"Not Far the Kingdom of God"

[Phil W]

Have you ever heard of "the Trinity", and do you believe that God is three persons in One essence?

Derail.

Thanks for exemplify why the thread exists.

Frankly, men's teachings, more often than not, lead other men away from the Lord.
Do the stoics write with the Spirit of God?
How much stock should I put in someone outside of God?

 

[fhansen]

A thread on the relationship between Stoicism and Christianity. (I may actually throw in the relationship of Christianity with Zoroastrianism as well, and even talk a bit about pre-Christian paganism etc).

One problem I have seen in Christianity is a lot of defensiveness. Christians, especially on the social conservative end of the spectrum (Protestants especially), frequently cannot actually acknowledged when there is anything positive to say when it comes to other religions and philosophies even when they actually mirror traditional Christian values and beliefs! And it's not just that, there are even times when the Judeo-Christian tradition has been positively influenced by such things.

Anyway back to the defensiveness, as Christians we believe in the exclusiveness of our Faith as far as Salvation, and having a restored relationship with God goes. So there is some degree of nervousness in some people who most likely equate or conflate the ability to say something positive about some other Faith tradition outside the Judeo-Christian tradition as some kind of slippery slope towards Unitarianism, or some other kind of belief. But I would maintain this should not be the case, you can acknowledged the positive and not ditch that Jesus is the only way to salvation etc.

But I think this has been a problem for centuries. To start with it makes Christians and Christianity seem petty. Secondly, growing up especially attending parochial schools (Lutheran and Southern Baptist) Christians can be so much better at preaching than actually practicing their Faith. In particular, I recall the concept of hearing a lot about "Agape" growing up, but seeing or experiencing only on very, very rare occasions. I can say that a number of my secular instructors growing up were much better when it came to virtues like patience compared to some Christian counter parts. Anyway, this phenomenon undermines the veracity claims of the Faith. It makes people wonder if Christianity is simply an idealogy or such concepts like Agape are just slogans and ideals that are never realized.

And thirdly, like the previous statement concerning slogans and ideologies etc. I think some of this concept is something that is God allowed or ordained, namely many Christians have a deeply flawed concept concerning what it means to be a Christian. It's for that reason, that I think the rise of postChristian society is not entirely bad. It's bad in general but sometimes it is a reaction to something areas of institutional Christianity that are not worth saving. Essentially in my own life, I left the Faith for a fear years and came back but was better off for it in the end and I think that sometimes also happens with other people.

Anyway leave your comments, objections and other responses below and take care,
Pavel

PS - the thread got so long I forgot the 1st part! There is some good life advice to be had from Stoicism, it has a number of Christian parallels if you pay attention. IF you don't mind a few PG-13 cuss words, I recommend "10 Stoic Teachings Of Marcus Aurelius We Desperately Need Today (Practical Stoicism)"

Virtue isn't important with some brands of Christianity; faith takes its place! Ironically. Faith, for some, actually makes it alright to remain as you were before you were saved! And that produces people who're actually rather fearful, and wary of others, especially non-believers- who do good. But the Parable of the Good Samaritan comes to mind here.

 

[Pavel Mosko]

Derail.

Not a derail, Christians for 1800+ years have describe the Godhead using the term Trinity. The whole Trinity concept was directly lifted from Stoicism because it solved the scriptural paradox/conflict how three Beings (Father, Son and Holy Spirit) could be "One" (Deuteronomy 6:4).

 

[public hermit]

Not a derail, Christians for 1800+ years have describe the Godhead using the term Trinity. The whole Trinity concept was directly lifted from Stoicism because it solved the scriptural paradox/conflict how three Beings (Father, Son and Holy Spirit) could be "One" (Deuteronomy 6:4).

Okay, I'm curious.

