"Hellenization of Christianity" a bad thing? - cougarguard.com — unofficial BYU Cougars / LDS sports, football, basketball forum and message board

SeattleUte · 05-21-2007, 05:34 PM

Go to the FARMS/FAIR web site and you can dig up a host of articles condemning the "Hellenization of Christianity." This is really what Harold Bloom finds offensive about mainstream Christianity when you get right down to it.

I submit that this notion is as silly as wishing your parents had never met. Christianity can be defined as the fusing of the two seminal strands of Western Civilization--the Hebreic and the Hellenistic. This occurred at a unique place and time, in Judea, becuase of Alexander the Great's and subsequently imperial Rome's conquering and civilizing achievements.

Needless to say, Hebreism, which begat the Old Testament, and invented monotheism, was an essential ingredient of Christianity. But it was Paul's Hellenizatoin of Hebreism that enabled the new religion to nearly take over the Western World.

But even if one could speculate about the growth potential of Hebreism absent its Hellenization, what would you have? I submit something pretty backward. Islam may be a rough approximation. Islam's best years were when it was Hellenized.

In any event, it's like imagining what you'd be if your parents never met.

SeattleUte · 05-21-2007, 06:21 PM

What a shame that a thread about demonic possession gets dozens of replies and a thousand hits and this subject, vital to how Mormonism differentiates itself and understanding ourselves, has no takers.

Archaea · 05-21-2007, 06:34 PM

Not certain what to add, that's why I haven't responded.

To me, it's a complex issue, fraught with good and bad. Overall, Hellenization did allow Christianity to flourish and couple itself with empirical logic thereby tying itself to the star that led us to a modern ages.

creekster · 05-21-2007, 06:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SeattleUte

What a shame that a thread about demonic possession gets dozens of replies and a thousand hits and this subject, vital to how Mormonism differentiates itself and understanding ourselves, has no takers.

Your original post is at 10:34, followed by an edit at 10:42. Your follow-up was at 11:21. How dare we wait almost an hour before responding to your thread. Seriously, however, the premise for your post was a group of articles you referred to at the FAIR/FARMS website. Would it help if I posted without having looked at those? Seems rather pointless to me.

LBP

SeattleUte · 05-21-2007, 06:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by creekster

Your original post is at 10:34, followed by an edit at 10:42. Your follow-up was at 11:21. How dare we wait almost an hour before responding to your thread. Seriously, however, the premise for your post was a group of articles you referred to at the FAIR/FARMS website. Would it help if I posted without having looked at those? Seems rather pointless to me.

LBP

FARMS is part of BYU and therefore part of the LDS Church. But okay, fine, who cares about FARMS; forget FARMS. It wasn't a predictate but a rhetorical device for framing the issue. The issue stands on its own.

Indy Coug · 05-21-2007, 06:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SeattleUte

FARMS is part of BYU and therefore part of the LDS Church.

What do you mean "part of the LDS Church"?

creekster · 05-21-2007, 07:01 PM

What issue? That it is silly to bemoan the hellenization of chirsitanity? Silly from what perspective? i assumed I would need to look at the articels to know. Silly in the sense that you stateit, menaing it is what it is so why lament what can't be undone? Or perhaps from the point of view that regardless of what it is, the change was undesreiable for doctrinal reasons? WHat argument from these or others are you trying to have?

Archaea · 05-21-2007, 07:12 PM

Without reading his articles, I suppose there is some "tainting" of Christian thinking with Greek thought, specifically, it's focus upon empiricism and some of its sexuality. That would be the only reason I can imagine a Christian can bemoan association with Greek culture and thought.

Our society would not be as prevalent and successful without the development of Greek thought, or so I believe.

All-American · 05-21-2007, 07:31 PM

What you call "hellenization" we call "apostasy." The church changed to the point that it was no longer the same church that Jesus established-- though, in all likelihood, hellenization only finished off what so-called Judaisers had started.

