Christianity is not about Philosophy

Hi all,

although were on “I love philosophy”, I do believe that a lot of the power of the Gospel has been lost to a kind of Christian philosophy that is only useful for debates and excitation through religious speculation. It is a different kind of wisdom that is promoted on the pages of the Bible, something that has to be worked out in humility and service – quite the opposite to what we often experience from the Christian media presence.

Paul too found in Corinth that a media-effective brazenness was being promoted, an attitude of superiority that failed to be awed by the responsibility or made humble by self-recognition. There were people spouting off words of the Bible, impressing a number of people who began to reject Paul as being “weak” and not as charismatic as other speakers. He agreed and said, “I was with you in weakness, and in fear, and in much trembling” - there was nothing that he could boast that would change that. But he said “my word and my preaching was not in moving words of human wisdom, but in proof of Spirit and of power, that your faith might not be in wisdom of men, but in power of God.”

It seems to me that much of what Christianity is portrayed to be is something that tries to compete with human wisdom, commending itself amongst certain circles. Whether it is mainstream Christianity that puts of the guise of the social-worker, fighting for the minorities, forgetting that the message of Christ is about salvation. Or whether it is the evangelising Church that suggests power and majesty, condemning the minorities, striving for dominion, portraying everything as a question of law and order.

Jesus is the one who was counted amongst the subversive criminals, amongst the heretics and the blasphemers. He was regarded a glutton and a drunkard, a friend of tax collectors and sinners. He was the one who could do nothing right for his critics, although he healed and preached in the open, he showed the wisdom of God in all frailty and weakness. He had patience, was kind, was not envious, was not vain, was not puffed up. He didn’t behave indecently, did not pursue his own things, was not easily provoked, thought no evil; did not rejoice in unrighteousness, but rejoiced in the truth … and he said follow me!

Therefore, Christians should heed the words of Paul: “Watch that there not be one robbing you through philosophy and empty deceit, according to the tradition of men, according to the elements of the world, and not according to Christ.” (Kolosser 2:8)

Shalom

You got that right. It is the anti-Christian who tries to use the vain philosophy of men to uphold his doctrine over their own philosophies. All he does is come back as a loser and defiles Christianity. He cannot win this battle of philosophy. Look at Ade versus Satyr.

Are there any citings at this site to which you feel your topic may have bearing on this subject? If there are, it would be a good idea to point these out so as to be a warning to others.

I’d have to agree with that. As I’ve said in the past, ‘the Christian god is not a philosopher’.

That would have to be true. Everything is black and white where God is concerned, only man finds it necessary to create infinite shades of gray.

What Paul meant by philosophy in Colossians 2:8 was not what Bob is trying to say Paul meant. Paul meant false teaching – specifically an early version of gnosticism.

Consider Paul’s sermon on Mars Hill in Athens.

Consider any sermon ever constructed!

Consider! Test! Do philosophy!

But don’t do it falsely!

What is Bob trying to say Paul meant?

Hi Felix,

Thanks for the support. Ichthus seems to have gnosticism on the brain … Once he has read the information below, he should tell me where gnosticism enters into my threads so that we can address these issues.

Gnosticism
Gnosticism, dualistic religious and philosophical movement of the late Hellenistic and early Christian eras. The term designates a wide assortment of sects, numerous by the 2d cent. A.D.; they all promised salvation through an occult knowledge that they claimed was revealed to them alone. Scholars trace these salvation religions back to such diverse sources as Jewish mysticism, Hellenistic mystery cults, Iranian religious dualism (see Zoroastrianism), and Babylonian and Egyptian mythology. The definition of gnosis [knowledge] as concern with the Eternal was already present in earlier Greek philosophy, although its connection with the later Gnostic movement is distant at best. Christian ideas were quickly incorporated into these syncretistic systems, and by the 2d cent. the largest of them, organized by Valentinus and Basilides, were a significant rival to Christianity. Much of early Christian doctrine was formulated in reaction to this movement.

Until the discovery at Nag Hammadi in Egypt of key Manichaean (1930) and Coptic Gnostic (c.1945) papyri, knowledge of Gnosticism depended on Christian sources, notably St. Irenaeus, St. Hippolytus, Tertullian, and Clement of Alexandria. Among principal Gnostic writings are the Valentinian documents Pistis-Sophia and the Gospel of Truth (perhaps by Valentinus himself). Important too is the literature of the Mandaeans in modern Iraq, who are the only Gnostic sect extant. Gnostic elements are found in the Acts of Thomas, the Odes of Solomon, and other wisdom literature of the pseudepigrapha.

Some Gnostics taught that the world is ruled by evil archons, among them the deity of the Old Testament, who hold captive the spirit of humanity. The heavenly pleroma was the center of the divine life, and Jesus was interpreted as an intermediary eternal being, or aeon, sent from the pleroma to restore the lost knowledge of humanity’s divine origin. Gnostics held secret formulas, which they believed would free them at death from the evil archons and restore them to their heavenly abode. See Valentinus for typical Gnostic teaching on the pleroma.

