*
+
Out of Joy Cometh the Word
.
/ Topic >
Re: More Big Picture - 3 /
/ Newsgroup
> alt.bible.prophecy / 10Feb2002 /
/ Forum >
TheologyOnLine - Philosophy & Religion /
.
>>> AD previously wrote: Hardly
a saint!
.
>> tx said: You don't think he
merits the rank of sainthood?
>> I do. He was quite a character;
and quite an influential
>> character too, you know.<snip>
.
> On 8Feb Atheist_Divine clarifies:
My apologies, I assumed
> from your referring to "cybersaints
who quote..saints" that
> you were referring to me, not
Tertullian!
.
textman does some LOL ... I was,
and you're far too modest :)
.
>> So Paul is surely right to
warn the average illiterate
>> believer away from philosophy,
but we should not forget
>> that this same apostle also
wrote this hopeful command:
>> "Brethren, do not be as children
in your thinking! Yes,
>> be like babes in doing evil;
but in your thinking, be
>> mature" (1Cor 14:20).
.
> The difficulty lies in saying
who you would allow to mix
> philosophy with Christianity.
You mentioned Aquinas, and
> the church certainly saw no
harm in allowing an educated
> man (a monk, wasn't he?)
.
The 'Dumb Ox' was a Dominican
friar; and a born writer too.
.
> to do so, but the average believer?
I doubt it.
.
No difficulty at all. The
average bible student is certainly literate enough to read some of the
better philosophy writers (eg. Plato and Aristotle). Frankly, there's no
excuse for any deliberate policy making for a grand ignorance of humankind's
intellectual history. The history of the Faith is everywhere bound up with
it; both being intimately involved with the ongoing process of universal
rationalization.
.
>> <snip> I do NOT! Athens
was right there at the very
>> beginnings of the New Testament,
.
> He went on a visit, made a
short speech and moved on.
> Whats so important about that?
.
O my lordy! You are like
*totally* off base on this one, AD. This is doubtless due to the contamination
of Lukan images and texts which completely change the emotional and psychological
realities of that historic occasion. ... Let us therefore make a nice distinction
between the *primary* sources (ie. eyewitness accounts; namely, the Thessalonian
letters), and the *secondary* sources (Acts of Apostles). So I'm sure you'll
agree with me when I suggest that the author of Lk-Acts was not present
at the events in question, and that no amount of divine inspiration or
intervention is going to make up for *that* deficiency. And when we do
even this much (say, in the name of a more historical-critical understanding
of the scriptures), it is plain to see that there was no grand and glorious
speech that humbled the gods and citizens of mighty Athens. Rather, it
was Paul himself who was assailed by the demons of doubts and fears. Damascus
was never like this!
.
Let me put it another way.
If someone wished to know, for example, how the first words of the earliest
NT document came about, what would you tell him? Would you speak about
the concrete circumstances surrounding the actual composition of the first
draft (or original autograph, as the scribes put it)? It's an altogether
interesting question; and yet one that most believers rarely even consider
(as if it were of no importance whatsoever to the Faith). And even when
they do consider it, they are eager to latch onto whatever meager and feeble
explanation that they happen to stumble over first! Have you seen the way
that these commentaries on 1&2 Thessalonians threat 1Th.2:13-3:5? I
have --> Despicable! ...
.
[Brief timeout for silent fumings
and heated simmerings ... ]
.
Anyway, lets try to picture
the intrepid band of missionaries as they arrive in Athens round about
the year 49CE. Here we have three men who have been travelling for many
long and hard months. Two of them are mature men, Jewish-Hellenistic prophets
recently out of Antioch (Syria): "Paulos and Silvanus" (1T.1:1). The third
is a younger man (perhaps late teens or early twenties), named: "Timothy
(our brother and God's fellow-worker in the gospel of Christ)" (1T.1:1&3:2).