That Stoicism may influenced the doctrine, okay. But the phrase, "directly lifted" seems a bit much. For instance, Justin Martyr seems to have been influenced by Middle Platonism, as with the analogy of the sun's rays. So, very early on, Christians are wrestling with the ontological relationship between the Father and Son (God and Jesus). Origen, who all sides of the controversy liked to quote, was Alexandrian and probably influenced by Neo-Platonism (possibly took classes from Ammonius Saccas). Maybe you're referencing Tertullian? Anyway, it seems there were various philosophical influences that aided the formulation of the Trinitarian conception. But, I'm open to a different point of view.

 

[Pavel Mosko]

But the phrase, "directly lifted"

"Directly lifted" is a colloquialism for borrowed or adapted. If you read up on most encyclopedias give Stoicism the credit for adapting the Trinity since it was a literal example of a metaphysical Trinity that was readily available and could easily be used by the early Christians when it came to reconciling the Scriptural paradox, but yes the intellectual foot prints go back far if you want to be picky.


Why did the Apologists adopt Stoic Philosophy of the λόγος?


Three I know not what: The influence of Greek philosophy on the doctrine of Trinity

 

[Phil W]

"Directly lifted" is a colloquialism for borrowed or adapted. If you read up on most encyclopedias give Stoicism the credit for adapting the Trinity since it was a literal example of a metaphysical Trinity that was readily available and could easily be used by the early Christians when it came to reconciling the Scriptural paradox, but yes the intellectual foot prints go back far if you want to be picky.

What scriptural paradox are you referring to?

 

[Pavel Mosko]

God as Father, Son and Holy Spirit (3 beings) and God being "One" (Deuteronomy 6:4)

 

[public hermit]

"Directly lifted" is a colloquialism for borrowed or adapted. If you read up on most encyclopedias give Stoicism the credit for adapting the Trinity since it was a literal example of a metaphysical Trinity that was readily available and could easily be used by the early Christians when it came to reconciling the Scriptural paradox, but yes the intellectual foot prints go back far if you want to be picky.


Why did the Apologists adopt Stoic Philosophy of the λόγος?


Three I know not what: The influence of Greek philosophy on the doctrine of Trinity

The second link you posted says one of the things borrowed from Stoicism was the distinction between imminent logos and expressed logos. That is new to me, and I find it helpful. It correlates nicely with the fact that logos can be translated both "word" or "reason."

Imminent logos = Reason
Expressed logos = Word

Do you know how Christian's used that distinction? Was it to explain the difference between the divine Logos pre-Incarnation and the divine Logos incarnated? I don't know.

 

[Pavel Mosko]

The second link you posted says one of the things borrowed from Stoicism was the distinction between imminent logos and expressed logos. That is new to me, and I find it helpful. It correlates nicely with the fact that logos can be translated both "word" or "reason."

Imminent logos = Reason
Expressed logos = Word

Do you know how Christian's used that distinction? Was it to explain the difference between the divine Logos pre-Incarnation and the divine Logos incarnated? I don't know.

From what I can tell a lot of it came from Philo of Alexandria. Philo had his own Jewish adaptation of the Trinity, and was widely read by the various Church Fathers so much that even was kind of considered a Christian saint by many.

Philo Judaeus: A Precursor to New Testament Theology


Now Greek Philosophy is not a strength of mine but I strive to understand it at some kind of rudimentary level since it has obvious Apologetics uses etc. If I recall Philo's Trinity had some kind 3 fold aspect of 1)A God, Demiurge (yahweh), 2) the Logos of the Divine will at work in creation (the theory of forms), and 3) the Stoic "mind fire" at work in the Universe. The last one especially fits into Christian notions of the work of the Holy Spirit. It is kind of the Aristotlean aspect of God that you see in Eastern Orthodox, Palamite theology (Gregory of Palamas) of "knowing God in his energies but not in his essence". The logos has some correspondence to the Son of God per the creation in Genesis and the opening of John, him being the Alpha and Omega etc. And naturally the Father is the "Fountain head" of the Trinity, the First Cause etc. where the Son and HS eternally proceed or are eternally generated from Him.