Dear Reader,
I don't get many comments about my research and representations, but a very dear friend of mine has sincerely commented and his comments have humbled me to the point where I am moved to not only respond to his comments but also share his and my discourse with you. But, because he has not given me permission to do so, I will not write his name. However, the wisdom of his message is far more important than his identity. I trust that he will not mind my sharing his wisdom with you. Just to maintain his anonymity, I will address him in this blog as John Doe.
John said:
Perman,
That was some research. When I was a little boy growing up I used to go to church very often, and I remember the part with Abraham and his one son that he was about to sacrifice. Those men at that time were so holy that they would do anything to please God.
I said:
Thanks for responding, John.
Even more than holy, they were ignorant. Not only did they not know how to please God, they also didn't know who or what God is. The problem with ignorance is that you can't solve real problems with it. You can solve real problems with what you know--not what you think you know that just isn't so. Accurate thinking solves problems. Inaccurate thinking not only doesn't solve problems but can also make matters worse.
John said:
Perman,
I totally agree with you, because when I was a young boy growing up. I would believe everything I was told when I would go to church and hear the pastor preaching, but as I got older I was able to analyze for myself.
John,
I must admit that I too grew up in the church believing exactly what I was told until I reached an age that I began to question some things that just didn't make any sense to me as I reflected on my real life experiences--even though I was only about 12 or 13 years old.
I asked questions like: If Adam and Eve were the only two people on earth, had two sons (no daughters were mentioned), Cain (the oldest son) killed his younger brother, Abel, and God sent him away to a land away from his parents, how could he and his wife have a son? In Genesis, Chapter 4: Verses 16 & 17, it says, "And Cain went away from the LORD'S presence and lived in a land called 'Wandering,' which is east of Eden. Cain and his wife had a son and named him Enoch...." After reading that, I asked myself: “What wife?” Even if Adam and Eve had more children, and somehow Cain got one of them to be his wife, wouldn't that be incest? Why would God let that happen? Why wouldn't God just make him a wife like He made Adam and Eve?
The honest truth of the matter is that, according to archeologists, it took thousands of years after the known existence of humans before people began to write. Therefore, if anyone really knew how people came into existence, they could only tell others about it orally--that is, they couldn't write it. Thus, any so-called proof of the validity of the Creation Story is at best hear-say, which is not admissible in a court of law.
In other words, anybody with any common sense (which has never been common) could reason that oral traditions are not legitimate history. Anyone can say anything, and usually, many people do. It doesn't take much intelligence to realize that unless actions and events are recorded by responsible historians, oral traditions, which is nothing more than hear-say, is unreliable. So many folktales, fairytales, myths, and legends have been made up (and believed) in the past--only to be thought ridiculous by later generations--that it defies logic and common sense to believe some ludicrous fantasies generation after generation as has been done.
What awe's me about typical religions (and I regard myself as a religious person) is that people (including me) have allowed there minds to be enslaved by what some people wrote in the past--people who were not nearly as knowledgeable as we are today.
However, I think I understand why. Let me try to both understand it as well as explain it. It seems to me that life is so difficult (even though it is remarkable how so many people have simplified their lives) that many people try desperately to make it easier to live. Because people find themselves neither able to control their own minds nor the minds of others, they delude themselves and dogmatize others into believing things (like religions) that will help them to both control themselves as well as others; as proof, kings as well as emperors have realized that whoever controls the religion of a people also controls the people who believe in that religion. And, besides being able to control the people with religion, I'm sure that many of them also realized that with religion they could also control themselves.
So, to sum up, most religious people aren't stupid; we just want to live the best life that we can; and, religion helps us to do just that. There is a difference between knowing and doing, and ones religion helps one to both know and do. For example, I know that for optimum health I should indeed exercise daily about twenty to thirty minutes, but I haven't done so in eight months; if my religion required me to exercise for twenty to thirty minutes a day, I would most likely do it. The unspoken truth is that religion both controls a person as well as helps a person to control him or her self.
Saturday, October 30, 2010
Friday, October 29, 2010
LEGEND OR MYTH?
A legend is a story or group of stories handed down through popular oral tradition, usually consisting of an exaggerated or unreliable account of some actually or possibly historical person—often a saint, monarch, or popular hero. Legends are sometimes distinguished from myths in that they concern human beings rather than gods, and sometimes in that they have some sort of historical basis whereas myths do not; but these distinctions are difficult to maintain consistently. The term was originally applied to accounts of saints' lives (e.g., hagiography, which is a worshipful or idealizing biography), but is now applied chiefly to fanciful tales of warriors (e.g. King Arthur and his knights), criminals (e.g. Faust, Robin Hood).
In folklore theory, a ‘legend’ is a short traditional oral narrative about a person, place, or object that really exists, existed, or is believed to have existed; even when it recounts a supernatural or highly unusual event, this is claimed to have occurred in real life. Unlike a fairytale or joke, it is presented (and generally accepted) as true; it offers information, moral judgments, or warnings. In practice, the status of legends is more complex, both as regards morality and perceived truthfulness. Many which were once purely oral have repeatedly appeared in books, local newspapers, and TV, from where they feed back into oral tellings; in some cases, the truth of the tradition is a matter for heated dispute (e.g. Robin Hood, Lady Godiva), while in others what was once regarded as true and important is now mere entertainment.
Following are three definitions for myth:
1. A traditional story or tale that has no proven factual basis.
2. A body of traditional beliefs and notions accumulated about a particular subject.
3. Any fictitious idea accepted as part of an ideology by an uncritical group; a received idea: creation, fantasy, fiction, figment, invention.
In folklore theory, a ‘legend’ is a short traditional oral narrative about a person, place, or object that really exists, existed, or is believed to have existed; even when it recounts a supernatural or highly unusual event, this is claimed to have occurred in real life. Unlike a fairytale or joke, it is presented (and generally accepted) as true; it offers information, moral judgments, or warnings. In practice, the status of legends is more complex, both as regards morality and perceived truthfulness. Many which were once purely oral have repeatedly appeared in books, local newspapers, and TV, from where they feed back into oral tellings; in some cases, the truth of the tradition is a matter for heated dispute (e.g. Robin Hood, Lady Godiva), while in others what was once regarded as true and important is now mere entertainment.
Following are three definitions for myth:
1. A traditional story or tale that has no proven factual basis.
2. A body of traditional beliefs and notions accumulated about a particular subject.
3. Any fictitious idea accepted as part of an ideology by an uncritical group; a received idea: creation, fantasy, fiction, figment, invention.
Monday, October 25, 2010
HOW OUR RELIGION BEGAN (Part 2)
The early Hebrews, like the other Semites, knew very little about religion and life as we know it today. They were wrong in some things that they believed, as, for instance, when they thought that the wind was made by some spirit blowing hard. When a stream flowed gently they said the spirit was asleep and when the stream was disturbed they said the spirit was angry. They could only think of things happening in nature because of something that was alive and doing these things. They knew nothing about the laws of nature.
These ancient Hebrews had the terrible custom of sacrificing children as offerings to their gods. The Old Testament mentions this in several places: II Kings 17:31, II Kings 3:27, Leviticus 18:21, Leviticus 20:2.
The Hebrews worshipped their god by giving their first-born children as a sacrifice to the god. They followed this custom for many hundreds of years. Probably it was not until after the exile that it entirely ceased. See Jeremiah 7:31, Jeremiah 19:5, Ezekiel 20:25, II Kings 3:27. If a sacrifice was required, it was the first-born child who was chosen. Probably this first child was thought the most sacred one (Genesis 40:3). In some of the very oldest laws of the Hebrews it says that god Yahweh wanted their first-born sons as a sacrifice. Read Exodus 23:9. On very special occasions, adults were offered as a sacrifice to Yahweh (Judges 11:31, 39).
The Bible story of Abraham preparing to kill his son Isaac as an offering to his god is told to the later Hebrews to prove that Yahweh no longer required human sacrifices to be made (Genesis 22:1-17). Perhaps this is why Abraham is given credit for starting the new Hebrew religion—even though Moses is given credit for being the first to write laws for the “Children of Israel." Following is a copy of the Biblical story of how this horrible ritual (of sacrificing human beings) changed (to merely sacrificing other animals) with the story of Abraham and his first-born son, Isaac:
1And it came to pass after these things, that God did tempt Abraham, and said unto him, Abraham: and he said, Behold, here I am.
2And he said, Take now thy son, thine only son Isaac, whom thou lovest, and get thee into the land of Moriah; and offer him there for a burnt offering upon one of the mountains which I will tell thee of.
3And Abraham rose up early in the morning, and saddled his ass, and took two of his young men with him, and Isaac his son, and clave the wood for the burnt offering, and rose up, and went unto the place of which God had told him.
4Then on the third day Abraham lifted up his eyes, and saw the place afar off.
5And Abraham said unto his young men, Abide ye here with the ass; and I and the lad will go yonder and worship, and come again to you.
6And Abraham took the wood of the burnt offering, and laid it upon Isaac his son; and he took the fire in his hand, and a knife; and they went both of them together.
7And Isaac spake unto Abraham his father, and said, My father: and he said, Here am I, my son. And he said, Behold the fire and the wood: but where is the lamb for a burnt offering?
8And Abraham said, My son, God will provide himself a lamb for a burnt offering: so they went both of them together.
9And they came to the place which God had told him of; and Abraham built an altar there, and laid the wood in order, and bound Isaac his son, and laid him on the altar upon the wood.
10And Abraham stretched forth his hand, and took the knife to slay his son.
11And the angel of the LORD called unto him out of heaven, and said, Abraham, Abraham: and he said, Here am I.
12And he said, Lay not thine hand upon the lad, neither do thou any thing unto him: for now I know that thou fearest God, seeing thou hast not withheld thy son, thine only son from me.
13And Abraham lifted up his eyes, and looked, and behold behind him a ram caught in a thicket by his horns: and Abraham went and took the ram, and offered him up for a burnt offering in the stead of his son.
These ancient Hebrews had the terrible custom of sacrificing children as offerings to their gods. The Old Testament mentions this in several places: II Kings 17:31, II Kings 3:27, Leviticus 18:21, Leviticus 20:2.
The Hebrews worshipped their god by giving their first-born children as a sacrifice to the god. They followed this custom for many hundreds of years. Probably it was not until after the exile that it entirely ceased. See Jeremiah 7:31, Jeremiah 19:5, Ezekiel 20:25, II Kings 3:27. If a sacrifice was required, it was the first-born child who was chosen. Probably this first child was thought the most sacred one (Genesis 40:3). In some of the very oldest laws of the Hebrews it says that god Yahweh wanted their first-born sons as a sacrifice. Read Exodus 23:9. On very special occasions, adults were offered as a sacrifice to Yahweh (Judges 11:31, 39).