Gnosticism held that human beings consist of flesh, soul, and spirit (the divine spark), and that humanity is divided into classes representing each of these elements. The purely corporeal (hylic) lacked spirit and could never be saved; the Gnostics proper (pneumatic) bore knowingly the divine spark and their salvation was certain; and those, like the Christians, who stood in between (psychic), might attain a lesser salvation through faith. Such a doctrine may have inspired extreme asceticism (as in the Valentinian school) or extreme licentiousness (as in the sect of Caprocrates and the Ophites). The influence of Gnosticism on the later development of the Jewish kabbalah and heterodox Islamic sects such as the Ismailis is much debated.

See H. Jonas, Gnostic Religion (rev. ed. 1964); R. Haardt, Gnosis: Character and Testimony (1971); E. H. Pagels, The Gnostic Gospels (1979); M. W. Meyer, The Secret Teachings of Jesus (1984); B. Layton, The Gnostic Scriptures (1987); J. M. Robinson and R. Smith, The Nag Hammadi Library (1988); H.-J. Klimkeit, tr., Gnosis on the Silk Road: Gnostic Texts from Central Asia (1993).

American Psychological Association (APA):
Gnosticism. (n.d.). Columbia Electronic Encyclopedia. Retrieved January 12, 2008, from Reference.com website: reference.com/browse/columbia/Gnostici

Chicago Manual Style (CMS):
Gnosticism. Reference.com. Columbia Electronic Encyclopedia. Columbia University Press. reference.com/browse/columbia/Gnostici (accessed: January 12, 2008).

Modern Language Association (MLA):
“Gnosticism.” Columbia Electronic Encyclopedia. Columbia University Press. 12 Jan. 2008. <Reference.com reference.com/browse/columbia/Gnostici>.

Needless to say, I have extensively rejected Dualism and even said that the greatest problem of modern man is the fact that he is dualistic and doesn’t know it – or ignores it. What Jesus taught was a holistic view of humanity, which is the Hebrew/Aramaic stance as against the Greek philosophies which reach deep into our own time.

Secondly, I do not promise salvation through an occult knowledge, but I say that the Prayer that takes place in your room, behind closed doors, “in secret” has contemplative potential that goes beyond the typical petitional prayer in as much as it is active listening, rather than speaking. In this practise, there is an exchange that imparts insight that I would otherwise not have, and it is what Paul gave thanks for, namely that “the grace of God given to you in Christ Jesus, that in everything you were enriched in Him, in all discourse and all knowledge, even as the testimony of Christ was confirmed in you, so that you are not lacking in any gift …” however, he warns that “knowledge puffs up, but love builds up”. The example given in 1 Corinthians is the eating of meat from temples.

The knowledge that has especially been presented by you, Ichthus, with your endless quotes from Zondervan (which you really expect people to read?), has had exactly that effect on you, whereas the contemplative prayer promotes humility through knowing ones self. This is the first “knowledge” that a contemplative or a mystic has, before he goes on to gain insight into the true nature of things. “For through the Spirit is given to one a word of wisdom, and to another a word of knowledge, according to the same Spirit and to another, faith by the same Spirit, and to another, gifts of healing by the same Spirit, and to another, workings of powers, and to another, prophecy, and to another, discerning of spirits, and to another, kinds of languages, and to another, interpretation of languages. But the one and the same Spirit works all these things, distributing separately to each as He wills.”

The key word, something which I have continuously quoted, is love. “And if I have prophecies, and know all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have all faith so as to move mountains, but do not have love, I am nothing.” I have experienced – and still experience – that those who take a literalist view of the Bible often accentuate the memorisation of verses from the Bible, which no doubt I have in the past too, but it has become a habit that installs fear at the end of their days, when the memory is weak. I have had to comfort numerous elderly evangelicals who weep in anxiety, and ask, “how shall I believe, if I can’t remember?” I comforted them with a word from Meister Eckhardt (loosely translated): “If the thought that you are not close to God worries you, find consolation in knowing that He is close to you!”

The slander that I have had to put up with here is the same as any mystic or contemplative has to go through (although others have suffered considerably), and shows the kind of insecurity which you can only forgive and try to sway. Some react to such efforts in the way that Ichthus has, by gaining security in all of the things he thinks he “knows” - and blasting others.

Shalom

I see nothing objectionable here. I see valuable wisdom. Deep prayer which Jesus practiced and taught, and comforting the suffering are nothing but commendable. I don’t know why Ichthus feels threatened by you. I think he misunderstands what you are saying.

Many that believe what they deem to be true concerning Jesus’ teaching sometimes suffer the slings and arrows of scrutinizing from other brother’s in Christ. We know Jesus went through these trials of the spirit and His teachings were quite unique at the time.

We need to be careful in how conduct ourselves because our egos can be a deterrent of how God’s Word get disseminated amongst our brothers and sisters. God knows I am no authority of the Bible, but I try my honest best to be the best representative of Him as I can. I pray for His Guidance so that I may not misrepresent His Teachings.

We certainly know how other followers of Christ went through difficult times. These trespasses should be forgiven and forgotten so as not to be an impediment for spreading The Gospel.

