Theology/Seminary Notes/Theology weened on Greek Philosophy

OT01

Key Terms:

Socrates - The doctrine and greatest discovery that was taught primarily by Socrates was the beautiful philosophical theory called the immortality of the soul. That was Socrates' so according to Dr. Partee "all you soul-type people are Socratic". Forget the Socratic method (answers through questions), that we all have aspiration for high things, that we especially have aspiration for the beautiful soul and beauty itself and that people should think about the care for the Socratic "soul" It is us that insist that it is the person that survives. We are one entity. We believe in resurection. -Socrates believed death was a friend a freeing of the soul. Jesus called death an enemy. What up with that? Plato - continued Socrates idea of aspiration (that we strive toward God) -wrote many different works but there are a few that are more important to Christianity. -Euthypho (dialogue concerned with what is holiness) Ion- argues that the poet (Homer) is inspired -He also had different accounts of what the soul was in his different works that often contradict. What is really important is the Platonic synthesis: Platonic dualism -forms (ideals) and things Forms (heaven) things (earth) and God is above all of this The world is a world of things and ideas the ideas (ideals) never changing. They don’t change because you can’t change their substance but things are ever changing. Ideas are thing to aspire to. (good and God are in the realm of ideals) The ideas are the cause of the physical world. -This whole scheme helps form the chain of being. This chain of being influence New Testament writers Aristotle -took the idea of ideas and things and put them together -the form was immanent in matter. Form and matter constitute concrete individual realities. -in everything, the form is already in the material Ex. Acorn becoming a tree. From the moment of becoming an acorn, it has a cause of moving in a certain direction. Everything in the universe has its end. -the substance tends to be the form and the attributes are changeable. (This idea of substance develops in the Eucharist (transubstaciation, consubstantiation, symbolic, Calvin's view Epicureans -believed the world was causeless -everything was a matter of chance and fortune -Developed view of Metaphysics: atoms have a property called the swerve. These atoms fly around and this swerve introduces chance. -Life Theme "Eat drink and be merry for tomorrow you die." -Ethics:- sought pleasure; hedonists -Tried to be free from evil. Believed that death was the end. Theology of Epicureans: 1.Believe that gods exist because they dream about them but the gods can’t know about the human condition 2.Since gods are without concern for the world, there can be no possible doctrine of providence. 3.There can be no creation by the gods because then they would be responsible for the evil that crept into the world. Stoics - Stoic View of Fate The concept of providence was influced by the stoic view -they believed that nature, God, fate, and providence were all essentially the same idea. Nature is determining who you are. We get in on that because in each of us there is a logos (a divine spark). This means something that is human and divine. We participate in a secondary and subordinate reality -Stoic Ethics: very rational and ethical 1. Believed in brotherhood of man (because of the logos, we are all related as one family 2. Believed that God was our common father 3. The only appropriate behavior is apathy. You need to rise above the world and your feelings and pay attention to the logos (reason) Plotinus - greatest of the pagan mystics. He said we become one with god. We are united with God and it is proper aspiration to become one with God -He was a Platonist but he took Plato in a mystical direction -had notion of great chain of being. Top is God and then you move down toward nothingness and Satan. If you exalt your animal nature you move towards nothingness. Gnostics grasped this great chain of being and believed that Jesus is the one who comes down and helps us get turned in the right direction. He does this by secret knowledge and not faith.

