὸν λόγον), but laments that men are always clueless about this logos (δὲ λόγου τοῦδ’ ἐόντος ἀεὶ ἀξύνετοι γίνονται ἄνθρωποι). The author of John's gospel, in my opinion, was directly alluding to Heraclitus in his famous beginning. (esp. John 1.3: πάντα δι’ αὐτοῦ ἐγένετο) The ensuing drivel in this thread over the "hellenization" of Christianity is both ill-informed and a red herring. I would be more mystified as to why this remains a debate if I wasn't already so well aware of a tendency to argue despite facts, not with them. It all reminds me of Rodney Stark's ridiculous claims in The Victory of Reason, where Stark asserts that Christianity is directly responsible for the west's notions of progress and enlightenment. Kind of like Hitler was responsible for the creation of the modern state of Israel.
__________________
I hope for nothing. I fear nothing. I am free. - Epitaph of Nikos Kazantzakis (1883-1957) |
|
Bookmarks |
|
|