Might I submit that one reason this thread isn't getting the attention you wish is that you make yourself a difficult person to take seriously when it comes to religion?

SeattleUte · 05-21-2007, 08:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by All-American

What you call "hellenization" we call "apostasy."

Exactly. I think the reason this thread is being largely ignored is it demonstrates the absurdity of the very concept a "great apostasy." It's like saying it's a bad thing that your parents ever met one another, that you'd have been better off in some alternate universe.

05-21-2007, 05:34 PM	#1
SeattleUte fairlds.org Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Seattle, WA Posts: 10,665	"Hellenization of Christianity" a bad thing? Go to the FARMS/FAIR web site and you can dig up a host of articles condemning the "Hellenization of Christianity." This is really what Harold Bloom finds offensive about mainstream Christianity when you get right down to it. I submit that this notion is as silly as wishing your parents had never met. Christianity can be defined as the fusing of the two seminal strands of Western Civilization--the Hebreic and the Hellenistic. This occurred at a unique place and time, in Judea, becuase of Alexander the Great's and subsequently imperial Rome's conquering and civilizing achievements. Needless to say, Hebreism, which begat the Old Testament, and invented monotheism, was an essential ingredient of Christianity. But it was Paul's Hellenizatoin of Hebreism that enabled the new religion to nearly take over the Western World. But even if one could speculate about the growth potential of Hebreism absent its Hellenization, what would you have? I submit something pretty backward. Islam may be a rough approximation. Islam's best years were when it was Hellenized. In any event, it's like imagining what you'd be if your parents never met. __________________ 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; 05-21-2007 at 05:42 PM.

05-21-2007, 06:21 PM	#2
SeattleUte fairlds.org Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Seattle, WA Posts: 10,665	What a shame that a thread about demonic possession gets dozens of replies and a thousand hits and this subject, vital to how Mormonism differentiates itself and understanding ourselves, has no takers. __________________ Interrupt all you like. We're involved in a complicated story here, and not everything is quite what it seems to be. —Paul Auster

05-21-2007, 06:34 PM	#3
Archaea Assistant to the Regional Manager Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: The Orgasmatron Posts: 24,338	Not certain what to add, that's why I haven't responded. To me, it's a complex issue, fraught with good and bad. Overall, Hellenization did allow Christianity to flourish and couple itself with empirical logic thereby tying itself to the star that led us to a modern ages. __________________ Ἓν οἶδα ὅτι οὐδὲν οἶδα

05-21-2007, 07:01 PM	#7
creekster Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: the far corner of my mind Posts: 8,711	What issue? That it is silly to bemoan the hellenization of chirsitanity? Silly from what perspective? i assumed I would need to look at the articels to know. Silly in the sense that you stateit, menaing it is what it is so why lament what can't be undone? Or perhaps from the point of view that regardless of what it is, the change was undesreiable for doctrinal reasons? WHat argument from these or others are you trying to have? __________________ Sorry for th e tpyos.

05-21-2007, 07:12 PM	#8
Archaea Assistant to the Regional Manager Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: The Orgasmatron Posts: 24,338	Without reading his articles, I suppose there is some "tainting" of Christian thinking with Greek thought, specifically, it's focus upon empiricism and some of its sexuality. That would be the only reason I can imagine a Christian can bemoan association with Greek culture and thought. Our society would not be as prevalent and successful without the development of Greek thought, or so I believe. __________________ Ἓν οἶδα ὅτι οὐδὲν οἶδα

05-21-2007, 07:31 PM	#9
All-American Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 3,420	What you call "hellenization" we call "apostasy." The church changed to the point that it was no longer the same church that Jesus established-- though, in all likelihood, hellenization only finished off what so-called Judaisers had started. Might I submit that one reason this thread isn't getting the attention you wish is that you make yourself a difficult person to take seriously when it comes to religion? __________________ εν αρχη ην ο λογος Last edited by All-American; 05-21-2007 at 07:47 PM.