Ebionites- said that Jesus was only human *Docetists- Jesus only appeared human. He was only divine Arius - He wanted to preserve the humanity of Jesus and monotheism. He thought that since God was immutable and the son changes it must mean that the son is a creature and not THE God. -He believed that the son had to learn obedience (but God does not have to learn obedience) -He believed that Jesus was not co eternal. If he were then God would have a twin brother and not a son -God was not always the father but he became the father when the son was begotten. So he is not the eternal father. -For Arius, to same substance meant two principles -He made Jesus a bridge to God. An intermediatery at the top of the list. He rejected the distinction between incarnate logos and divine logos. -The son is equal in glory but not in substance. He was the highest human being. Be only becomes God by participation. Athansius Arius was opposed at Nicea by Athansius who is the father of orthodoxy Arius was opposed at Nicea by Athansius who is the father of orthodoxy -He insisted that only God can save. Jesus is our savior so he is not a creature 2. the Logos is fully divine. The Logos is now personal. All of the persons of the trinity are co eternal and co equal 3. the HS is not a creature. 4. Jesus is fully god and fully man. Nicea was an attack against Arius. It answered the who question. 1. There was an emphasis on the Eternal son. 2. Said Jesus was one substance 3. Jesus was made man 4. Had filioque clause (and the son) The Spirit proceeds from the father and the son. The next question is how

Apollanarius said Jesus had 3 different forms (mind, body and soul) He said the divine logos took on the human nature but not the human personality. He had a dual nature. He had the mind of God. -The divine nature took the place of the human soul of God. Nestorius tended to go more toward emphasizing Jesus’ humanity -He opposed the phrase theotocus (mother of God). He though this was to speak of Mary as the mother of God. He said that Jesus 2 natures are conjoined but not united. He wants to keep the two natures apart (turning Jesus into two people) -He destroys the one personality -Jesus is an appearance, behind which one finds the man Jesus and the divine logos. He loses the unity of the person. Eutichian Christ was of two natures before incarnation but not in 2 natures. In incarnation, he was one person IN two natures. -emphasized the divinity -one nature became subsumed by the other. The humanity of Christ is o only a memory of Christ -denied the reality of the human nature Divine nature always overcomes the human attributes. Chalcedon: answered the how -it was a decision and definition and not a compromise -set flexible but definite boundaries -talked about hypostatic union Jesus is fully divine, fully human, 2 natures, united in one person w/out confusion against Eutichism w/out transmuting one nature into the other- against Apoll W/out dividing them into 2 separate categories- against Nestorius Thomistic synthesis: 1274 (Angelic doctor) Theological synthesis: Grace perfects nature. Aquainas view: Cooperating grace is a gift of God infused by God into the soul (justification) and becomes habitual grace (sanctification), which is the principle of meritorious works (Christian perfection). (this is Aquainas’ position.) this depends on human ability to do good. -If you are just, you are creating meritorious works. He said that habits are the intrinsic principles of human actions of mind or will. A habit is always potential. Aristotle- the major philosophical influence for Aquanans Operating grace-grace given by God…then we have to cooperate with it Relation of philosophy and theology- you can’t be a theologian until you first learn philosophy Philosophy is the truth which can be discovered and demonstrated by reason. -we are all philosophers -philosophical theological (natural theology) appeals only to reason. One of the facets of this is the ability to prove the existence of God. Cosmological argument 1. Motion to first mover 2. Effect to cause. First cause is uncaused 3. We are all contingent. We are not necessary. Therefore, there must be one who is necessary 4. Degrees of perfection: must be a best 5. Order of universe: must be an ordered Philosophical reflection on God’s nature 1. God is pure actuality. God sees everything as one event 2. God is perfectly simple (can’t add to God). God is immutable 3. God is perfect and perfectly good How we know: 3 kinds of knowledge 1. Univocal- what we say applies in the same way to dif realities (whatever we mean by wise applies equally to 2 people, events, etc 2. Equivocal- similar but mostly deferent (she’s an angel but u don’t mean that) 3. Analogical- neither univocal or equivocal. There is something in the world that we know that we apply to ‘God (like the term father) His cosmology 1. Adopts chain of being. There is a hierchy. (angels higher than bishops, bishops higher than other people etc 2. In chain of being it is obvious that there are angels 3. Humans are composed of matter and form. We differ only in appearance but we are all human (angels, on the other hand, are different species Ethics: humans seek happiness. Perfect happiness is perfect contemplation of God (Beatific vision) Law Eternal law- way God thinks Natural law- reflection of God’s eternal reason. (children being produced form nature, etc) Divine law- God’s revelation which reaches those people who have been reached by revelation Human law- rules we make for ourselves. We must act in terms of our conscience Believes in condign merit which requires co operating grace -when God’s sovereign grace is bestowed, an adequate human response is enabled and the result is salvation. In other words: elect r predestined to grace. On that basis, they earn glory…