The Bible story of Abraham preparing to kill his son Isaac as an offering to his god is told to the later Hebrews to prove that Yahweh no longer required human sacrifices to be made (Genesis 22:1-17). Perhaps this is why Abraham is given credit for starting the new Hebrew religion—even though Moses is given credit for being the first to write laws for the “Children of Israel." Following is a copy of the Biblical story of how this horrible ritual (of sacrificing human beings) changed (to merely sacrificing other animals) with the story of Abraham and his first-born son, Isaac:
1And it came to pass after these things, that God did tempt Abraham, and said unto him, Abraham: and he said, Behold, here I am.
2And he said, Take now thy son, thine only son Isaac, whom thou lovest, and get thee into the land of Moriah; and offer him there for a burnt offering upon one of the mountains which I will tell thee of.
3And Abraham rose up early in the morning, and saddled his ass, and took two of his young men with him, and Isaac his son, and clave the wood for the burnt offering, and rose up, and went unto the place of which God had told him.
4Then on the third day Abraham lifted up his eyes, and saw the place afar off.
5And Abraham said unto his young men, Abide ye here with the ass; and I and the lad will go yonder and worship, and come again to you.
6And Abraham took the wood of the burnt offering, and laid it upon Isaac his son; and he took the fire in his hand, and a knife; and they went both of them together.
7And Isaac spake unto Abraham his father, and said, My father: and he said, Here am I, my son. And he said, Behold the fire and the wood: but where is the lamb for a burnt offering?
8And Abraham said, My son, God will provide himself a lamb for a burnt offering: so they went both of them together.
9And they came to the place which God had told him of; and Abraham built an altar there, and laid the wood in order, and bound Isaac his son, and laid him on the altar upon the wood.
10And Abraham stretched forth his hand, and took the knife to slay his son.
11And the angel of the LORD called unto him out of heaven, and said, Abraham, Abraham: and he said, Here am I.
12And he said, Lay not thine hand upon the lad, neither do thou any thing unto him: for now I know that thou fearest God, seeing thou hast not withheld thy son, thine only son from me.
13And Abraham lifted up his eyes, and looked, and behold behind him a ram caught in a thicket by his horns: and Abraham went and took the ram, and offered him up for a burnt offering in the stead of his son.
Sunday, October 24, 2010
HOW OUR RELIGION BEGAN (Part 1)
The following information can be read more extensively (also free of charge) at:
http://www.archive.org/stream/MN40194ucmf_0#page/n0/mode/2up
Here I have summarized (and will continue to do so in successive posts with this title) the information provided by Edna M. Baxter in her great book:
How Our Religion Began.
Judaism, Christianity and Islam can trace their roots back to the ancient Hebrews and their neighbors. During that time, people tried to explain birth and death, the growth of trees and plants, the reasons for floods and for disasters, the causes of sickness and disease, and many other things. The answers given were connected with "the gods" or with "spirits."
As time passed and scientific discoveries became known, peoples' answers to these questions kept changing. At the same time as their ideas of the world changed, their customs of worship and their ideas of God slowly changed.
Thus, Jewish, Christian, and Islamic religions find the beginnings of their religion in and near the great Arabian Desert. Thousands of years ago the people who lived around this desert were called Semites. In the Old Testament of the Bible references are made to such people as Canaanites, Assyrians, Babylonians, Ethiopians, and Hebrews; but, as they settled in different places, they came to have different names. Thus, the Arabian Desert is the center from which the Semites spread. Also among the Semites were Aramaeans and Arabs.
Judaism is a religion of which the members are commonly called Jews. Most of the people we know today as Jews are Hebrews. They are also descendants of the early Semites who wandered about the desert with their flocks and lived in tents.
Four or five thousand years ago, when the ancestors of the Hebrews were nomads in the desert, they did not have books or schools or libraries or teachers or scientists. It was necessary for them to discover everything about the world and about religion for themselves. Sometimes they learned from their neighbors in Babylonia and Egypt. However, everywhere at that time, people were answering questions regarding nature by using their imaginations rather than science.
For example, before there were any scientists to help people to explain natural occurrences, the Semites thought that breath was the spirit inside of people. They believed that when people died or even when they had dreams, there was a living spirit which left the body and visited distant places. So they came to think that ghosts were superior to people and they feared and honored them as superhuman beings.
The Semites called them by the name el. El is the oldest name we know meaning god to the Hebrews. An ancient name for the Hebrew nation is Isra-el, which (in the Bible) means "He has striven with God."
Just as they thought that there was a ghost or spirit living in people, so they began to believe that there were spirits living in trees, rivers, wells, stones and mountains. Everything that moved or had life seemed to show the power of a god. In Canaan where the Hebrews later came to live the people called these spirits by the name "ba'al," which means "owner." The plural of this word is baalim. There was a ba'al of the frost, a ba'al of the dew, a ba'al of the thunder, a ba'al of the storm, a ba'al of the trees, a ba'al of springs, a ba'al mountains, and a ba'al of stones--a ba'al for each. All of these things in which a god or ba'al was thought to dwell were called "beth-el," which means "house of deity."
The movement of the sun, moon and stars, the floating of clouds, the crash of thunder, the flash of lightning, the rustle of leaves, the flowing of water, were believed by these early people to be alive and to possess a spirit.
Here is what the ancient Babylonian neighbors of the Hebrews said about their gods:
The highest walls, the thickest walls, like a flood they pass.
From house to house they break through,
No door can shut them out, no bolt can turn them back.
Through the door like a snake they glide,
Through the hinge like a wind they blow.
http://www.archive.org/stream/MN40194ucmf_0#page/n0/mode/2up
Here I have summarized (and will continue to do so in successive posts with this title) the information provided by Edna M. Baxter in her great book:
How Our Religion Began.
Judaism, Christianity and Islam can trace their roots back to the ancient Hebrews and their neighbors. During that time, people tried to explain birth and death, the growth of trees and plants, the reasons for floods and for disasters, the causes of sickness and disease, and many other things. The answers given were connected with "the gods" or with "spirits."
As time passed and scientific discoveries became known, peoples' answers to these questions kept changing. At the same time as their ideas of the world changed, their customs of worship and their ideas of God slowly changed.
Thus, Jewish, Christian, and Islamic religions find the beginnings of their religion in and near the great Arabian Desert. Thousands of years ago the people who lived around this desert were called Semites. In the Old Testament of the Bible references are made to such people as Canaanites, Assyrians, Babylonians, Ethiopians, and Hebrews; but, as they settled in different places, they came to have different names. Thus, the Arabian Desert is the center from which the Semites spread. Also among the Semites were Aramaeans and Arabs.
Judaism is a religion of which the members are commonly called Jews. Most of the people we know today as Jews are Hebrews. They are also descendants of the early Semites who wandered about the desert with their flocks and lived in tents.
Four or five thousand years ago, when the ancestors of the Hebrews were nomads in the desert, they did not have books or schools or libraries or teachers or scientists. It was necessary for them to discover everything about the world and about religion for themselves. Sometimes they learned from their neighbors in Babylonia and Egypt. However, everywhere at that time, people were answering questions regarding nature by using their imaginations rather than science.
For example, before there were any scientists to help people to explain natural occurrences, the Semites thought that breath was the spirit inside of people. They believed that when people died or even when they had dreams, there was a living spirit which left the body and visited distant places. So they came to think that ghosts were superior to people and they feared and honored them as superhuman beings.
The Semites called them by the name el. El is the oldest name we know meaning god to the Hebrews. An ancient name for the Hebrew nation is Isra-el, which (in the Bible) means "He has striven with God."
Just as they thought that there was a ghost or spirit living in people, so they began to believe that there were spirits living in trees, rivers, wells, stones and mountains. Everything that moved or had life seemed to show the power of a god. In Canaan where the Hebrews later came to live the people called these spirits by the name "ba'al," which means "owner." The plural of this word is baalim. There was a ba'al of the frost, a ba'al of the dew, a ba'al of the thunder, a ba'al of the storm, a ba'al of the trees, a ba'al of springs, a ba'al mountains, and a ba'al of stones--a ba'al for each. All of these things in which a god or ba'al was thought to dwell were called "beth-el," which means "house of deity."
The movement of the sun, moon and stars, the floating of clouds, the crash of thunder, the flash of lightning, the rustle of leaves, the flowing of water, were believed by these early people to be alive and to possess a spirit.
Here is what the ancient Babylonian neighbors of the Hebrews said about their gods:
The highest walls, the thickest walls, like a flood they pass.
From house to house they break through,
No door can shut them out, no bolt can turn them back.
Through the door like a snake they glide,
Through the hinge like a wind they blow.
Wednesday, October 20, 2010
ORIGIN OF RELIGION
The following information was presented by the Ontario Consultants on Religious Tolerance.
There are two broad groups of theories about the origin of religion:
Faith-based theories: According to David Barrett et al, editors of the "World Christian Encyclopedia: A comparative survey of churches and religions - AD 30 to 2200," there are 19 major world religions which are subdivided into a total of 270 large religious groups, and many unique faith groups. Among this great religious diversity, there are probably hundreds of different religious creation stories which describe how humans, other species of life, the Earth, and the rest of the universe came to be. Many of these stories describe the origins of their particular religion. It was typically based on revelation from one or more deities -- mainly gods and goddesses.
Secular-based theories: Anthropologists, evolutionary biologists, and other researchers have reached a near consensus that humans of the species homo sapiens evolved from a species of proto-humans who originated somewhere in Africa. (This statement probably upsets any white supremacists who are reading this essay. That can't be helped; scientists consider the evidence to be conclusive; ultimately, we are all descended from Africans.) These proto-humans walked upright, and had an opposing thumb and little finger. Their internal brain structure represented a major advance over those of previous animals in terms of its flexibility, its ability to reason, and its ability to plan for the future. This gave proto-humans an improved ability to pass on their accumulated knowledge to their descendents, to form more advanced societies, and ultimately to create religions.
Nobody knows with accuracy how the first religions evolved. By the time that writing had developed, many religions had been in place for many millennia and the details of their origins had been forgotten. However, there is speculation that the first religions were a response to human fear. They were created to give people a feeling of security in an insecure world, and a feeling of control over the environment where there was little control.
The developing abilities of proto-humans were a double-edge sword:
Unfortunately, because these belief systems were based on hunches, the various religions which developed in different areas of the world were all different. Their teachings were in conflict with each other. Because the followers of most religions considered their beliefs to be derived directly from God, they cannot be easily changed. Thus, inter-religious compromise is difficult or impossible. Also, because religious texts are often ambiguous, divisions developed within religions. Different denominations, schools, or traditions have derived different meanings from the same religious texts. Thus were laid the foundations for millennia of inter-religious and intra-religious conflict.