They are not entering the great city as conquering heroes. They are not
so much going somewhere as getting away from the pillars at their backs
(ie. Peter in Antioch, James in Jerusalem, John in Alexandria). They are
not in Athens because they want to be there. They are not engaged in any
triumphant march leading (eventually) to glorious Rome. No, they are simply
taking the only route that is left open to them.
.
Behind them lay some several
months of sporadic preaching and church-building in Asia Minor and up the
coast of the Aegean Sea to Greece; with mixed results. Most of these alien
Greeks who heard them voicing the gospel of salvation through the Lord
Jesus Christ thought their accents barbaric, and their claims ridiculous
(and perhaps even dangerous). They were driven out of town after town with
rods and stones (most of the time). They felt lucky to escape with only
cuts and bruises and bloodshed. Sometimes they even got arrested for causing
what the English call a brouhaha. It was more for their own safety than
for any deliberate intent to maliciously persecute the new Faith (of which
the cops knew, and cared, nothing).
.
In the middle of the night,
the guards would hustle the trio through the back streets and escort them
well out town. When they were far enough away, they would be warned not
to return, and then given a good smack on the head to show that they mean
it. Good riddance to bad rubbish! Good luck and get lost! That's how it
was for the Lord's free-thinking prophets Paulos and Silvanus. Paul himself
seemed to have been traveling about aimlessly for the last ten years, ever
since his conversion being driven out of one place after another. Thus
the opening words of the first NT letter looks back on this tradition of
persecution, and reveals the dark and sober mood of the two hellenized
Jewish prophets who survived it:
.
"Because of
this we for our part unceasingly thank God that when you received from
us the Word of the message of God you accepted not a word of men, but what
it really is, a word of God (which works in you who believe). For you brothers
and sisters became imitators of the assemblies of God in Christ Jesus which
are in Judea. You suffered the same treatment from your own countrymen
as they did from the Jews who killed both the Lord Jesus and the prophets,
and also drove us out. They displease God and are hostile to all people
by hindering us from speaking to the Gentiles that they may be saved. They
always fill up the measure of their sins; but the wrath of God has come
upon them at last!" -- 1T.2:13-16 / PV
.
Always going away, never
going forward. This brave expedition into the heartland of paganism was
supposed to change all that. But look what has become of them now! Here
in the shadow of the Parthenon listening to the debates and teachings of
the students and teachers (and even citizens), Paul realized that his tongue
could never topple this city. What was he doing here? Paul had had enough
of it. He was sick of travelling, sick of running, running from the Jews,
running from the pagan mobs, running from the mighty pillars of the church
(who did not see the liberating potential of the gospel in quite the same
way as these two radical prophets). Paul wanted desperately to go to the
only safe place he knew, Thessalonika, where the prophetic pair had had
their greatest success in converting the Greeks:
.
"Now, brothers and sisters,
when we were made orphans, physically but not spiritually, from you for
a short period, we endeavored (with great desire) all the more to see you
face to face; for we resolved to come to you (I, Paulos, indeed; and that,
several times). But Satan prevented us. For who is our hope and joy and
crown of boasting - is it not you, with others - before our Lord Jesus
in his Parousia? ... Yes, indeed you are our glory and joy" (2:17-20/IEV).
But under the relentless pressure of a vain and self-assured Athens, Paul's
troubles and woes ("in all our affliction and tribulation" 3:7) began to
catch up with him. He even wondered if they were doing any good at all!
.
"And so because
we were no longer able to endure it, we [ie. Paulos and Silvanus] willingly
resolved to remain behind (alone in Athens), and we sent Timothy (our brother
and God's fellow-worker in the gospel of Christ) to strengthen you and
encourage you in respect of your faith, so that no one may be disturbed
by these tribulations. For you yourselves know that we are destined for
this; for indeed when we were with you, we foretold you that we were to
experience tribulation (as even it happened, and as you know). So because
I, for my part, was no longer able to endure it, I sent Timothy to learn
about your faith; fearing that in some way the Tempter had tempted you,
and our labor might have been in vain and fruitless" 1T.3:1-5 / PV.