• Ignatius • Justin Martin • The Gnostics • Marcion • Montanus • Irenaeus • Tertullian • Origen • Arius • Athanasius • The Cappadocians • Apollinaris • Nestorius • Eutyches • Gregory the Great • Anslem • Aquinas • Occam The Historical Impact of classical philosophy on Christian Theology. Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, Epicureans, Stoics and Plotinus all helped build the foundation of Christianity. The Historical Impact of classical philosophy on Christian Theology. Socrates provided a basis and method of thought and reflection without this and the Socratic Method there would be no creed, doctrine or dogma. He aspired for better and encouraged others to think about the care for the soul. Plato, expanded the idea of aspiration to that holiness and introduced to idea that the poet (Homer) is inspired. From Aristotle we get concepts of form, matter and being. Form and matter constitute concrete individual realities. Looking at an acorn Aristotle saw it as the substance (being) of an Oak Tree. From this seed come the complex views that develop into the Eucharist, transubstaciation and consubstantiation. The Epicureans influenced the view that God is to Holy to be in contact with fallen humanity. This restriction was taken up by Christians and melded into the debate over the substance of Jesus. We must thank the Stoics for the concept of providence, fate and predestination because they taught that nature, God, fate, and providence were all essentially the same idea. Nature is determining who you are. It gets deeper when they mix in that in each of us there is a logos (a divine spark). This means something that is human and divine. We participate in a secondary and subordinate reality. Stop the bus because I want OFF! Before I get off I need to talk about the greatest of the pagan mystics. Plotinus said we must seek to become one with god. We are united with God and it is the only proper aspiration to become one with God. In 2002 Mulholland wrote a book for modern Christian with the central theme of "Finding Christ-likeness. Without the milk of Philosophy, the fledgling Christian Church of the Patristic Period would have had nothing to suckle. Question is was it milk or hemlock.

Christianity developed with the aid of Ebionites, Docetists, Arius, Athanasius, Nestorius, Apollinaris, Nicea and Chalcedon. Christianity developed with the aid of Ebionites, Docetists, Arius, Athanasius, Nestorius, Apollinaris, Nicea and Chalcedon. Ebionites and Muslims said that Jesus was only human. Agreeing with them, Arius wanted to preserve the humanity of Jesus and monotheism. He thought that since God was immutable and the son changes it must mean that the son is a creature and not THE God. Opposing them Docetists said that Jesus only appeared human that He was 100% divine. Athanasius condemned them all as Heretic at Nicea. Vehemently stating that despite all reason four things are mysteriously true: That in order for Jesus to be our Savior he can not be a creature; that the Logos is fully divine; The Logos is now personal; All of the persons of the trinity are co eternal and co equal; That the Holy Spirit is not a creature; And Jesus is 100% fully God and 100% fully man. For his trouble Athanasius was told by the bishops of Nicea the he was less wrong than Arius who was really wrong. Therefore, Council of Nicea in an attempt to suppress the Arius Heresy and answer the question of "Who (What) Jesus is (Is) (was)." question. 1. There was an emphasis on the Eternal son 2. Said Jesus was one substance 3. Jesus was made man 4. The Spirit proceeds from the Father and The Son Unfortunately, left three questions unanswered. What does this mean to mean to me I just want to love Jesus as my Savior and Lord? Who put the hemlock in my milk? How in the world does this make any sense?