There are two broad groups of theories about the origin of religion:
Faith-based theories: According to David Barrett et al, editors of the "World Christian Encyclopedia: A comparative survey of churches and religions - AD 30 to 2200," there are 19 major world religions which are subdivided into a total of 270 large religious groups, and many unique faith groups. Among this great religious diversity, there are probably hundreds of different religious creation stories which describe how humans, other species of life, the Earth, and the rest of the universe came to be. Many of these stories describe the origins of their particular religion. It was typically based on revelation from one or more deities -- mainly gods and goddesses.
Secular-based theories: Anthropologists, evolutionary biologists, and other researchers have reached a near consensus that humans of the species homo sapiens evolved from a species of proto-humans who originated somewhere in Africa. (This statement probably upsets any white supremacists who are reading this essay. That can't be helped; scientists consider the evidence to be conclusive; ultimately, we are all descended from Africans.) These proto-humans walked upright, and had an opposing thumb and little finger. Their internal brain structure represented a major advance over those of previous animals in terms of its flexibility, its ability to reason, and its ability to plan for the future. This gave proto-humans an improved ability to pass on their accumulated knowledge to their descendents, to form more advanced societies, and ultimately to create religions.
Nobody knows with accuracy how the first religions evolved. By the time that writing had developed, many religions had been in place for many millennia and the details of their origins had been forgotten. However, there is speculation that the first religions were a response to human fear. They were created to give people a feeling of security in an insecure world, and a feeling of control over the environment where there was little control.
The developing abilities of proto-humans were a double-edge sword:
- On the one hand, they aided their chances of surviving in a cruel and unpredictable world. They helped each successive generation of proto-humans to build upon the knowledge base of their ancestors.
- This increased mental ability led to a terrifying piece of knowledge: personal mortality. For the first time, individual animals on earth became aware that their life was transient; they would die at some point in their future. This knowledge produced an intolerable emotional drain.
- What controlled the seasonal cycles of nature -- the daily motion of the sun; the motion of the stars, the passing of the seasons, etc.
- What controlled their environment -- what or who caused floods, rains, dry spells, storms, etc?
- What controls fertility -- of the tribe, its domesticated animals, and its crops.
- What system of morality is needed to best promote the stability of the tribe?
- And above all: what happens to a person after they die?
- The first religious belief system,
- The first priesthood,
- The first set of rituals to appease the Goddess,
- Other rituals to control fertility and other aspects of the environment,
- A set of behavioral expectations for members of the tribe, and
- A set of moral truths to govern human behavior.
Unfortunately, because these belief systems were based on hunches, the various religions which developed in different areas of the world were all different. Their teachings were in conflict with each other. Because the followers of most religions considered their beliefs to be derived directly from God, they cannot be easily changed. Thus, inter-religious compromise is difficult or impossible. Also, because religious texts are often ambiguous, divisions developed within religions. Different denominations, schools, or traditions have derived different meanings from the same religious texts. Thus were laid the foundations for millennia of inter-religious and intra-religious conflict.
EDNA M. BAXTER
Edna M. Baxter was a respected and admired academician. She was a member of the editorial board of the Journal of Bible and Religion (JBR), which was published by The National Association of Biblical Instructors to Foster Religion in Education. She was actually the Religious Education Editor. The purpose of this journal was to foster education in religion. In the November 1941 issue Edna wrote a portion entitled “Books for Teaching Religion.” The American Academy of Religion (AAR), which has been in operation more than 100 years, has reprinted this journal. They have made it available nationwide through college, university, and public libraries.
The November 1941 issue introduces its contributors; following is a copy of what was printed about Edna:
CONTRIBUTORS TO THIS ISSUE
EDNA M. BAXTER is a member of the editorial board of the JBR. She is actively engaged in training professional leadership in the field of religious education, while serving as Associate Professor of Religious Education at the Hartford Seminary Foundation. The following are her most recent books: Living and Working in Our Country, How Our Religion Began, and Jewish-Christian Relationships.
Her book entitled “How Our Religion Began,” from which I will provide brief highlights on this blog, is available free online at: http://www.archive.org/stream/MN40194ucmf_0#page/n0/mode/2up
Edna M. Baxter is one of the most influential academician as well as educator of the 20th Century. The Christian Educators of the 20th Century web-based database provides access to information about the people who have shaped the field of Christian religious education in North America throughout the 20th Century. The database covers Protestant, Catholic, and Orthodox religious education leaders. It is overseen by an editorial board consisting of Christian religious education scholars from a variety of denominational backgrounds. When completed, the database will contain entries on approximately 160 persons. Those included in this project are deceased, retired or past age 70.
This project, funded by The Lilly Endowment and hosted by Talbot School of Theology, Biola University, is intended to serve the needs of faculty, students, and other researchers in the field of Christian education who desire to better understand who and what has shaped the development of Christian education during the last century and up to the present. We stand on the shoulders of those who have come before us, and we inherit educational ministry approaches that have been shaped by the contexts and issues of previous generations. This project provides access to the kind of resources necessary for sound historical research that can help challenge and guide the ongoing development of effective educational ministry in the local church. May God's people use it to God's glory.
Kevin E. Lawson
Director, Ph.D. and Ed.D. programs in Educational Studies
Talbot School of Theology
CE20 Project Director
Following is what might be called a brief biographical sketch of some of her academic. It is presented by Dr. Lawson:
Miss Baxter (1890-1985) was appointed Instructor in Religious Education at Hartford Seminary in 1926 and Professor in the Seminary’s School of Religious Pedagogy in 1944. She was the first woman to serve as a full professor at any theological seminary in the United States.
A Methodist, her interests included early childhood education, curriculum development, the teaching of the Bible to children and youth, and multi-racial, multi-cultural, and multi-national relations.
Miss Baxter received a B.A. in Religious Education from Boston University and an M.A. in Religious Education from Northwestern University. She earned a Bachelor of Divinity degree at Garrett Theological Seminary.
Subsequently, she completed work for a Ph.D. at Hartford Seminary, writing a doctoral dissertation titled “A Study of the Ideas of God Held by Protestant Teachers of Religion.” But she was not awarded the degree by her colleagues. Archival records indicate that one or two of them thought that awarding the doctorate to a fellow professor was somehow unprofessional and that such a degree would lack academic credibility. Hartford Seminary awarded an honorary Doctor of Divinity degree, posthumously, to Professor Edna M. Baxter in recognition of her service and accomplishments.
Despite this decision, Miss Baxter served the seminary and academia to national acclaim. Besides her position as a professor at Hartford Seminary, she was a Director of the Religious Education Association for ten years and visiting Professor at Garrett, Northwestern, Union Theological Seminary, Tufts University, and Yale Divinity School. She was an editor of the journal Religious Education.
She also was a member for sixteen years of the editorial staff of The Journal of Bible and Religion, published by the National Association of Bible Instructors, which was the predecessor of the American Academy of Religion. She was a member of the board of education, New York Conference of the United Methodist Church, the Women’s Board of Japan International Christian University, and the committee of the Ewha Women’s University of Seoul, Korea.
Miss Baxter pioneered in curriculum development, especially on the elementary level. At a time when the uniform lessons and quarterlies were at their peak, she was dissatisfied with traditional Bible stories and designed courses that brought together the best of biblical scholarship, archaeological research and sound educational methodology.
One of her outstanding innovations was a course for 5th and 6th graders on “Children and Labor Problems,” and one on “Living and Working in Our Country.” These courses introduced economic and social issues, including those of child labor, migrants, miners, workers in cotton, unions and strikes, housing, cooperatives, and living with people of other races. She told Helen Sheldrick: “I have tried to connect Church education with all areas of life, especially where human relationships were concerned... To me, the Christian faith is related to all of life.”
She also did ground-breaking work in the area of intercultural, interracial and interreligious understanding, enriched by her many visits to other countries. Among her resources was a teacher’s guide for a book on the Middle East, “Bible Lands Today,” published by Friendship Press. She worked to improve relations between Jews, Christians and Muslims.
She was a master in developing creative approaches to teaching, using dramatics, choral speech, story-telling, music, games, arts and crafts, and creative worship. She prepared thousands of pages of syllabi and course outlines that would embody the most creative methods and techniques.
As part of her community service, soon after she came to Hartford, Miss Baxter founded the Knight Hall Nursery School in order to help students understand how to work with children and their parents, but also to meet the needs of seminary and neighborhood families. She was a member of the United Methodist Church of Hartford, and helped to develop a church library that was named in her honor.
Upon her retirement in 1960, she was named Professor Emerita. A professor emeritus or emeritus professor is a title that may be given to a full professor who retires in good standing. According to the American council on Education, it is typically awarded for "long and distinguished service".
Her publications are numerous. In 1984, one year before her death, Miss Baxter wrote an autobiography, Ventures in Serving Mankind, which offered insight on her early life and education, chronicled her extensive travels around the world, and added some information about her retirement years.
The degree was awarded at graduation ceremonies for the Class of 2010, which took place on Friday, June 4 at the Seminary, 77 Sherman Street, Hartford. Members of Miss Baxter’s family attended and received the posthumous degree.
For a full biography of her life, including her education, her career, her travel and writings, her contributions to Christian education, and a bibliography of her books and articles, please see: http://www.talbot.edu/ce20/educators/view.cfm?n=edna_baxter. This site also has excerpts from her publications and recommended readings. It was researched and written by The Rev. Boardman W. Kathan, general secretary emeritus for the Religious Education Association and archivist for both the R.E.A. and the Association of Professors and Researchers in Religious Education.
The November 1941 issue introduces its contributors; following is a copy of what was printed about Edna:
CONTRIBUTORS TO THIS ISSUE
EDNA M. BAXTER is a member of the editorial board of the JBR. She is actively engaged in training professional leadership in the field of religious education, while serving as Associate Professor of Religious Education at the Hartford Seminary Foundation. The following are her most recent books: Living and Working in Our Country, How Our Religion Began, and Jewish-Christian Relationships.
Her book entitled “How Our Religion Began,” from which I will provide brief highlights on this blog, is available free online at: http://www.archive.org/stream/MN40194ucmf_0#page/n0/mode/2up
Edna M. Baxter is one of the most influential academician as well as educator of the 20th Century. The Christian Educators of the 20th Century web-based database provides access to information about the people who have shaped the field of Christian religious education in North America throughout the 20th Century. The database covers Protestant, Catholic, and Orthodox religious education leaders. It is overseen by an editorial board consisting of Christian religious education scholars from a variety of denominational backgrounds. When completed, the database will contain entries on approximately 160 persons. Those included in this project are deceased, retired or past age 70.