.
And when Timothy returned
with the good news that Paul's panic attack was unfounded, the prophets
were pleased and rejoiced (see 1T.3:6-10). And *that* is when the three
missionaries hit upon the idea of writing a brief letter (ie. 1Th.2:13-4:2;
letter 1 of 4) to the believers in Thessalonika; in order to encourage
them you see (although it was the prophets themselves who got all the encouragement).
Thus the prophets begin the letter's closing with a reiteration of the
original primary impulse, but now in bold new tones that show the prophets
intention to go forward after all: "Now may our God and Father himself,
and our Lord Jesus, direct our path to you" (3:11). Instead they stayed
in Athens for a few months, keeping a low profile, and making preparations
for the next leg of their journey (which would take them to Corinth, and
the parting of the ways for the two brother-apostles).
.
So there never was any
pretty speech in pagan Athens by the all-conquering hero (Saul of Tarsus)
marching off to Rome! But there was a small and beaten prophet of Jesus
whose own personal fears and doubts led them to the very depths of despair.
Timothy's return must have seemed to them as clear evidence of the Lord's
power and grace. Good news indeed; for it is out of this joyous outburst
that the New Testament was born! No speech, but something better than a
speech: the first Christian epistles, and the beginnings of what would
become the New Testament.
.
>> <snip> That is correct.
It did so because it had to.
>> 4X: The Faith adopted the
Greek language of the masses
>> because it was the best medium
through which to spread
>> the Good News to all the nations.
.
> Yes, they used the language,
but I meant the ideas, the
> philosophy, not the language.
.
It's a package deal. :)
.
>>> Thought they had good ideas
or *gasp* inspired those ideas?
.
>> huh? Wut U mean please?
.
> If it is ok to mix pagan philosophy
with Christian faith,
> then are we to assume that
God agreed with or inspired
> these pagan beliefs?
.
Not necessarily. Reality/Creation
is a complex machine. Human beings are complex creatures. Accordingly,
things like art, religion, literature are also complicated affairs. Not
all men are created equal, and not all religions or philosophies are equally
valid. Some are better than others because they are closer to the truths
relating to the big picture. Look at ancient Egyptian religion for example.
For thousands of years the chief concern powering the religious machinery
throughout the Black Land was the desire (or perhaps 'lust' would be a
more accurate word) for personal immortality. They wanted only to live
a good Egyptian style life (beyond the grave), and to live it forevermore!
Clearly there's no hope for such a spiritually blind religious system as
that. Best to just put it out of its misery; which is exactly what happened
later (since it just couldn't compete with the more developed - and more
ferocious - new religions).
.
> And what would such an assumption
mean?
.
It might mean that the
Logos of God enlightens every man and
woman ... to some degree. Those
who take up the gift, and run
with it, (like Socrates, Plato,
and Aristotle), are surely
loved as much as the saints by
the Father of Lights!
.
>> Growth always involves change
and development. God is
>> in process, just as His creation
is always in process.
.
> Prov 24:21 My son, fear thou
the LORD and the king:
> and meddle not with them that
are given to change.
.
I think he means changing hearts
& minds that never sit still.
.
> James 1:17 Every good gift
and every perfect gift is from
> above, and cometh down from
the Father of lights, with
> whom is no variableness, neither
shadow of turning.
.
Good quote, and quite true
in many ways. Nevertheless, from
the merely human perspective
God appears to be in process;
and I hardly think he'd be offended
by my saying so.
.
>> What I find very curious is
that there is even some evidence
>> to show that Paulos was familiar
with the writings of
>> Philo of Alexandria. I find
this interesting because it
>> suggests that at some point
in his travels Paul may have
>> studied in Egypt for a time
<snip>
.
> Not just Paul, John the Evangelist
seems to show the
> influence of Philo - or the
Stoics - in his use of
> the term 'logos'.