The Council at Chalcedon answered the "how" 1 It was a decision and definition and not a compromise 2 Set flexible but definite boundaries 3 Talked about hypostatic union 4 Jesus is fully divine, fully human, 2 natures, united in one person 5 There is No con-fusion against Eutichism 6 Transmuting one nature into the other against Apoll 7 There is no dividing them into 2 separate categories against Nestorius The Bishops of the Medieval Period had there hand full. The chaos and persecution of the Patrictic Period had melded into a period of intellectual and spiritual torture. The Lions and Gladiators had made way for double edged dogma, razor sharp vocabulary and an unquenchable fire of Christians shouting unspeakable heresies. They spent centuries in a proverbial Ferrari speeding down mountain roads of ultra-thin truth and faith in an unseen and inscrutable God.

The Thomastic Synthesis involved Aristotle, Dante, operating grace and condign and congruent merit. The essential difference between condign merit and congruent merit is based on the fact that, besides those works which claim a remuneration under pain of violating strict justice (as in contracts between employer and employee, in buying and selling, etc.), there are also other meritorious works which at most are entitled to reward or honour for reasons of equity or mere distributive justice, as in the case of gratuities and military decorations. St Thomas Aquainas synthesized the various problems that developed over time in the Church. He appointed himself the one to finally and for all blend the sacred words of Paul and the sacrilegious philosophical and historical foundation of the society where Paul wrote his letters. Hoping to challenge and simplify the issues that perplexed so many good men through the centuries. So many before him attempting to meet this challenge found themselves on the wrong end of the heretic's pyre. There are few ideas in political theory, in philosophy or Christianity as a whole which cannot be traced back in some form to Plato, Aristotle, and their amazingly fertile period of Greek speculative thought. Indeed, the fact that he sat down to interpret works done centuries before Christ demonstrates that the philosophical efforts of the ancient Greeks rank far above even this genius work on the subject. At any rate, when one considers the enduring quality of ancient political thought, lasting in spite of the entirely different theology and doctrine that developed in it's wake, one must realize how little man has changed in his quest for God even awash in the Holy Spirit. History demonstrates that though Christian creeds and political institutions rise and fall, the frailties of man limit the mind and soul. We are a social worm in the garden of the Divine. Theological synthesis: Grace perfects nature. Aquainas view: Cooperating grace is a gift of God infused by God into the soul (justification) and becomes habitual grace (sanctification), which is the principle of meritorious works (Christian perfection). (this is Aquainas’ position.) this depends on human ability to do good. The Augustinian Synthesis involved Plato, Pelagius and the Donatists. The Augustinian synthesis had at its roots the teachings of Plato, Pelagius and resisance to the views of the Donatists. Being one of the earliest attempts to marry the secular reason with prayful revelation this work has had implications that reverberate throughout history. Augustine had studied Plato through the writings of Plotinus. He accepted Plato's view that idea, God and spirit were combined, and he accepted Plotinus' view that the power of God touched everything, molding and giving meaning to passive matter. From Plotinus, Augustine believed he had gained an understanding of a permanence that was God. Augusine now saw God as utterly transcendent, as the creator of all, all-knowing and the source of human knowledge. He had come to believe that materiality was not evil, that the universe was a continuous active whole and that evil was merely the turning away from God. Yet Augustine believed that Plato was right about God but wrong about gods. Augustine used the creation story to illustrate how he and Ambrose viewed God as an all powerful and intelligent designer. That creation had not just happened and that God had not created the universe with a compass and a level but instead had commanded it. But Augustine's legacy was not limited to his writings. Sadly, much of his legacy was from conflict. Augustine railed against the remnant paganism among his parishioners, including astrology. He attacked the notion that humanity's course of action could be determined by the stars while animals remained free to chose between doing something and not doing it. He condemned the idea that people born in the same month - even the same hour - had some type of unified destiny in their life or a lifetime. Augustine believed that the Church needed to exclude ideas that were contrary to fundamental Christianity. So Augustine was a word warrior. Augustine also came into conflict with Donatists Christians who believed that the Church should be restricted to those who maintained the purity they had acquired at baptism, who believed that the Church was a source of holiness and that no sinner should have a part in it, that the Church should expel those who were guilty of mortal sins. For Augustine, sin was not just a matter of choice, sin was inherited and ingrained, that the Church should embrace all of humanity, saints and sinners alike, that the good and bad would be together until Armageddon, when they would be separated. Augustine claimed that the good Christian must try to become holy but must also coexist with sinners in the same community and be prepared to rebuke and correct them. His neo-Platonic education led him to see Christians as part of a world of development, as imperfection struggling toward the ideal as manifested in God. Augustine saw the Church not as a body of purists defying society but a body that should master society, a body capable of bringing truth to the masses. Augustine led the drive against Donatism. He wanted the Donatists to come under the discipline of both church and state. Like others of his time, Augustine believed that people lacked the will and wisdom to govern themselves. The battle between the Donatists and Augustinians was akin to a civil war. With one side gaining the upper hand and then the other. At one point Augustine's life was in danger. When peace was achieved by suppression of the Donatist a new villain lay on the horizon. Pelagius became disturbed by the moral laxity among Christians and began advocating a stricter morality for all Christians. Pelagius and those known as Pelagians came to believe that people could be good. The stated that rather than being born sinful, people had no excuse for sinful behavior and that every sin was a deliberate act of contempt for God. What began as an influence on those who wished to reform the Church became a threat to the church in Augustine’s mind. The ideas of Pelagius were the ideas of Dotanists. This disturbed Augustine, and once again he led the attack. This time against the Pelagians. Once again his argument involved inner feelings and patience, a belief that people should merely try to do right while convalescing within the Church. Augustine reiterated his belief in humanity's power to choose, and he added that freedom of choice was limited and, in having only a limited power to choose, people could not live flawlessly. Augustine supported his belief in the limits of will by holding up his own experinces and understanding of the scriptures. Although Augustine saw the world that God had created as overwhelmingly good, he believed that humanity was destined to envy and to lust for power. Though he had been extraordinarily active sexually in his younger days, now in his old age he saw humanity as gluttonous. Augustine described infants at the breast as filled with lust, jealousy and other vices. Adam and Eve could have had sex without lust, he wrote, but they chose instead to have it with lust. A carpenter moved his hands without lust, he added, and so too could people in sexual intercourse. Virtue, claimed Augustine, demanded complete control over one's body, but absolute control was impossible, he claimed, because of Adam' fall. The Ecumenical Councils: There are seven councils that provide an ecumenical or mutual doctrine of the Christian Church. These seven councils were all called by the emperor. Their decisions were widely received as authoritative by "Christians" in both East and West. The Arians, however, continued to exist as a separate church long after their condemnation at Nicaea I. The main dogmatic pronouncements of the seven councils are: (1) nicaea I (325): that the Son is ‘of the substance of the Father’; that is, the Son is consubstantial, homoousios, with the Father. This council condemned Arianism. (2) constantinople I (381): that the Holy Spirit is fully God. The restatement of the Nicene faith attributed to this council declares the Spirit to be ‘Lord and Life-giver, proceeding from the Father, worshipped and glorified together with the Father and the Son’. (3) ephesus (431): that Mary is theotokos, the one who gave birth to God. This council condemned Nestorius, bishop of Constantinople. (4) chalcedon (451): Defined the Divine and Human nature of Christ and condemned the view of Eutyches.

