Announcement

Collapse

Theology 201 Guidelines

This is the forum to discuss the spectrum of views within Christianity on God's foreknowledge and election such as Calvinism, Arminianism, Molinism, Open Theism, Process Theism, Restrictivism, and Inclusivism, Christian Universalism and what these all are about anyway. Who is saved and when is/was their salvation certain? How does God exercise His sovereignty and how powerful is He? Is God timeless and immutable? Does a triune God help better understand God's love for mankind?

While this area is for the discussion of these doctrines within historic Christianity, all theists interested in discussing these areas within the presuppositions of and respect for the Christian framework are welcome to participate here. This is not the area for debate between nontheists and theists, additionally, there may be some topics that within the Moderator's discretion fall so outside the bounds of mainstream evangelical doctrine that may be more appropriately placed within Comparative Religions 101 Nontheists seeking only theistic participation only in a manner that does not seek to undermine the faith of others are also welcome - but we ask that Moderator approval be obtained beforehand.

Atheists are welcome to discuss and debate these issues in the Apologetics 301 or General Theistics 101 forum without such restrictions. Theists who wish to discuss these issues outside the parameters of orthodox Christian doctrine are invited to Unorthodox Theology 201.

Remember, our forum rules apply here as well. If you haven't read them now would be a good time.

Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

Does Theology Need Philosophy?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by Chrawnus View Post
    Using these as passages against theologically/biblically informed philosophy hinges on the supposition that what Paul meant by "philosophy", "knowledge" "earthly wisdom" and so on is the same as the modern notion of philosophy, something which I am not at all convinced about. I don't see anything in these passages that would make engaging in biblically and theologically informed philosophical reasoning problematic.
    Originally posted by mossrose View Post
    What is the definition of biblical and theologically informed philosophical reasoning?
    If I may answer for myself, it would be to philosophise after the manner of great Christian deterministic thinkers such as Augustine, Calvin, Beza, Zwingli, Perkins, Gomarus, Edwards, Mohler, et cetera.
    For Neo-Remonstration (Arminian/Remonstrant ruminations): <https://theremonstrant.blogspot.com>

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by Chrawnus View Post
      drcraigvideos, a (I believe) WLC fan-channel uploaded a short clip where he talks about precisely this question:

      I don't see a lot of exegesis in there, but I don't think he meant for it to go indepth either.
      "I am not angered that the Moral Majority boys campaign against abortion. I am angry when the same men who say, "Save OUR children" bellow "Build more and bigger bombers." That's right! Blast the children in other nations into eternity, or limbless misery as they lay crippled from "OUR" bombers! This does not jell." - Leonard Ravenhill

      Comment


      • #18
        The early church struggled with this. On one hand, Tertullian very famously said, "What has Athens to do with Jerusalem?" (To be fair, the context of that was opposing the use of Greek philosophy and not necessarily philosophy per se.) On the other, Justin Martyr kept wearing his philosopher's hat after he became a Christian, saying that Christianity was the true philosophy.

        Of course, opposing philosophy in itself is an act of philosophy
        "I am not angered that the Moral Majority boys campaign against abortion. I am angry when the same men who say, "Save OUR children" bellow "Build more and bigger bombers." That's right! Blast the children in other nations into eternity, or limbless misery as they lay crippled from "OUR" bombers! This does not jell." - Leonard Ravenhill

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by tabibito View Post
          I'm pretty sure the Bible warns against vain philosophy ... could be wrong.
          Colossians chapter 2 teaches us to beware of the philosophy that is contrary to the Bible. We should be opposed to that kind of philosophy that is in accordance with man-made tradition.

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by Hornet View Post
            Colossians chapter 2 teaches us to beware of the philosophy that is contrary to the Bible. We should be opposed to that kind of philosophy that is in accordance with man-made tradition.
            Yes - philosophy per se is not spoken against, just particular philosophical bents.
            1Cor 15:34 Come to your senses as you ought and stop sinning; for I say to your shame, there are some who know not God.
            .
            ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛
            Scripture before Tradition:
            but that won't prevent others from
            taking it upon themselves to deprive you
            of the right to call yourself Christian.

            ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛

            Comment

            widgetinstance 221 (Related Threads) skipped due to lack of content & hide_module_if_empty option.
            Working...
            X