.
I rather suspect that the
Gospel of John grew straight out of the rich earth of the Black Land. There
is lots of evidence in the text linking it to the historical situation
of the church there towards the end of the first century (eg. the 'local'
conflict with the re-established Judaism). In this case, it is not at all
difficult to imagine that the early church in Egypt was more than familiar
with Philo's writings. Thus Paul could also have stayed there (with the
newly arrived church of Egypt) for a year or two as a novice (ie. a brand
new convert) to learn about the Faith; and that it was during the course
of this instruction that he learned his Philo.
.
>> - the almost pharonic one
- textman ;>
.
> anet, heq, aua embah neteru
aaiu --> [Homage to
> you, prince, I am in the presence
of the great gods]
.
hehehe ... cute 
.
> an÷ uta senb (life!
strength! health!) ~AD~
.
Another fine ancient egyptian
blessing ... They sure did
love life, those folks! But not
so much their prophets 
.
- the almost relentless one - textman ;;>
x
+
Re: Out of Joy Cometh the Word
.
/ Topic >
Re: More Big Picture 4 /
/ Newsgroup
> alt.bible.prophecy / 12Feb2002 /
/ Forum >
TheologyOnLine - Philosophy & Religion /
.
<snipsome>
.
>> tx previously
wrote: The average bible student is
>> certainly
literate enough to read some of the better
>> philosophy
writers (eg. Plato and Aristotle).
.
> On 10Feb
Atheist_Divine replied: They can read it,
> but can
they understand it? There are an awful
> lot of
stupid people around...
.
textman
sayeth. Sure; but a constant reading of good books
is still
the best way around *that* little problem. :)
.
>> Frankly,
there's no excuse for any deliberate policy making
>> for
a grand ignorance of humankind's intellectual history.
.
> Christianity
will fall if it idealizes ignorance, as
> so many
of its branches seem to do, for the laymen.
.
I
agree. But old habits die hard, and it's hard for the
'duly appointed
shepherds' (and their preferred theologians)
to admit
that maybe they *don't* already have ALL the answers.
.
>> <snip>
O my lordy! You are like *totally* off base on
>> that
one, AD. This is doubtless due to the contamination
>> of Lukan
images and texts which completely change the
>> emotional
and psychological realities of that historic
>> occasion.
... Let us therefore make a nice distinction
>> between
the *primary* sources (ie. eyewitness accounts;
>> namely,
the Thessalonian letters), and the *secondary*
>> sources
(Acts of Apostles).
.
> I was
primarily thinking of Acts - Thessalonians not
> being
among my favourite books...
.
Most
people tend to agree with your assessment. There is a vast difference in
"literary quality" between these few pages of primitive and obscure letters,
and the entirely modernish two-part historical-novel canonized as 'Gospel
of Luke', and 'Acts of Apostles'. There would have to be a *LOT* of literary
development going on somewhere in order to get from 1&2Thess to Luke-Acts!
Most people don't seem to realize that by supposing Lk-Acts to have been
written early on (ie. first generation eyewitness account) they are in
effect allowing NO possibility of literary and theological development.
But if Lk-Acts just happened to appear out of thin air, well that's just
fine too (they say), since it's inspired and all, you know. So I guess
that the Holy Ghost was in such an all-fired up hurry to get every little
thing down on papyrus before the future-determined cut-off point of 100AD
(so as to satisfy the exacting specifications of fundyfied believers twenty
centuries down the road yet) that He couldn't wait a few generations in
order to get the job done right! ... HA!
.
So
'Acts of Apostles' is certainly a great read, but it's not really of much
value to church historians trying to piece together the very beginnings
of church-history (ie. the actual course of events in the first century).
The biggest problem is that most people simply refuse to accept that it
is a secondary source on the first century, and a primary witness to the
early second century. That little distinction makes all the difference
in the world when we're actually trying to understand the texts and how
they emerged out of the context of the living faith of the urbanized and
romanized and Greek-speaking believers of the early churches.