This project, funded by The Lilly Endowment and hosted by Talbot School of Theology, Biola University, is intended to serve the needs of faculty, students, and other researchers in the field of Christian education who desire to better understand who and what has shaped the development of Christian education during the last century and up to the present. We stand on the shoulders of those who have come before us, and we inherit educational ministry approaches that have been shaped by the contexts and issues of previous generations. This project provides access to the kind of resources necessary for sound historical research that can help challenge and guide the ongoing development of effective educational ministry in the local church. May God's people use it to God's glory.
Kevin E. Lawson
Director, Ph.D. and Ed.D. programs in Educational Studies
Talbot School of Theology
CE20 Project Director
Following is what might be called a brief biographical sketch of some of her academic. It is presented by Dr. Lawson:
Miss Baxter (1890-1985) was appointed Instructor in Religious Education at Hartford Seminary in 1926 and Professor in the Seminary’s School of Religious Pedagogy in 1944. She was the first woman to serve as a full professor at any theological seminary in the United States.
A Methodist, her interests included early childhood education, curriculum development, the teaching of the Bible to children and youth, and multi-racial, multi-cultural, and multi-national relations.
Miss Baxter received a B.A. in Religious Education from Boston University and an M.A. in Religious Education from Northwestern University. She earned a Bachelor of Divinity degree at Garrett Theological Seminary.
Subsequently, she completed work for a Ph.D. at Hartford Seminary, writing a doctoral dissertation titled “A Study of the Ideas of God Held by Protestant Teachers of Religion.” But she was not awarded the degree by her colleagues. Archival records indicate that one or two of them thought that awarding the doctorate to a fellow professor was somehow unprofessional and that such a degree would lack academic credibility. Hartford Seminary awarded an honorary Doctor of Divinity degree, posthumously, to Professor Edna M. Baxter in recognition of her service and accomplishments.
Despite this decision, Miss Baxter served the seminary and academia to national acclaim. Besides her position as a professor at Hartford Seminary, she was a Director of the Religious Education Association for ten years and visiting Professor at Garrett, Northwestern, Union Theological Seminary, Tufts University, and Yale Divinity School. She was an editor of the journal Religious Education.
She also was a member for sixteen years of the editorial staff of The Journal of Bible and Religion, published by the National Association of Bible Instructors, which was the predecessor of the American Academy of Religion. She was a member of the board of education, New York Conference of the United Methodist Church, the Women’s Board of Japan International Christian University, and the committee of the Ewha Women’s University of Seoul, Korea.
Miss Baxter pioneered in curriculum development, especially on the elementary level. At a time when the uniform lessons and quarterlies were at their peak, she was dissatisfied with traditional Bible stories and designed courses that brought together the best of biblical scholarship, archaeological research and sound educational methodology.
One of her outstanding innovations was a course for 5th and 6th graders on “Children and Labor Problems,” and one on “Living and Working in Our Country.” These courses introduced economic and social issues, including those of child labor, migrants, miners, workers in cotton, unions and strikes, housing, cooperatives, and living with people of other races. She told Helen Sheldrick: “I have tried to connect Church education with all areas of life, especially where human relationships were concerned... To me, the Christian faith is related to all of life.”
She also did ground-breaking work in the area of intercultural, interracial and interreligious understanding, enriched by her many visits to other countries. Among her resources was a teacher’s guide for a book on the Middle East, “Bible Lands Today,” published by Friendship Press. She worked to improve relations between Jews, Christians and Muslims.
She was a master in developing creative approaches to teaching, using dramatics, choral speech, story-telling, music, games, arts and crafts, and creative worship. She prepared thousands of pages of syllabi and course outlines that would embody the most creative methods and techniques.
As part of her community service, soon after she came to Hartford, Miss Baxter founded the Knight Hall Nursery School in order to help students understand how to work with children and their parents, but also to meet the needs of seminary and neighborhood families. She was a member of the United Methodist Church of Hartford, and helped to develop a church library that was named in her honor.
Upon her retirement in 1960, she was named Professor Emerita. A professor emeritus or emeritus professor is a title that may be given to a full professor who retires in good standing. According to the American council on Education, it is typically awarded for "long and distinguished service".
Her publications are numerous. In 1984, one year before her death, Miss Baxter wrote an autobiography, Ventures in Serving Mankind, which offered insight on her early life and education, chronicled her extensive travels around the world, and added some information about her retirement years.
The degree was awarded at graduation ceremonies for the Class of 2010, which took place on Friday, June 4 at the Seminary, 77 Sherman Street, Hartford. Members of Miss Baxter’s family attended and received the posthumous degree.
For a full biography of her life, including her education, her career, her travel and writings, her contributions to Christian education, and a bibliography of her books and articles, please see: http://www.talbot.edu/ce20/educators/view.cfm?n=edna_baxter. This site also has excerpts from her publications and recommended readings. It was researched and written by The Rev. Boardman W. Kathan, general secretary emeritus for the Religious Education Association and archivist for both the R.E.A. and the Association of Professors and Researchers in Religious Education.
Saturday, October 16, 2010
DOCTORS OF THE CHURCH
“I desire to have knowledge of God and the soul. Of nothing else? No, of nothing else whatever.” Augustine wrote these words shortly after becoming a Christian in A.D. 387. To our ears they may sound close-minded, unsophisticated, or just plain stupid. Yet his words signal the emergence of a new conceptual framework in Western civilization. It is a framework (of religion based upon faith) that replaced the one fashioned by the Greeks and Romans (of philosophy based upon reason); a framework that dominated Western Civilization for a thousand years—a framework that led the West into the Dark Ages.
Born in 354 in the northern African town of Tagaste, Augustine had a Christian mother and a pagan father. His studies in Latin literature and grammar led to his becoming a teacher of rhetoric in Carthage. The unruly students there forced him to quit and go to Rome, where he opened a school of his own. Here the students behaved better, but they reneged on the payment of his fees. As a result, Augustine applied for, and got, a position as municipal professor of rhetoric in Milan. At this point his life changed dramatically.
Until this time, Augustine, in spite of his mother’s pleads and prayers, was not a Christian. Moreover, he had lived a self-indulgent life: he had a mistress, and an illegitimate son, and was, he wrote in his Confessions, “thoroughly licentious.” But in Milan Augustine came under the influence of the bishop, Saint Ambrose, who converted him to Christianity. The intellectual conversion came first, the moral conversion he found more difficult, because Augustine had trouble resisting the temptations of the flesh. “Give me chastity and continence,” he prayed, “only not yet.”
Ultimately, Augustine became the devoted Christian that he had longed to become. He gave up his professorship—and his mistress—returning with his son, Adeodatus, his mother, and some friends to Cassiciacum, a town near Milan, where he conducted seminars, attempting to work out Christian answers to philosophical questions about happiness, truth, and good and evil. Later, Augustine published the record of his seminars: The Happy Life, Against Skepticism, and Divine Providence and the Problem of Evil.
In 388 Augustine went back to Africa to his home town of Tagaste, where he established a monastery. In 392 he was ordained a priest and set up a second monastery in Hippo, a seaport town about 150 miles west of Carthage. Augustine became bishop of Hippo in 396, serving there for over thirty years. He died in 430 while the Vandals were robbing and destroying the city.
As bishop, Augustine spent much of his time combating heresies (beliefs that were not approved by Church officials). Some of these heretics (dissenters from established religious doctrine) were:
• Pelagians, who taught that human beings could attain salvation through their own efforts;
• Manicheans, who taught that two equal gods (one good and one evil) ruled the world;
• Arians, who taught that God had created a son (Jesus) who was neither eternal nor equal with the Father;
• Donatists, who taught that only the pure and holy could be members of the church.
In his battle to against these doctrines (that differed with the Christian doctrine as it had been officially accepted) Augustine composed numerous disputatious sermons, tracts, letters, and books. (The one against the Manicheans comprised thirty-three books or chapters.)
In addition to his polemics, Augustine wrote books and monographs on matters of Christian doctrine, on free will, and on the Trinity. Of his writings, 113 books, 218 letters, and over 500 sermons have survived. His most famous book, The City of God, he composed to explain why Rome fell to the Goths in 410.
Augustine, his contemporaries, Ambrose and Jerome, and Pope Gregory the Great (who came later) are called Doctors of the Church in recognition of their great influence on Christianity.
• The influence of Ambrose and Gregory came from their skill as statesmen; they established the independence of the church and its domination over secular rulers.
• Jerome’s contribution was to translate the Bible into Latin.
• But it was Augustine who had the greatest intellectual influence on Christianity. It was he who fashioned the Christian framework.
Born in 354 in the northern African town of Tagaste, Augustine had a Christian mother and a pagan father. His studies in Latin literature and grammar led to his becoming a teacher of rhetoric in Carthage. The unruly students there forced him to quit and go to Rome, where he opened a school of his own. Here the students behaved better, but they reneged on the payment of his fees. As a result, Augustine applied for, and got, a position as municipal professor of rhetoric in Milan. At this point his life changed dramatically.
Until this time, Augustine, in spite of his mother’s pleads and prayers, was not a Christian. Moreover, he had lived a self-indulgent life: he had a mistress, and an illegitimate son, and was, he wrote in his Confessions, “thoroughly licentious.” But in Milan Augustine came under the influence of the bishop, Saint Ambrose, who converted him to Christianity. The intellectual conversion came first, the moral conversion he found more difficult, because Augustine had trouble resisting the temptations of the flesh. “Give me chastity and continence,” he prayed, “only not yet.”
Ultimately, Augustine became the devoted Christian that he had longed to become. He gave up his professorship—and his mistress—returning with his son, Adeodatus, his mother, and some friends to Cassiciacum, a town near Milan, where he conducted seminars, attempting to work out Christian answers to philosophical questions about happiness, truth, and good and evil. Later, Augustine published the record of his seminars: The Happy Life, Against Skepticism, and Divine Providence and the Problem of Evil.
In 388 Augustine went back to Africa to his home town of Tagaste, where he established a monastery. In 392 he was ordained a priest and set up a second monastery in Hippo, a seaport town about 150 miles west of Carthage. Augustine became bishop of Hippo in 396, serving there for over thirty years. He died in 430 while the Vandals were robbing and destroying the city.
As bishop, Augustine spent much of his time combating heresies (beliefs that were not approved by Church officials). Some of these heretics (dissenters from established religious doctrine) were:
• Pelagians, who taught that human beings could attain salvation through their own efforts;
• Manicheans, who taught that two equal gods (one good and one evil) ruled the world;
• Arians, who taught that God had created a son (Jesus) who was neither eternal nor equal with the Father;
• Donatists, who taught that only the pure and holy could be members of the church.