Hi Liteninbolt,

This is what I have continually pointed to. If a tradition actually portrays its main characters as having suffered under erroneous judgement, if God is portrayed as the totally “Other”, if the scriptures of that tradition warn against judgement and fend off accusers, isn’t that an indication of how we ought not to behave? Curiously, those accusing others ought to know who the “great accuser” is and understand why Jesus told the Pharisees and the Scribes, “… you witness to yourselves that you are the sons of those who murdered the prophets.”

I am deeply moved by Marcus Borg’s words, “Those who say that taking the Bible literally is the only way to salvation must ask themselves what they are saying about those people who cannot take the Bible literally!” Are they condemning such people to hell? Have they a right to do that? There is an amazing brazenness in someone who is prepared to say that what another says is “poison” and that their position is the only right one.

I agree, and the fact that the Gospel is spread amongst those who would otherwise have difficulties should be an encouragement to tolerate people like Marcus Borg etc. I am always reminded of the story of Peters dream when he had gone down to Joppa and was visited by Cornelius. It helped him overcome his prejudice and gave him a perspective that he didn’t have before. I can only pray and hope that others will have such dreams.

Shalom

Meh, you guys should spend more time spreading out the word of the Flying Spaghetti Monster gospel. His holiness will only forgive those who have read and understood his noodly words. Don’t you want to be touched by his noodly appendages?

Oh well, I tried to get you out of pasta hell, but I guess you would rather have eternal damnation that start believing in the correct god.

Gotta love how theists ramble on about what Jesus and his disciples did. You weren’t there when it happened. You guys just base everything on what you read from the Bible and some historical accounts that seem to fit in.

Hi GLOR,

you must be bored!

Shalom

Ya, I am bored. Better ranting about the Flying Spaghetti Monster than actually beliving in something as irrational as God, though.

Take care and God Bless you Bob. Please continue to be a testament for God here, The Lord knows it’s an uphill struggle for people who go to bat for Him. I will pray for all of us here on ILP.

Hi Liteninbolt,

Thank you for your good wishes, I wish you Gods inspiration and blessing too!

Shalom

GLOR–

The flying spaghetti monster gibe, which no doubt evoked glee among atheist ditto heads long ago when it funny, was a response to the Intelligent Design hypothesis. The point was that since ID advocates theory lacked specificity, they may as well have been talking of a flying spaghetti monster. The God of Judeo-Christian tradition does not lack specificity. So not only is your joke stale and unoriginal, it is also irrelevant to this discussion. :smiley:

I believe a closer look at Mr. Ichthus’s post is in order.

Go back, Christians, and read the command that Paul gave us.

Colossians chapter 2, verse 8, (NAS):

Take heed lest there shall be any one that maketh spoil of you through his philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ

Take heed that no one maketh spoil of you, (or also translated ROB.) Make sure no one Robs you!

Robs us of what? Well, if you look at the context, specifically back to verse 3, Paul says that all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge which are hidden in Christ!

Paul in verse 8 is not saying beware of philosophy, but rather, beware of a certain TYPE of philosophy, namely, those worldly philosophies which do not give Jesus Christ the proper place, and end up robbing us of the treasures of wisdom and knowledge.

I imagine that Paul was thinking specifically of the early forms of Hellenistic philosophies that Mr. Ichthus alluded to.

We are therefore required to study philosophy, in order to avoid that which Paul warns us against. We must realize our own comprehensive philosophical worldview revealed by the Bible, and defend that system.

To divorce Christianity from philosophy is to concede to the Devil our position.

I’m in a war brothers, will you fight, or will you lay down your arms and talk about how great not having any philosophy is, (all the while not realizing that THAT very position is a philosophy?)

A big ol’ AMEN to Ichthus for standing up for truth.

Shotgun

P.S.

For a great article on this very topic, see Greg Bahnsen’s “Beware of Philosophy” here: cmfnow.com/articles/pa053.htm
It’s not very long, so go read it!

Lightninbolt has a thread against reason, so I cannot use reason to convince him to use discernment and ignore Bob. So, moving on…

Felix dakat – the title of this thread is “Christianity is not about Philosophy” and Bob quotes from a verse which uses the word “philosophy” in a way that is not meant when a modern mind thinks that word in the title. Hence, my reply. Mindless following is how heresy is most easily spread…

He is basically presenting a “saved by works” error by attempting to yank the rug of our motivation (without philosophy, without asking “why” – we wouldn’t care about motivation) out from under us (as if that were possible).

Word! to shotgun.

Spot on Felix, well written.

The other side I can give: GLOR, being a pompous windbag, showing little lucidity, and less respect, for individuals whose beliefs are contained, and only respectfully disseminated; it just makes you, and unfortunately anyone they determine to be “like” you in ideology, look like a brutish, infantile ass and narcissistic cretin.

I’m telling you this as an atheist GLOR, grow up and find something to do with yourself that doesn’t involve trolling after people, attacking with pointless ad homs, just to justify your ego.

Typical of atheists/secular humanists, you just make the entire community look clueless, pointless and uneducated.

Everyone has a right to their beliefs, regardless anyone else’s opinions, and no amount of personal attacks changes ideology.