SEVEN ECUMENICAL COUNCILS Council of Nicaea (325) Bishops from all over the Christian world came to answer key issues and to set a Christian Creed. Pope Sylvester. The Emperor Constantine. Of primary importance to those in attendance was the differing view of the Divinity of Jesus. "Was Jesus Human?" (as viewed by Arius) or Divine as ultimately presented in the The Creed Of Nicaea. First Council of Constantinople (381) Defined the Divinity of the Holy Ghost. Opposed to Macedonius. Added wording to state divinity of Holy Ghost. Council of Ephesus (431) Defined the unity of Christ, defined Mary "Theotokos",and condemned the view of Pelagius. Council of Chalcedon (451) Defined the Divine and Human nature of Christ and condemned the view of Eutyches. Second Council of Constantinople (553) of 165 bishops under Pope Vigilius and Emperor Justinian I, condemned the errors of Origen and certain writings (The Three Chapters) of Theodoret, of Theodore, Bishop of Mopsuestia and of Ibas, Bishop of Edessa; it further confirmed the first four general councils, especially that of Chalcedon whose authority was contested by some heretics. http://www.piar.hu/councils/ number 5 Third Council of Constantinople (680-681) Addressed the Heresy of Monothelism. Which maintained that even though Jesus had two natures there was only One Will. This Council sought to Define the Two Wills of Jesus Christ. It anathematized (To bring about the worst imaginable curse upon, The Curse of Judas) Sergius, Pyrrhus, Paul, Macarius, and all their followers. Second Council of Nicaea (787) Later Councils: Fourth Council of Constantinople (869)

