[quote]
Kamui is a smart guy, but I really think you should take what the Catholic Church believes from a primary source…say the Catechism. But, please continue to get your information from a secondary source.[/quote]
Tiribulus agree with me on this :
but not on this :
[quote]
But on the other hand, i don’t think that the Catholic paradigm deny this.[/quote]
For what i understood, the Catholic doesn’t use (greek) philosophy to establish its ontology nor its epistemology.
It already has both.
Greek philosophy didn’t gave her its “content”, it gave her a method, a formalism, and, last but not least, a pedagogy (scholastic)
So, for the Church, pagan philosophy is, at best, a propedeutic.
Now, Tiribulis probably thinks that such a propedeutic is both useless ('cause Revelation is complete) and dangerous (since even the most formal of formalism is still “content”).
[quote]kamui wrote:<<< Greek philosophy didn’t gave her its “content”, it gave her a method, >>>[/quote]In my view method determines content. Not in the sense of providing it, but in the sense of the interpretation of reality from which the content is drawn. What method of interpretation one employs should, if consistently executed, lead to content matching the method. Our agreed upon unavoidable circularity. Aquinas was not consistent. Aristotle’s method cannot lead to Christian content, but Thomas sort of clumsily just plugged them together.
Van Til rejected Aristotle’s method out of hand and proceeded from a self consciously and deliberately biblical one wherein the triune God is indeed THE ground of ALL being and knowledge. You should read Van Til Kamui. You would enjoy him even while disagreeing. Aside from his own convictions he was a walking database of philosophical and theological history.[quote]kamui wrote:<<< and, last but not least, a pedagogy (scholastic) >>>[/quote]The Catholics have some extremely impressive educational resources to be sure, but I’m not following how that emerges from Greek thinking. Are you referring to the aforementioned “Socratic method?”[quote]kamui wrote:<<< Now, Tiribulis probably thinks that such a propedeutic is both useless.('cause Revelation is complete) >>>[/quote]On that level yes.[quote]kamui wrote:<<< and dangerous (since even the most formal of formalism is still “content”). >>>[/quote]Absolutely. =] Still “fish”. The ecosystem is the mind of God. http://presupp101.files.wordpress.com/2011/08/van-til-a-survey-of-christian-epistemology.pdf
No, i’m referring to scholasticism here.
It is what saved our civilization at the end of the 8th century.
Don’t forget that, during this period, the knowledge of the Greek language had nearly disappeared in the West, except in the schools of Irish monasteries. On the continent, most christians would have been unable to read the original text of the Gospel. They had to resort to latin translations.
The institution of scholasticism was the conscious decision by the Church to revive this
logical, philological and rhetorical knowledge, as well as the old “Artes Liberales” of late antiquity.
At this point, Aristotle had become an unavoidable reference.
And when muslim thinkers started to challenge the theologians of christianity, the knowledge of Aristotle works gave both camps a common ground to argue. And a dialectical method to do it.
I can’t help myself but i think that if the Church had not been that appreciative of Aristotle the only Sola Scriptura we would argue about today would be a Quranic one.
No, i’m referring to scholasticism here.
It is what saved our civilization at the end of the 8th century.
Don’t forget that, during this period, the knowledge of the Greek language had nearly disappeared in the West, except in the schools of Irish monasteries. On the continent, most christians would have been unable to read the original text of the Gospel. They had to resort to latin translations.
The institution of scholasticism was the conscious decision by the Church to revive this
logical, philological and rhetorical knowledge, as well as the old “Artes Liberales” of late antiquity.
At this point, Aristotle had become an unavoidable reference.
And when muslim thinkers started to challenge the theologians of christianity, the knowledge of Aristotle works gave both camps a common ground to argue. And a dialectical method to do it.
I can’t help myself but i think that if the Church had not been that appreciative of Aristotle the only Sola Scriptura we would argue about today would be a Quranic one.
[/quote]
My argument, but I believe Providence gave us Aristotle to destroy the Moslems (not like in the late Crusade sense).
So you guys are saying that had it not been for Rome’s appreciation of Aristotle during those early battles with Islam that Koine Greek would have slipped into the mists of history and without him western Christian civilization would have been absorbed into Islamic culture? Do I have that right?
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
So you guys are saying that had it not been for Rome’s appreciation of Aristotle during those early battles with Islam that Koine Greek would have slipped into the mists of history and without him western Christian civilization would have been absorbed into Islamic culture? Do I have that right?[/quote]
No, Koine greek would probably not have slipped into the mists of history.
It would surely have survived as a spoken language in the byzantine lands.
But it could very well have dissapeared as a written language in the west.
It was almost the case in 787.
When Carolus Magnus decided to establish scholae in every abbeys of the Empire, there was not enough scholars to teach in them. He had to “import” them from Ireland.
What would have happened if the Church hadn’t saved the heritage of the pagans ?
No one knows.
But uchrony is always fun.
Maybe it’s because of our differing points of reference, but I am not following this line of reasoning.