.
>> <snip>
Always going away, never going forward. This brave
>> expedition
into the heartland of paganism was supposed to
>> change
all that. But look what has become of them now!
>> Here
in the shadow of the Pantheon listening to the
>> debates
and teachings of the students and teachers (and
>> even
citizens)
.
> That
is a rather amusing misspelling
.
Not
a misspelling, but rather the completely wrong word! I'm so embarrassed.
It got by the spell-checker, and the editor was out taking a nap at the
time. Thx for pointing it out. The Parthenon (ie. 'virgin's place') is
the building I meant to indicate: the sacred temple of Athena on the acropolis
at Athens. I ought to know, I have a needlepoint type poster of it on my
wall in the living room. ha :)
.
> I'd have
liked to go to the Parthenon, and listen to
> the philosophers,
if such a thing existed today...
.
Alas
not. Today the Sophists have taken charge, and they
demand
their payments up front first please!
.
>> <snip>
So there never was any pretty speech in pagan Athens
>> by the
all-conquering hero (Saul of Tarsus) marching off to
>> Rome!
But there was a small and beaten prophet of Jesus
>> whose
own personal fears and doubts led them to the very
>> depths
of despair. Timothy's return must have seemed to
>> them
as clear evidence of the Lord's power and grace. Good
>> news
indeed; for it is out of this joyous outburst that the
>> New
Testament was born! No speech, but something better
>> than
a speech: the first Christian epistles, and the
>> beginnings
of what would become the New Testament.
.
> Hmmm....I'm
none too big a Paul fan, but I liked your
> exegesis.
I would have preferred it if John had written
> more
of the NT, but there you go...
.
In
a way, there is more, AD. It all depends on how you look at it. I see the
gospel of John as the "prophetic" gospel (ie. as an example of Christian
prophetic literature); eg. compare the number of times that the word 'prophet'
appears in the various NT books. What I'm trying to get at is that John's
Gospel (along with 1,2,3John) is a part of a larger prophetic tradition
that includes people like Paul and Silvanus (ie. the author of 1Peter),
and also the author of Hebrews, and even the later egyptian prophets (who
wrote James, Jude, and 2Peter). Jacob in particular demonstrates a good
knowledge of John's gospel, and even develops Johannine themes and theology
to his own unique prophetic homilies. ... Check it out.
.
>>> <snip>
Yes, they used the language, but I meant
>>> the
ideas, the philosophy, not the language.
.
>> It's
a package deal.
.
> So you
think that the language we use influences
> the thoughts
we have?
.
Absolutely!
For this reason alone it is very useful to have
*some*
knowledge of the original Greek of the NT documents.
.
>> <snip>
Not necessarily. Reality/Creation is a complex
>> machine.
Human beings are complex creatures. Accordingly,
>> things
like art, religion, literature are also complicated
>> affairs.
Not all men are created equal, and not all
>> religions
or philosophies are equally valid.
.
> Rather
an unusual position to take ... most Christians
> would
argue that the writings of the Bible are the only
> valid
spiritual/religious writings.
.
There
are signs that this is changing too. Many people recognize that there is
some value and truth in most of the world's best religious literature.
I personally find the sheer variety and abundance of Buddhist scriptures
to be endlessly fascinating. 4X: There is even one document in 'The Buddhist
Bible' (by D.Goddard) called 'Awakening of Faith'.
.
<snipsome>
.
>> It might
mean that the Logos of God enlightens every man
>> and
woman ... to some degree. Those who take up the gift,
>> and
run with it, (like Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle), are
>> surely
loved as much as the saints by the Father of Lights!
.
> Didn't
some of the Church Fathers/Catholic theologians argue
> something
like that, for the use of Aristotle? That people
> before
Jesus came were spoken to by God, even if they were
> not Jews?
.