--Eastern Orthodox Church Breaks With The Roman Catholic Church (1054) First Lateran Council (1123) Second Lateran Council (1139) Heresy of Arnold of Brescia Third Lateran Council (1179) Heresy of Albigenses and Waldenses Fourth Lateran Council (1215), Heresy of Albigenses again and the arrant if not heretical views of Abbot Joachim (Trinitarian). "This is the most important council of the Middle Ages, it marks the culminating point of ecclesiastical life and papal power". First Council of Lyons (1245). Excommunicated and deposed Emperor Frederick II and directed a crusade, under the command of St. Louis, against the Saracens and Mongols. Council of Lyons (1274) Council of Vienne in France (1311-1313) Council of Constance (1414-1418) Council of Basle (1431). The Crusades. The Papacy. Discuss Origen and his influence. Origen believed our body keeps us on earth. It is not evil, but it is a hindrance. Origen also: • had a theology of scripture. He described three levels of scripture (literal/historical, moral, and spiritual. • He believed in a transcendental fall. Adam and Eve were not historical, but spiritual. Means alienation from God. The fall occurs before Adam and Eve. We are born blind, and our sight is restored. • Believe in a distinction between essence and existence. Salvation is restoration to our essential being. We remove ourselves from existence. In God's eternity all are saved • thought logos was eternally generated but subordinate. Was never a time when the son was not

Discuss Anselem and the Ontological Argument and Atonement. An Ontological Arguement is a method of proving the existence of God. For Anslem the method was logical and similar to the Socratic Method of using questions until a proof is made. Anslem is famous for two proofs of God. The first that God exists in reality the second that God is necessary. God exists in reality because: If God is that thing that is greater than everything then God is the greatest power. If this concept exists in human understanding then God exists in one's mind. If God existed in reality then God would be greater than what exists in a man's. Since, existence both in reality and in imagination is greater than just one or the other. Therefore, God in reality must exist. God is necessary because: God is that entity than which nothing greater can be conceived. If it is greater to be necessary than not then God must be necessary. Therefore, God is the greatest necessary entity to exist. Anslem's view of Attonement is seated in what was his modern view of chivalry, justice and logic. This is different than our modern view but in the time of knights and Nobels is was a clear model. The first part of the model is chivalry. For Anslem, sin was an attack on the Honor of God. Each act of sin, disobedience or lowliness is a slap to the face of God. The honor of God must be re-cooped or satisfied. Yet, we are lowly creatures more lowly than a peasant to a King and only an equal can propose to repair the honor of another. This leaves only one person in a position to be able the restore God's Honor and that is Jesus. The Second part of the model is justice. Our dishonor requires an action. Justice in that period emphasizes the importance of character. In this case, our action to dishonor God demands response and justice. Otherwise, God's Honor is lost or somehow reduced. This Justice demands that the sin be punished and action be taken. The third part is logically, logic. We are all sinners. Lowly reprobates and because even the best of us would fail to live a life good enough to honor God. So, all of us fall short. Yet, it is illogical to believe that God created an entity or species for the purpose of insulting himself. Therefore, by logic there must be a means of atonement. This again leads the realization that Jesus is the only possible source for reconciliation to God. Patristc verses Medival History

Retrieved from "http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/OT01"