In his battle to against these doctrines (that differed with the Christian doctrine as it had been officially accepted) Augustine composed numerous disputatious sermons, tracts, letters, and books. (The one against the Manicheans comprised thirty-three books or chapters.)
In addition to his polemics, Augustine wrote books and monographs on matters of Christian doctrine, on free will, and on the Trinity. Of his writings, 113 books, 218 letters, and over 500 sermons have survived. His most famous book, The City of God, he composed to explain why Rome fell to the Goths in 410.
Augustine, his contemporaries, Ambrose and Jerome, and Pope Gregory the Great (who came later) are called Doctors of the Church in recognition of their great influence on Christianity.
• The influence of Ambrose and Gregory came from their skill as statesmen; they established the independence of the church and its domination over secular rulers.
• Jerome’s contribution was to translate the Bible into Latin.
• But it was Augustine who had the greatest intellectual influence on Christianity. It was he who fashioned the Christian framework.
ARIANISM
Arius (AD 250 or 256 – 336) was a Christian presbyter (an elder of the congregation in the early Christian church) from Alexandria, Egypt. His teachings about the nature of the Godhead, which emphasized the Father's Divinity over the Son, and his opposition to the Trinitarian Christology, made him a controversial figure in the Church. After Emperor Constantine legalized and formalized Christianity as the religion for the entire Roman Empire, Church officials sought to unify and clarify its theology. To do so, the Emperor convened the First Council of Nicea in 325 A.D.
Although virtually all positive writings on Arius' theology have been suppressed or destroyed, negative writings describe Arius' theology as one in which there was a time before the Son of God, where only God the Father existed. Despite concerted opposition, nontrinitarian Christian churches persisted throughout Europe and North Africa, in various Gothic and Germanic kingdoms, until suppressed by military conquest or voluntary royal conversion between the fifth and seventh centuries.
Although "Arianism" suggests that Arius was the originator of the teaching that bears his name, the debate over the Son’s precise relationship to the Father did not begin with him. This subject had been discussed for decades before he began it; Arius merely intensified the controversy and carried it to a Church-wide audience, where other "Arians" such as Eusebius of Nicomedia would prove much more influential in the long run. However, because the conflict between Arius and his foes brought the issue to the theological forefront, the doctrine he proclaimed—though not originated by him—is generally labeled as "his".
Arius taught that God the Father and the Son did not exist together eternally. He taught that Jesus did not exist before he was created by God. Thus, because Jesus was created by God, he was inferior to God. Arius and his followers appealed to Bible verses such as John 14:28 where Jesus says that the father is "greater than I."
Auxentius, a 4th-century Arian bishop of Milan, gives the clearest picture of Arian beliefs on the nature of the Trinity: God the Father ("unbegotten"), always existing, was separate from the lesser Jesus Christ ("only-begotten"), born before time began and creator of the world. The Father, working through the Son, created the Holy Spirit, who was subservient to the Son as the Son was to the Father. The Father was seen as "the only true God."
[However, I myself can imagine a theory that could have been put forth in this debate: God (male) and the Holy Spirit (female) married. They decided to have a son on earth who would be both human and divine; so God impregnated the Holy Spirit; then the Holy Spirit went into the womb of the virgin Mary, through whom Jesus was delivered as both human and Divine.]
Of all the various disagreements within the Christian Church, the Arian controversy has held the greatest force and power of theological and political conflict, with the possible exception of the Protestant Reformation. The conflict between Arian’s beliefs (nontrinitarianism) and Tertullian’s beliefs (trinitarianism) was the first major doctrinal confrontation in the Church after the legalization of Christianity by the Roman Emperor Constantine I.
Such a deep controversy within the Church could not have materialized in the 3rd and 4th centuries without some significant historical influences providing the basis for the Arian doctrines. Of the roughly three hundred bishops in attendance at the Council of Nicea, the majority of them signed the Nicene Creed, which officially established the doctrine of the trinity for the Church. However, to minimize the extent of Arianism ignores the fact that extremely prominent Emperors such as Constantius II, and Valens were Arians, as well as prominent Gothic, Vandal and Lombard warlords both before and after the fall of the Western Roman Empire, and that none of these groups was out of the mainstream of the Roman Empire in the 4th century. However, after the Nicene Creed officially settled the debate with a great majority holding to the Trinitarian position, the Arian position was officially declared to be heterodox—that is, not in agreement with accepted beliefs.
While Arianism continued to for several decades even within the family of the Emperor, the Imperial nobility, and higher-ranking clergy, in the end it was Trinitarianism which prevailed in the Roman Empire at the end of the 4th century.
Although virtually all positive writings on Arius' theology have been suppressed or destroyed, negative writings describe Arius' theology as one in which there was a time before the Son of God, where only God the Father existed. Despite concerted opposition, nontrinitarian Christian churches persisted throughout Europe and North Africa, in various Gothic and Germanic kingdoms, until suppressed by military conquest or voluntary royal conversion between the fifth and seventh centuries.
Although "Arianism" suggests that Arius was the originator of the teaching that bears his name, the debate over the Son’s precise relationship to the Father did not begin with him. This subject had been discussed for decades before he began it; Arius merely intensified the controversy and carried it to a Church-wide audience, where other "Arians" such as Eusebius of Nicomedia would prove much more influential in the long run. However, because the conflict between Arius and his foes brought the issue to the theological forefront, the doctrine he proclaimed—though not originated by him—is generally labeled as "his".
Arius taught that God the Father and the Son did not exist together eternally. He taught that Jesus did not exist before he was created by God. Thus, because Jesus was created by God, he was inferior to God. Arius and his followers appealed to Bible verses such as John 14:28 where Jesus says that the father is "greater than I."
Auxentius, a 4th-century Arian bishop of Milan, gives the clearest picture of Arian beliefs on the nature of the Trinity: God the Father ("unbegotten"), always existing, was separate from the lesser Jesus Christ ("only-begotten"), born before time began and creator of the world. The Father, working through the Son, created the Holy Spirit, who was subservient to the Son as the Son was to the Father. The Father was seen as "the only true God."
[However, I myself can imagine a theory that could have been put forth in this debate: God (male) and the Holy Spirit (female) married. They decided to have a son on earth who would be both human and divine; so God impregnated the Holy Spirit; then the Holy Spirit went into the womb of the virgin Mary, through whom Jesus was delivered as both human and Divine.]
Of all the various disagreements within the Christian Church, the Arian controversy has held the greatest force and power of theological and political conflict, with the possible exception of the Protestant Reformation. The conflict between Arian’s beliefs (nontrinitarianism) and Tertullian’s beliefs (trinitarianism) was the first major doctrinal confrontation in the Church after the legalization of Christianity by the Roman Emperor Constantine I.
Such a deep controversy within the Church could not have materialized in the 3rd and 4th centuries without some significant historical influences providing the basis for the Arian doctrines. Of the roughly three hundred bishops in attendance at the Council of Nicea, the majority of them signed the Nicene Creed, which officially established the doctrine of the trinity for the Church. However, to minimize the extent of Arianism ignores the fact that extremely prominent Emperors such as Constantius II, and Valens were Arians, as well as prominent Gothic, Vandal and Lombard warlords both before and after the fall of the Western Roman Empire, and that none of these groups was out of the mainstream of the Roman Empire in the 4th century. However, after the Nicene Creed officially settled the debate with a great majority holding to the Trinitarian position, the Arian position was officially declared to be heterodox—that is, not in agreement with accepted beliefs.
While Arianism continued to for several decades even within the family of the Emperor, the Imperial nobility, and higher-ranking clergy, in the end it was Trinitarianism which prevailed in the Roman Empire at the end of the 4th century.
Wednesday, October 13, 2010
TERTULLIAN
Quintus Septimius Florens Tertullianus, anglicised as Tertullian (ca. 160 – ca. 220 A.D.)[1], was a prolific early Christian author from Carthage in the Roman province of Africa. He is the first Christian author to produce an extensive corpus of Latin Christian literature. He also was a notable early Christian apologist and a polemicist against heresy. Tertullian has been called "the father of Latin Christianity". According to church tradition, he was raised in Carthage and was thought to be the son of a Roman centurion, a trained lawyer, and an ordained priest. These assertions rely on the accounts of Eusebius of Caesarea, Church History, II, ii. 4, and Jerome's De viris illustribus (On famous men) chapter 53.
Tertullian, a lawyer and presbyter of the third century Church in Carthage, was the first to use the word "Trinity" when he put forth the theory that the Son and the Spirit participate in the being of God, but all are of one being of substance with the Father. Though conservative, he did originate and advance new theology to the early Church. Besides being famous for being the first extant Latin writer to use the term Trinity (Latin trinitas), he was also famous for giving the first extant formal exposition of a Trinitarian theology. Other Latin formulations that first appear in his work are "three Persons, one Substance" as the Latin "tres Personae, una Substantia" (itself from the Koine Greek "treis Hypostases, Homoousios"). While Paul of Tarsus, the man who could rightfully be considered the true founder of Christianity, did formulate many of its doctrines, that of the Trinity was not among them. He did, however, lay the groundwork for such when he put forth the idea of Jesus being a "divine Son." After all, a Son does need a Father, and what about a vehicle for God's revelations to man? In essence, Paul named the principal players, but it was the later Church people who put the matter together.
When controversy over the matter of the Trinity blew up in 318 between two church men from Alexandria - Arius, the deacon, and Alexander, his bishop - Emperor Constantine stepped into the fray. Although Christian dogma was a complete mystery to him, he did realize that a unified church was necessary for a strong kingdom. When negotiation failed to settle the dispute, Constantine called for the first ecumenical council in Church history in order to settle the matter once and for all. Six weeks after the 300 bishops first gathered at Nicea in 325, the doctrine of the Trinity was hammered out. The God of the Christians was now seen as having three essences, or natures, in the form of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.
The matter was far from settled, however, despite high hopes for such on the part of Constantine. Arius and the new bishop of Alexandria, a man named Athanasius, began arguing over the matter even as the Nicene Creed was being signed; "Arianism" became a catch-word from that time onward for anyone who did not hold to the doctrine of the Trinity.
It wasn't until 451, at the Council of Chalcedon that, with the approval of the Pope, the Nicene/Constantinople Creed was set as authoritative. Debate on the matter was no longer tolerated; to speak out against the Trinity was now considered blasphemy, and such earned stiff sentences that ranged from mutilation to death. Christians now turned on Christians, maiming and slaughtering thousands because of a difference of opinion.