[quote]And when muslim thinkers started to challenge the theologians of christianity, the knowledge of Aristotle works gave both camps a common ground to argue. And a dialectical method to do it. [/quote]Which to me is exactly the wrong method to defend Christianity and a liability. The Greek method of analogy is destructive to the divine truth of Christianity regardless of whose hands it is found in, to which both Islam and Catholicism today stand as testimonials. There is no such common ground between the born again believer and the unregenerate sinner.
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
So you guys are saying that had it not been for Rome’s appreciation of Aristotle during those early battles with Islam that Koine Greek would have slipped into the mists of history and without him western Christian civilization would have been absorbed into Islamic culture? Do I have that right?[/quote]
Aquinas wasn’t in Rome, at least not when he was arguing against the radical Aristoteleans. Another point, most of the Church was vehemently against using Aristotle because they thought it was encouraging the Averroists. Even his own school, University of Paris, was against him (his advocates were mostly the Averroists here though).
[quote]Brother Chris wrote:<<< lol. Such faith in the Divine Truth. ;)[/quote]Are you going out of your way to misunderstand me? I really have to say that I do not mean destructive as in actually and substantively destructive? Really? I really have to say that? You don’t understand that I mean destructive to the purity of it’s apprehension in the subject(read individual) polluted by Greek paganism? You didn’t get that? Kamui. Did YOU get that? I suspect you may be engaging in an intentional campaign of pigheadedness with me Chris.
[quote]Brother Chris wrote:<<< lol. Such faith in the Divine Truth. ;)[/quote]Are you going out of your way to misunderstand me? I really have to say that I do not mean destructive as in actually and substantively destructive? Really? I really have to say that? You don’t understand that I mean destructive to the purity of it’s apprehension in the subject(read individual) polluted by Greek paganism? You didn’t get that? Kamui. Did YOU get that? I suspect you may be engaging in an intentional campaign of pigheadedness with me Chris.
[/quote]
No, it’s just humorous to think that God would let something corrupt his Church’s teachings. Just tickles me when people propose that.
[quote]Leanna wrote:<<< OK, sorry. I’m gonna have to fly – I’ve got the dentist, the tax guy and company coming for dinner today.
So that’s great that you agree that God created the world and everything in it.
Do you think God The Creator still creates the world and everything in it or did he get beat somewhere? Take your time. [/quote]Genesis 2: [quote]1-Thus the heavens and the earth were completed, and all their hosts. 2-By the seventh day God completed His work which He had done, and He rested on the seventh day from all His work which He had done.[/quote]I’ll be back later. Enjoy your day.
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
He would never let that happen Christopher.[/quote]
You keep saying he did. SO, I have to assume you are holding two contradictory ideas in your head.[/quote]We’ll get there. I’m just more patient than you.
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
He would never let that happen Christopher.[/quote]
You keep saying he did. SO, I have to assume you are holding two contradictory ideas in your head.[/quote]We’ll get there. I’m just more patient than you.
[/quote]Oh, I’m sure there is a list of things you’re more than me. [/quote]There is no need for this Brother Chris. As surely as the Lord God Jehovah has raised us from the grave of sin unto new life in His son and sealed us against the day of redemption by His Holy Spirit, I am your friend. Probably the best one you have.
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
There is no need for this Brother Chris. As surely as the Lord God Jehovah has raised us from the grave of sin unto new life in His son and sealed us against the day of redemption by His Holy Spirit, I am your friend. Probably the best one you have.
[/quote]
I have no clue what you’re talking about exactly. Isn’t Jehovah a miss translation by a German Catholic monk?
I don’t know…I’m pretty good friends with Augustine, Aquinas, Bonaventure, and Mary…so, you’ll have to really up your game.
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
There is no need for this Brother Chris. As surely as the Lord God Jehovah has raised us from the grave of sin unto new life in His son and sealed us against the day of redemption by His Holy Spirit, I am your friend. Probably the best one you have.
[/quote]
I have no clue what you’re talking about exactly. Isn’t Jehovah a miss translation by a German Catholic monk?
I don’t know…I’m pretty good friends with Augustine, Aquinas, Bonaventure, and Mary…so, you’ll have to really up your game. ;)[/quote]Makes no difference what the vowels were for my point. That’s very clever Chris, but you ain’t seen the haffa my game yet =D
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
There is no need for this Brother Chris. As surely as the Lord God Jehovah has raised us from the grave of sin unto new life in His son and sealed us against the day of redemption by His Holy Spirit, I am your friend. Probably the best one you have.
[/quote]
I have no clue what you’re talking about exactly. Isn’t Jehovah a miss translation by a German Catholic monk?
I don’t know…I’m pretty good friends with Augustine, Aquinas, Bonaventure, and Mary…so, you’ll have to really up your game. ;)[/quote]Makes no difference what the vowels were for my point. That’s very clever Chris, but you ain’t seen the haffa my game yet =D
[/quote]
I’d point you to the sayings of jesus about John the Baptist, but I’m sure you already had that in mind.
