Never doubt Christianity is Philosophy but w. a religious style, exterior....

Below-copied by ap first published at comments, http://bellofliberty.blogspot.com/20...l-warming.html

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Christianity IS Philosophy/Rationalism, Never Doubt
(Apollonian, 2 Mar 16)

"Why not take up Tertullian's position eschew philosophy altogether? The Church Father asked: "What indeed has Athens to do with Jerusalem? What concord is there between the Academy and the Church?"" March 1, 2016 at 8:11 PM

To "eschew philosophy altogether" would be to rejecting Christ (= truth) and Holy Spirit (= Reason, honesty, integrity). And in profound way, Christ and Christian Holy Spirit proceeds fm Athens, certainly rejecting the Pharisaism of Jerusalem.

For note Christianity is philosophy within a religious vehicle, form and exterior, considering most humans need leadership, incapable of fullest exercise of reason, hence Holy Spirit, Christianity APPEALING TO INTELLECT--unlike Islam which simply commands, and probably/perhaps the Torah worship which preceded Christianity.

Note further, Christianity surely pertains FAR MORE to Athens, Hellenism (Greeks), and Aristotle than it does to Jerusalem and Pharisaism, Torah probably written in Babylon for all we know, Moses (writer of Torah) probably never even having hrd of Jerusalem.

For how is one to know, understand, and revere truth (= Christ) without philosophy? And verily, philosophy (necessary part to Holy Spirit) is necessary means of grasping, knowing, and revering that precious truth (= Christ).

"Beleeeeeeeeeeeeeevin'" is poor substitute for knowing and understanding, never doubt. And Christian truth is NOT "absurd" as Tertulian seemed to imagine.

---------------------------above by ap in response to below-copied---------------

Liberty Bell said...
I mean, look: Plato's Forms are (I think) properly situated along the hypothetical "debate" above regarding somersaults. The question between Plato and Aristotle was NOT: "Is there an objective reality?" Both philosophers affirmed that. The question is simply: On our most accurate inventory of existing things, would Forms be on that list or not?

Your assertion that the "Denial Of Aristotelian Objective Reality Is Simply TREASON And Suicide" is, by my lights, tantamount to saying that that only the seconed view about somersaults is permissible because the first is "treasonous" (whatever that's supposed to mean, here) or "suidical." I can scarcely believe that you are serious.

Hopefully, you just got a bit carried away rhetorically. It happens to the best of us. But, as a fellow Christian, I would be remiss if I did not gently caution you that such grandiloquence comes awfully close to being uncharitable.

As proverbial Christian wisdom has it: In essentials, unity; in inessentials, liberty; in all things, charity."

Yes, Jesus is the Truth! That's an essential. But "Thou shalt not endorse Forms"? Even if I might be inclined to agree with you (and notice that I nowhere declare myself a "Platonist") I don't find that "commandment" in Exodus. Surely, it is more plausible to regard these abstruse metaphysical matters as inessential than it is to demand that all Christians be Aristotelians! After all, it is well-known that Aristotle's "god" - the "unmoved mover" embraced by later deists - is hardly the God of the Bible. Why not take up Tertullian's position eschew philosophy altogether? The Church Father asked: "What indeed has Athens to do with Jerusalem? What concord is there between the Academy and the Church?" (De praescriptione haereticorum, chapt. vii.)

In any case, thanks for the comments! They are always welcome :-)
March 1, 2016 at 8:11 PM