Tertullian later converted to Montanism. Montanism was an early Christian movement of the early 2nd century, named after its founder Montanus. It originated at Hierapolis where Papias was bishop and flourished throughout the region of Phrygia, leading to the movement being referred to as Cataphrygian (meaning it was "from Phrygia") or simply as "Phrygians". It spread rapidly to other regions in the Roman Empire at a time before Christianity was generally tolerated or legal. Although orthodox Nicene Christianity prevailed against Montanism within a few generations, labeling it a heresy, the sect persisted in some isolated places into the 8th century. Some people have drawn parallels between Montanism and modern Pentecostalism (which some call Neo-Montanism). Some modern writers have suggested that some of its emphasis on direct, ecstatic personal presence of the Holy Spirit bears resemblance to all forms of Pentecostalism. “It [Montanism] claimed to be a religion of the Holy Spirit and was marked by ecstatic outbursts which it regarded as the only true form of Christianity.” While there may be some similarities between Montanism and modern Pentecostalism, there does not appear to be any historical link between the two, as most Pentecostals claim authenticity based on the New Testament Book of Acts (chapter 2). There is also a similarity to spiritualism. The most widely known Montanist was undoubtedly Tertullian, who was the foremost Latin church writer before he converted to Montanism. Tertullian, a onetime champion of orthodox belief, believed that the new prophecy was genuine and began to fall out of step with the orthodox Christianity. He began to call it "the church of a lot of bishops" (On Modesty). Although the ideas he created were very abstract, he was always moved by practical considerations to make his case clear and irresistible. It was partly this element which gave to his writings a formative influence upon the theology of the post-Nicene period in the West.
Tertullian, a lawyer and presbyter of the third century Church in Carthage, was the first to use the word "Trinity" when he put forth the theory that the Son and the Spirit participate in the being of God, but all are of one being of substance with the Father. Though conservative, he did originate and advance new theology to the early Church. Besides being famous for being the first extant Latin writer to use the term Trinity (Latin trinitas), he was also famous for giving the first extant formal exposition of a Trinitarian theology. Other Latin formulations that first appear in his work are "three Persons, one Substance" as the Latin "tres Personae, una Substantia" (itself from the Koine Greek "treis Hypostases, Homoousios"). While Paul of Tarsus, the man who could rightfully be considered the true founder of Christianity, did formulate many of its doctrines, that of the Trinity was not among them. He did, however, lay the groundwork for such when he put forth the idea of Jesus being a "divine Son." After all, a Son does need a Father, and what about a vehicle for God's revelations to man? In essence, Paul named the principal players, but it was the later Church people who put the matter together.
When controversy over the matter of the Trinity blew up in 318 between two church men from Alexandria - Arius, the deacon, and Alexander, his bishop - Emperor Constantine stepped into the fray. Although Christian dogma was a complete mystery to him, he did realize that a unified church was necessary for a strong kingdom. When negotiation failed to settle the dispute, Constantine called for the first ecumenical council in Church history in order to settle the matter once and for all. Six weeks after the 300 bishops first gathered at Nicea in 325, the doctrine of the Trinity was hammered out. The God of the Christians was now seen as having three essences, or natures, in the form of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.
The matter was far from settled, however, despite high hopes for such on the part of Constantine. Arius and the new bishop of Alexandria, a man named Athanasius, began arguing over the matter even as the Nicene Creed was being signed; "Arianism" became a catch-word from that time onward for anyone who did not hold to the doctrine of the Trinity.
It wasn't until 451, at the Council of Chalcedon that, with the approval of the Pope, the Nicene/Constantinople Creed was set as authoritative. Debate on the matter was no longer tolerated; to speak out against the Trinity was now considered blasphemy, and such earned stiff sentences that ranged from mutilation to death. Christians now turned on Christians, maiming and slaughtering thousands because of a difference of opinion.
Tertullian later converted to Montanism. Montanism was an early Christian movement of the early 2nd century, named after its founder Montanus. It originated at Hierapolis where Papias was bishop and flourished throughout the region of Phrygia, leading to the movement being referred to as Cataphrygian (meaning it was "from Phrygia") or simply as "Phrygians". It spread rapidly to other regions in the Roman Empire at a time before Christianity was generally tolerated or legal. Although orthodox Nicene Christianity prevailed against Montanism within a few generations, labeling it a heresy, the sect persisted in some isolated places into the 8th century. Some people have drawn parallels between Montanism and modern Pentecostalism (which some call Neo-Montanism). Some modern writers have suggested that some of its emphasis on direct, ecstatic personal presence of the Holy Spirit bears resemblance to all forms of Pentecostalism. “It [Montanism] claimed to be a religion of the Holy Spirit and was marked by ecstatic outbursts which it regarded as the only true form of Christianity.” While there may be some similarities between Montanism and modern Pentecostalism, there does not appear to be any historical link between the two, as most Pentecostals claim authenticity based on the New Testament Book of Acts (chapter 2). There is also a similarity to spiritualism. The most widely known Montanist was undoubtedly Tertullian, who was the foremost Latin church writer before he converted to Montanism. Tertullian, a onetime champion of orthodox belief, believed that the new prophecy was genuine and began to fall out of step with the orthodox Christianity. He began to call it "the church of a lot of bishops" (On Modesty). Although the ideas he created were very abstract, he was always moved by practical considerations to make his case clear and irresistible. It was partly this element which gave to his writings a formative influence upon the theology of the post-Nicene period in the West.
Tuesday, October 12, 2010
Origins of Christianity
Christianity originated in the first century. According to Acts 11:19 and 11:26 in the New Testament, Jesus' followers were first called Christians by non-Christians in the city of Antioch, where they had fled and settled after early persecutions in Judea. After Jesus' death, early Christian doctrine was taught by Paul of Tarsus and the apostles.
Jesus, a descendant of Judah, is reported to have declared himself to be the long awaited Messiah (John 8:23-24, John 14:11), but this claim was rejected by the people generally considered to be the Jewish authorities (Matthew 26:63-64). He was executed by the Romans around the year 30. The formal charge cited in his execution was leading a rebellion (Luke 23:1-5): he was called the "King of the Jews" by Pontius Pilate (John 19:19-22, Luke 16:8) on the titulus crucis or statement of the charge hung over the condemned on the cross. The Gospels indicate that the Roman charge was actually an attempt to appease the Jewish authorities, although some scholars argue that it was an ordinary Roman trial of a rebel. After his crucifixion, his apostles and other followers claimed that Jesus rose from the dead, and set out to preach the new message.
The apostles are believed by most Christians to have written some of the New Testament's Gospels and Epistles; however, many of the New Testament's twenty-seven books were written by Paul of Tarsus. Twelve Epistles name him as writer, and some traditions also credit him as the writer of the book of Hebrews.
Undoubtedly, Paul was the principal missionary of the Christian message to the Gentile world. The Gospel of Luke and the Acts of the Apostles are stated as having been written by Luke, whom many believe to have been under Paul's direct influence. Acts cites Paul as a student of Gamaliel (Acts 22:3), a leading figure amongst the Jewish Sanhedrin (Acts 5:34-40) and a noteworthy authority in his own right (Acts 28:16-22) considering that the Jews of Rome sought his opinion on Christianity.
Jesus, a descendant of Judah, is reported to have declared himself to be the long awaited Messiah (John 8:23-24, John 14:11), but this claim was rejected by the people generally considered to be the Jewish authorities (Matthew 26:63-64). He was executed by the Romans around the year 30. The formal charge cited in his execution was leading a rebellion (Luke 23:1-5): he was called the "King of the Jews" by Pontius Pilate (John 19:19-22, Luke 16:8) on the titulus crucis or statement of the charge hung over the condemned on the cross. The Gospels indicate that the Roman charge was actually an attempt to appease the Jewish authorities, although some scholars argue that it was an ordinary Roman trial of a rebel. After his crucifixion, his apostles and other followers claimed that Jesus rose from the dead, and set out to preach the new message.
The apostles are believed by most Christians to have written some of the New Testament's Gospels and Epistles; however, many of the New Testament's twenty-seven books were written by Paul of Tarsus. Twelve Epistles name him as writer, and some traditions also credit him as the writer of the book of Hebrews.
Undoubtedly, Paul was the principal missionary of the Christian message to the Gentile world. The Gospel of Luke and the Acts of the Apostles are stated as having been written by Luke, whom many believe to have been under Paul's direct influence. Acts cites Paul as a student of Gamaliel (Acts 22:3), a leading figure amongst the Jewish Sanhedrin (Acts 5:34-40) and a noteworthy authority in his own right (Acts 28:16-22) considering that the Jews of Rome sought his opinion on Christianity.
Thursday, October 7, 2010
PHILO OF ALEXANDRIA
Philo (born 10 – 15 BC, Alexandria — died AD 45 – 50, Alexandria) was a Greek-speaking Jewish philosopher. He was a leader of the Jewish community of Alexandria. He led a delegation to the emperor, Caligula (c. AD 40), to ask that Jews not be forced to worship him. His writings provide the clearest view of this development of Judaism in the Diaspora. His philosophy was influenced by Plato, Aristotle, the Neo-Pythagoreans, the Cynics, and Stoicism. In his view of God, Philo was original in insisting on an individual Providence with the ability to suspend the laws of nature, in contrast to the prevailing Greek view of a universal Providence which is itself subject to the laws of nature. As the first to attempt to synthesize revealed faith and philosophic reason, he occupies a unique position in the history of philosophy. He is regarded as the most important representative of Hellenistic Judaism and a forerunner of Christian theology.
Philo’s account of the proceedings with the emperor survives in the treatise entitled Legatio ad Gaium.This remarkable document almost certainly tells less than the whole story about why friction arose between Jews and Greeks in Alexandria. But it provides an interesting portrait of the emperor, Caligula, and his attitude toward the problem of Jews and emperor worship. Whether through boredom at the length of the delegation's pleas or through genuine conviction, he observed of the Jews' refusal to worship him as a god, "I think that these people are not so much criminals as lunatics in not believing that I have been given a divine nature." The delegation, which had been understandably alarmed when Caligula brought up the question of emperor worship in his opening remarks, was heartily relieved when his concluding statement suggested merely pity and condescension rather than ill will.
Philo's major writings, however, consist largely of moral treatises and philosophical-theological essays on topics of scriptural interest. As a religious believer, he was convinced that the truth of things was to be found ultimately in the teachings of Moses; as a philosopher, he felt a need to express this truth in terms that were intelligible to a world imbued with the ideas of Greek philosophy. His works consequently suggest frequent tension between an attempt to interpret the Scriptures in the light of Greek philosophy and an attempt to criticize Greek philosophy in the light of scriptural truth.
The latter is particularly clear in Philo's doctrine of God. For Philo the believer, God is the only reality that is eternal; He is also totally "other" and unknowable. His providence is "individual,” manifesting itself in direct intervention in the universe, with suspension, if need be, of laws of nature for the benefit of meritorious individuals. Of His own goodwill, He endows the human soul with immortality. These views were strongly contrasted by Philo with Greek views, such as those found in Plato's Phaedo and Timaeus, in which both matter and the Ideas are said to be coeternal with God; Providence is said to be manifested in the basic laws of nature, and the human soul is said to be of its very nature immortal. In other words, Philo asserted that the human soul never dies.