It's
an old idea that goes way back, but the big debate over Aristotle took
place in Europe during the Middle Ages at the earliest universities with
the re-introduction of Greek classics from the Muslim civilization to the
East. There was a big scrap about it since the church had finally made
peace with Plato, and bang out of nowhere they get smacked with Aristotle.
Thomas Aquinas himself was largely responsible for legitimizing 'the pagan
ways of Aristotle'. This is one reason why Martin Luther later burned a
bunch of books by Thomas. I guess he wasn't as impressed by Aristotle as
Aquinas was. :)
.
>> <snip>
Good quote, and quite true in many ways. Neverthe-
>> less,
from the merely human perspective God appears to be
>> in process;
and I hardly think he'd be offended by my
>> saying
so.
.
> A way
to rationalise the differences between the OT and NT?
> Presumably
along the lines that God changed the message as
> the capacity
for understanding it increased? So for a bunch
> of warlike
primitive (relatively) people - a warlike
> religion,
and for a group of people more in tune with
> philosophy
and mysticism, a more thoughtful and less
> bloody
religion?
.
The
people weren't ready for a bloodless religion, AD.
That's
a plain historical fact. The failed religious reform
of the
black pharaoh Akhenaton in the fourteenth century BCE
demonstrated
that. These things need lots of time to ferment.
.
> Would
that not mean that there is continuing revelation
.
Revelation
will continue because the Faith is also in process, and will continue as
such until we all attain to the perfection of Christ: "It was he who gave
some as apostles, some as prophets, some as evangelists, and some to be
pastors and teachers, to equip the saints for the work of ministry, that
is, to build up the body of Christ, until we all attain to the unity of
the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God; a mature person, attaining
to the measure of Christ's full stature. The purpose of this is to no longer
be children, tossed back and forth by waves and carried about by every
wind of teaching by the trickery of people who with craftiness carry out
their deceitful schemes. But practicing the truth in love, we will in all
things grow up into Christ, who is the head" (Eph.4:11-15/NETbible).
.
> - that
the canon is not closed -
.
The
Holy Bible is in desperate need of an editorial overhaul all round. It's
long overdue, in my opinion; but then again I seriously doubt that there
are more than a small handful of people on the entire planet who are competent
enough to do a good job of *that*!
.
> and that
the religion might undergo a further change?
.
Christianity
will continue to change and evolve as it has always done since day one.
The Faith will continue to go through cycles of spiritual decay and corruption
(such as the present evil age of faithlessness) followed by lively periods
of spiritual growth and renewal. Out of the long history of the Faith we
see these patterns repeated over and over again. The places, the people,
the times, and the cultures all make their mark, and affect the course
of the flow of the living waters of faith in the hearts of believers.
.
>> <snip>
Another fine ancient egyptian blessing ... They sure
>> did
love life, those folks! But not so much their prophets L
.
> They
were quite keen on death, too
> May I
ask what flavour of Christianity you partake of? ~AD~
.
Well,
I used to be a Cat (of all things) until it was made clear to me that this
church, like so many others, is simply a front for the Church of the Poisoned
Mind & Twisted Heart. Since then I have joined the ranks of another
assembly, which is not a church or a denomination in the normal sense.
Rather, it is the company of the Christian prophets who have always appeared
outside the narrow channels of the established religious systems. This
assembly of the prophets contains many different sorts of people, including
the likes of the teachers Clement and Origen of Alexandria from the pre-Constantine
days, the early Anabaptists from the Radical Reformation period, the early
Quakers in 17C England, scholars such as Erasmus and William Tyndale, many
and various writers (such as Leo Tolstoy), and even a few philosophers
(such as S.Kierkegaard). And many others besides. These are the shining
lights of the Faith. These are the true and inspired good shepherds of
our religion. The only true successors to the original apostles are these
authentic prophets chosen by grace to serve the whole People of God. Amen!
.
- the cyber-electrified one - textman ;;>
x
Goto Big-P
#5
textman
*