Nonnegotiable dogma aside, however, Philo was more than willing to use the thought forms of Greek philosophy on those many matters on which honest disagreement among believers seemed to him allowable. The Greek philosophy in question is a philosophic eclecticism drawn from many sources. His stress on the symbolic importance of certain numbers suggests contemporary neo-Pythagorean influence. The views that causality is fourfold, that virtue lies in a mean, that God is to be seen as the prime mover of the universe, show the clear influence of Aristotle.
The spirit of Plato emerges clearly in Philo's general acceptance of notions such as the theory of Ideas, and the belief that the body is a tomb or prison, that life for man should be a process of purification from the material, that cosmic matter preceded the formation of the cosmos, and that the existence of God can be inferred from the structure and operations of the universe. The influence of stoicism emerges in his doctrines of man's "unqualified" free will, of the need to live in accord with nature, of the need to live free from passion, and of the "indifference" of what is beyond one's power.
Philo was one of the main philosophers of the transition period from Platonism to Neoplatonism. Philo is a representative of middle-Platonic philosophy, which combines Platonic doctrine with ideas of the Stoics and the Neo-Pythagoreans. In his writings, he endeavors to reconcile the world-view of Platonic philosophy with the principles of the Bible, and thereby pioneered in the attempt to forge a synthesis between Greek philosophy and Judaism. In his interpretation of Scripture, Philo seems to have adhered to its "spiritual" rather than to its literal truth. Thus the literal idea of a 6-day creation is rejected, and the story of Adam's rib is written off as mythical.
Philo's thought is of a deep religious and mystic character. According to Philo, God is a completely transcendent entity. Although God is beyond human apprehension, man must constantly strive to know Him. The logos, the Word of God, is the wisdom of God, different from God, yet not separate from Him. The logos is the force through which the world was created and it mediates between God and man. Following Plato, Philo distinguishes between the transient, material world and the eternal, spiritual world. Man, a creature composed of body and soul, partakes of both worlds and thus is given the possibility of choosing between them. The Church Fathers were greatly influenced by Philo's thought, including his allegorical mode of interpretation of the Bible and his doctrine of the logos, and they preserved his writings. The primary example in the Christian Bible (NIV), verses 1–18:
1. In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2. He was with God in the beginning.
3. Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made. 4. In him was life, and that life was the light of men. 5. The light shines in the darkness, but the darkness has not understood it.
6. There came a man who was sent from God; his name was John. 7. He came as a witness to testify concerning that light, so that through him all men might believe. 8. He himself was not the light; he came only as a witness to the light. 9. The true light that gives light to every man was coming into the world.
10. He was in the world, and though the world was made through him, the world did not recognize him. 11. He came to that which was his own, but his own did not receive him. 12. Yet to all who received him, to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God— 13. children born not of natural descent, nor of human decision or a husband's will, but born of God.
14. The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the One and Only, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth.
15. John testifies concerning him. He cries out, saying, "This was he of whom I said, 'He who comes after me has surpassed me because he was before me.' " 16. From the fullness of his grace we have all received one blessing after another. 17. For the law was given through Moses; grace and truth came through Jesus Christ. 18. No one has ever seen God, but God the One and Only, who is at the Father's side, has made him known.
Although the Church Fathers were anti-Jewish in attitude, they were responsible for the preservation of the writings of the Alexandrian Jewish philosopher, Philo, who nearly fell into oblivion among the Jews. Philo's Logos (God's word) represents God's emanation, His active reason. However, with the Church Fathers this concept developed into the hypostasis (the substance, essence, or underlying reality) represented in the Godhead's third person as Holy Spirit and in the incarnation of God becoming man in JESUS, the pre-existent Christ. Such modes of thought illustrate the influence of Hellenistic Judaism (Philo) in the development of Christianity. At the same time, they stand in direct opposition to normative Judaism, to which the speculations of the Church Fathers and the Church councils remained completely alien.
Philo’s account of the proceedings with the emperor survives in the treatise entitled Legatio ad Gaium.This remarkable document almost certainly tells less than the whole story about why friction arose between Jews and Greeks in Alexandria. But it provides an interesting portrait of the emperor, Caligula, and his attitude toward the problem of Jews and emperor worship. Whether through boredom at the length of the delegation's pleas or through genuine conviction, he observed of the Jews' refusal to worship him as a god, "I think that these people are not so much criminals as lunatics in not believing that I have been given a divine nature." The delegation, which had been understandably alarmed when Caligula brought up the question of emperor worship in his opening remarks, was heartily relieved when his concluding statement suggested merely pity and condescension rather than ill will.
Philo's major writings, however, consist largely of moral treatises and philosophical-theological essays on topics of scriptural interest. As a religious believer, he was convinced that the truth of things was to be found ultimately in the teachings of Moses; as a philosopher, he felt a need to express this truth in terms that were intelligible to a world imbued with the ideas of Greek philosophy. His works consequently suggest frequent tension between an attempt to interpret the Scriptures in the light of Greek philosophy and an attempt to criticize Greek philosophy in the light of scriptural truth.
The latter is particularly clear in Philo's doctrine of God. For Philo the believer, God is the only reality that is eternal; He is also totally "other" and unknowable. His providence is "individual,” manifesting itself in direct intervention in the universe, with suspension, if need be, of laws of nature for the benefit of meritorious individuals. Of His own goodwill, He endows the human soul with immortality. These views were strongly contrasted by Philo with Greek views, such as those found in Plato's Phaedo and Timaeus, in which both matter and the Ideas are said to be coeternal with God; Providence is said to be manifested in the basic laws of nature, and the human soul is said to be of its very nature immortal. In other words, Philo asserted that the human soul never dies.
Nonnegotiable dogma aside, however, Philo was more than willing to use the thought forms of Greek philosophy on those many matters on which honest disagreement among believers seemed to him allowable. The Greek philosophy in question is a philosophic eclecticism drawn from many sources. His stress on the symbolic importance of certain numbers suggests contemporary neo-Pythagorean influence. The views that causality is fourfold, that virtue lies in a mean, that God is to be seen as the prime mover of the universe, show the clear influence of Aristotle.
The spirit of Plato emerges clearly in Philo's general acceptance of notions such as the theory of Ideas, and the belief that the body is a tomb or prison, that life for man should be a process of purification from the material, that cosmic matter preceded the formation of the cosmos, and that the existence of God can be inferred from the structure and operations of the universe. The influence of stoicism emerges in his doctrines of man's "unqualified" free will, of the need to live in accord with nature, of the need to live free from passion, and of the "indifference" of what is beyond one's power.
Philo was one of the main philosophers of the transition period from Platonism to Neoplatonism. Philo is a representative of middle-Platonic philosophy, which combines Platonic doctrine with ideas of the Stoics and the Neo-Pythagoreans. In his writings, he endeavors to reconcile the world-view of Platonic philosophy with the principles of the Bible, and thereby pioneered in the attempt to forge a synthesis between Greek philosophy and Judaism. In his interpretation of Scripture, Philo seems to have adhered to its "spiritual" rather than to its literal truth. Thus the literal idea of a 6-day creation is rejected, and the story of Adam's rib is written off as mythical.
Philo's thought is of a deep religious and mystic character. According to Philo, God is a completely transcendent entity. Although God is beyond human apprehension, man must constantly strive to know Him. The logos, the Word of God, is the wisdom of God, different from God, yet not separate from Him. The logos is the force through which the world was created and it mediates between God and man. Following Plato, Philo distinguishes between the transient, material world and the eternal, spiritual world. Man, a creature composed of body and soul, partakes of both worlds and thus is given the possibility of choosing between them. The Church Fathers were greatly influenced by Philo's thought, including his allegorical mode of interpretation of the Bible and his doctrine of the logos, and they preserved his writings. The primary example in the Christian Bible (NIV), verses 1–18:
1. In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2. He was with God in the beginning.
3. Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made. 4. In him was life, and that life was the light of men. 5. The light shines in the darkness, but the darkness has not understood it.
6. There came a man who was sent from God; his name was John. 7. He came as a witness to testify concerning that light, so that through him all men might believe. 8. He himself was not the light; he came only as a witness to the light. 9. The true light that gives light to every man was coming into the world.
10. He was in the world, and though the world was made through him, the world did not recognize him. 11. He came to that which was his own, but his own did not receive him. 12. Yet to all who received him, to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God— 13. children born not of natural descent, nor of human decision or a husband's will, but born of God.
14. The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the One and Only, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth.
15. John testifies concerning him. He cries out, saying, "This was he of whom I said, 'He who comes after me has surpassed me because he was before me.' " 16. From the fullness of his grace we have all received one blessing after another. 17. For the law was given through Moses; grace and truth came through Jesus Christ. 18. No one has ever seen God, but God the One and Only, who is at the Father's side, has made him known.
Although the Church Fathers were anti-Jewish in attitude, they were responsible for the preservation of the writings of the Alexandrian Jewish philosopher, Philo, who nearly fell into oblivion among the Jews. Philo's Logos (God's word) represents God's emanation, His active reason. However, with the Church Fathers this concept developed into the hypostasis (the substance, essence, or underlying reality) represented in the Godhead's third person as Holy Spirit and in the incarnation of God becoming man in JESUS, the pre-existent Christ. Such modes of thought illustrate the influence of Hellenistic Judaism (Philo) in the development of Christianity. At the same time, they stand in direct opposition to normative Judaism, to which the speculations of the Church Fathers and the Church councils remained completely alien.
The key influences on Philo’s philosophy were Plato, Aristotle, the Neo-Pythagoreans, the Cynics, and the Stoics. Philo’s basic philosophic outlook is Platonic, so much so that Jerome and other Church Fathers quote the apparently widespread saying: “Either Plato philonizes or Philo platonizes.”
Wednesday, October 6, 2010
ECLECTICISM
As you may have noticed by now, the Ancient Greeks had many great ideas—many of which, although contradictory, were pertinent in some respects. “Eclecticism,” which, in Greek, means “to choose,” is the selection of elements from different systems of thought, without regard to possible contradictions between the systems. Eclecticism differs from syncretism, which tries to combine various systems while resolving conflicts. Many Ancient Roman philosophers, especially Cicero, and the Neoplatonists were known for eclecticism.
Eclecticism is a conceptual approach that does not hold rigidly to a single philosophical school or set of assumptions, but instead draws upon multiple theories, styles, or ideas to gain complementary insights into a subject, or applies different theories in particular cases.
The name, eclecticism, was first generally used in the first century BCE. Stoicism and Epicureanism had made the search for pure truth subordinate to the attainment of practical virtue and happiness. Skepticism had denied that pure truth was possible to discover. Eclecticism sought to reach by selection the highest possible degree of probability—understanding that it is hopeless to seek absolute truth.
In Greek philosophy, the best known Eclectics were the Stoic’s Panaetius, Posidonius. The New Academic (Neoplatonists), Carnaedes (155 BCE.) and Philo of Larissa (75 BCE.), were also eclectics. Among the Romans, Cicero, whose cast of mind made him always doubtful and uncertain of his own attitude, was thoroughly eclectic, uniting the Peripatetic, Stoic, and New Academic doctrines, and seeking the probable. The same general line was followed by Varro, and in the next century the Stoic Seneca propounded a philosophical system largely based on eclecticism.
Panaetius (c.185–109 BC), of Rhodes, was a Greek Stoic philosopher. In c.144 he went to Rome. He also traveled to Egypt and Asia. After his return c.138 he divided his time between Rome and Athens. In 129 he succeeded Antipater as head of the Stoic school in Athens, and there he died. He adapted Stoic doctrine to fit Roman ideals, dwelling on the active virtues of magnanimity and benevolence rather than the passive virtues of indifference to misfortune and danger and of avoiding wrongdoing; he emphasized the subordination of private ambition to the good of the state, conformity to the same standard of virtue in public and private life, and the suppression of self-indulgence. He was a powerful influence on Roman thought.
Posīdōnius (c.135–c.50 BC), of Apamea in Syria, historian, scientist, and philosopher, spent most of his life at Rhodes and became head of the Stoic school there. He was a polymath (a person of great or varied learning) who epitomized the learning of the Hellenistic age and transmitted some part of it to the Roman world. For several years he studied philosophy under Panaetius at Athens.
Philo of Larissa (160-c. 80 BC) was the last undisputed head of the Academy of Athens (which was founded by Plato, about 387 BC). Philo studied under a pupil of Carneades, before succeeding Clitomachus as head of the Academy in 110/109 BC. Around 88 BC he left Athens for Rome, effectively ending the Academy. He maintained the sceptical doctrines of Carneades, modified by the admission of those things that deserve some kind of confidence as a basis of action. His claim that this scepticism represented the true legacy of Plato prompted the break from the Academy by Antiochus that gave rise to Middle Platonism. Philo's most distinguished pupil and disciple was Cicero.
In the late period of Greek philosophy there appears an eclectic system consisting of a compromise between the Neo-Pythagoreans and the various Platonic sects. Still another school is that of Philo Iudaeus, who at Alexandria, in the first century CE. interpreted the Old Testament allegorically, and tried to harmonize it with selected doctrines of Greek philosophy. Neo-Platonism, the last product of Greek speculation, was also a fusion of Greek philosophy with eastern religion. Its chief representatives were Plotinus (230 CE.), Porphyrius (275 CE.), Iamblichus (300 CE.), and Proclus (450 CE.). The desire of this school was to attain right relations between God and humans, and was thus religious.
Eclecticism is a conceptual approach that does not hold rigidly to a single philosophical school or set of assumptions, but instead draws upon multiple theories, styles, or ideas to gain complementary insights into a subject, or applies different theories in particular cases.
The name, eclecticism, was first generally used in the first century BCE. Stoicism and Epicureanism had made the search for pure truth subordinate to the attainment of practical virtue and happiness. Skepticism had denied that pure truth was possible to discover. Eclecticism sought to reach by selection the highest possible degree of probability—understanding that it is hopeless to seek absolute truth.
In Greek philosophy, the best known Eclectics were the Stoic’s Panaetius, Posidonius. The New Academic (Neoplatonists), Carnaedes (155 BCE.) and Philo of Larissa (75 BCE.), were also eclectics. Among the Romans, Cicero, whose cast of mind made him always doubtful and uncertain of his own attitude, was thoroughly eclectic, uniting the Peripatetic, Stoic, and New Academic doctrines, and seeking the probable. The same general line was followed by Varro, and in the next century the Stoic Seneca propounded a philosophical system largely based on eclecticism.
Panaetius (c.185–109 BC), of Rhodes, was a Greek Stoic philosopher. In c.144 he went to Rome. He also traveled to Egypt and Asia. After his return c.138 he divided his time between Rome and Athens. In 129 he succeeded Antipater as head of the Stoic school in Athens, and there he died. He adapted Stoic doctrine to fit Roman ideals, dwelling on the active virtues of magnanimity and benevolence rather than the passive virtues of indifference to misfortune and danger and of avoiding wrongdoing; he emphasized the subordination of private ambition to the good of the state, conformity to the same standard of virtue in public and private life, and the suppression of self-indulgence. He was a powerful influence on Roman thought.
Posīdōnius (c.135–c.50 BC), of Apamea in Syria, historian, scientist, and philosopher, spent most of his life at Rhodes and became head of the Stoic school there. He was a polymath (a person of great or varied learning) who epitomized the learning of the Hellenistic age and transmitted some part of it to the Roman world. For several years he studied philosophy under Panaetius at Athens.
Philo of Larissa (160-c. 80 BC) was the last undisputed head of the Academy of Athens (which was founded by Plato, about 387 BC). Philo studied under a pupil of Carneades, before succeeding Clitomachus as head of the Academy in 110/109 BC. Around 88 BC he left Athens for Rome, effectively ending the Academy. He maintained the sceptical doctrines of Carneades, modified by the admission of those things that deserve some kind of confidence as a basis of action. His claim that this scepticism represented the true legacy of Plato prompted the break from the Academy by Antiochus that gave rise to Middle Platonism. Philo's most distinguished pupil and disciple was Cicero.
In the late period of Greek philosophy there appears an eclectic system consisting of a compromise between the Neo-Pythagoreans and the various Platonic sects. Still another school is that of Philo Iudaeus, who at Alexandria, in the first century CE. interpreted the Old Testament allegorically, and tried to harmonize it with selected doctrines of Greek philosophy. Neo-Platonism, the last product of Greek speculation, was also a fusion of Greek philosophy with eastern religion. Its chief representatives were Plotinus (230 CE.), Porphyrius (275 CE.), Iamblichus (300 CE.), and Proclus (450 CE.). The desire of this school was to attain right relations between God and humans, and was thus religious.
Friday, October 1, 2010
CARNEADES THE SKEPTIC
Carneades (ca. 213-ca. 128 B.C.) was a Greek philosopher of the third school of academic skepticism. His combination of skepticism and empiricism can now be seen to have remarkable affinities with a good deal of post-Renaissance Western philosophy. He was the first of the philosophers to pronounce the failure of metaphysicians who endeavored to discover rational meanings in religious beliefs. By the time of 159 BC he had started to refute all previous dogmatic doctrines, especially Stoicism, and even the Epicureans whom previous skeptics had spared. As head of the Academy, he was one of three philosophers sent to Rome in 155 BC where his lectures on the uncertainty of justice caused consternation among the leading politicians. He left no writings and many of his opinions are known only via his successor Clitomachus. He seems to have doubted the ability, not just of the senses but of reason too, in acquiring truth. His skepticism was, however, moderated by the belief that we can, nevertheless, ascertain probabilities of truth, to enable us to live and act correctly.
The Stoics used cognitive impressions as the basis by which truth could be perceived. Carneades argued that a cognitive impression could be in error because there were instances where entirely different objects or circumstances, such as identical twins or a mirror image, could produce identical cognitive impressions. In such cases, the only way to avoid error would be to suspend judgment. The Stoic counter-argument was that, without cognitive impressions, human beings would have no basis for making inquiries or acting. Carneades replied that such a basis could be found in “probable impressions.” Certain sense impressions would appear to be more convincing than others. If a sense impression is sufficiently convincing, and if it correlates with other relevant impressions, it can be used as a basis for action. There may be occasions when the sense impression is not accurate. When an important decision is to be made, particularly one relating to happiness, further inquiries can be made to verify the validity of the sense impression. In every instance, however, we are not dealing with absolute certainty; at best, however, we may experience 100% probability given a definite number of trials of experience; and, the greater the number of trials with the same outcomes, the stronger the grounds for belief; any and every counterexample would nonetheless weaken the grounds for belief.
To prove his point about the inability to determine absolute, unconditional truth, he demonstrated with great effect the logic of skepticism by delivering two contradictory orations on justice. One of these praised some justice, as a virtue grounded in nature; the other praised some injustice, on grounds of benevolent expediency. Although I don’t have any example from Carneades, I can think of many on my own. For example, it is unjust to take an old man’s cane; imagine, however, that a boy had fallen off a cliff and was holding onto a branch that was not only slightly out of your reach but also about to break from his weight; suppose further that you saw a cane that belonged to an old man, and despite not asking for permission to use it (which is unjust), you took the cane and used it to save the boys life. I don’t imagine that any reasonable person would disagree that in such a situation, such an injustice was good—especially if the old man in this story was not around to be asked for his permission to use his cane.
The Stoics used cognitive impressions as the basis by which truth could be perceived. Carneades argued that a cognitive impression could be in error because there were instances where entirely different objects or circumstances, such as identical twins or a mirror image, could produce identical cognitive impressions. In such cases, the only way to avoid error would be to suspend judgment. The Stoic counter-argument was that, without cognitive impressions, human beings would have no basis for making inquiries or acting. Carneades replied that such a basis could be found in “probable impressions.” Certain sense impressions would appear to be more convincing than others. If a sense impression is sufficiently convincing, and if it correlates with other relevant impressions, it can be used as a basis for action. There may be occasions when the sense impression is not accurate. When an important decision is to be made, particularly one relating to happiness, further inquiries can be made to verify the validity of the sense impression. In every instance, however, we are not dealing with absolute certainty; at best, however, we may experience 100% probability given a definite number of trials of experience; and, the greater the number of trials with the same outcomes, the stronger the grounds for belief; any and every counterexample would nonetheless weaken the grounds for belief.
To prove his point about the inability to determine absolute, unconditional truth, he demonstrated with great effect the logic of skepticism by delivering two contradictory orations on justice. One of these praised some justice, as a virtue grounded in nature; the other praised some injustice, on grounds of benevolent expediency. Although I don’t have any example from Carneades, I can think of many on my own. For example, it is unjust to take an old man’s cane; imagine, however, that a boy had fallen off a cliff and was holding onto a branch that was not only slightly out of your reach but also about to break from his weight; suppose further that you saw a cane that belonged to an old man, and despite not asking for permission to use it (which is unjust), you took the cane and used it to save the boys life. I don’t imagine that any reasonable person would disagree that in such a situation, such an injustice was good—especially if the old man in this story was not around to be asked for his permission to use his cane.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
