Is it possible to be christian but also read up on philosophy?

Yes. Christian existentialism is based.

Nope. If your a christfag ur retarded.

>>1803209
Did you fall from Mars or something?

File: Knight of Faith.jpg (134KB, 653x1024px) Image search: [Google]

134KB, 653x1024px

>>1803221

>>1803209
Don't you think it's a little dogmatic that you would consider rejecting information because of your religion?

>>1803255
>Don't you think it's a little dogmatic
That's the point, genius

>it's another liberal faggot who thinks Christianity is "anti-smart" because he watches Family Guy

>>1803209

No. You can be well-read in Christian apologetics, but it's not possible to be both a well-read philosopher AND a Christian, the juxtaposition of clear and careful thought against idiotic doctrines and antithought ideology is too stark.

>>1803381
Tell that to Thomas Aquinas

>>1803238
PAINFUL DEATH

>>1803381
Ah, I remember middle school.

>>1803209
Nope, you'll wind up catholic.

>>1803413
>>1803500
Nice arguments you got there m8s

>>1803209
True philosophy is inherently Christian because of the role Sophia/Wisdom plays in Christianity.

If you like philosophy and you like Christianity your thing is Catholicism.

Protestants don't like philosophy because hurr durr it's not in the bible. But the superficiality of Protestantism gets old after a while if you're a person seeking more depth.

>>1803209
Western Philosophy from Late Antiquity through to the enlightenment was all Christian philosophy m8.

>>1804830
Sounds interesting. Will check him out.

>>1804830
You're validating this guy
>>1803381

Tillich was a Christian in the sense Hegel and David Strauss were Christians.

>>1804835
Which is probably why it's completely discarded from most philosophy canons, except for Augustine and Aquinas.

>>1804845
>he didn't read Boetius
>he didn't read Anselm
>he didn't read Duns Scotus
>he didn't read Occam
>he didn't read the Scholastics

You should shoot your professors.

>>1804850
He wasn't Christian at all, though, not even nominally. That's like calling Zizek a Christian because he explores things like the significance of the Crucifixion.

>>1804862
Boethius might have been a Christian, but his work is not one of Christian philosophy.

The others significantly influenced later forms of rational inquiry, such as natural science, but they don't form any integral part of the motion of philosophical thought from the Enlightenment onward. It might appear as if they do in certain respects, but in reality it's just picking up contemplation of the same subjects from where the pagans and Augustine left off.

>>1803381
>Christian apologetics
Apologetics is anti-philosophy. Starting with a predetermined conclusion that you absolutely will not give up and then bending and twisting logic to justify it is the reverse of how philosophy works.
>>1804815
>All great philosophers
Before evolution was widely accepted/understood. I am sure many would be atheists today.

My question, OP, is what you will do once your faith clashes with logic. I think you will have to choose, one will have to bend.

>>1804871
And by "Enlightenment," I'm including all the way back to Descartes.

>>1804874
Evolution had zero to do with the decline of Christianity, except maybe those who stressed Scripture as the end-all and be-all. The decline of Christianity was in fact started by the new historical interpretations of the life of Christ that came out of 19th Century Protestant Germany.

You need religion to ask the big questions of philosophy.

>>1804879
>muh evolution
Yes, Muh two hundred years of careful theorizing, fact-checking, carbon dating, observation of speciation, cataloguing of millions (or more) species... studies in cellular adaptation, fossil prints, tectonic plate measurements... you can see why I am tenacious about this.

>much ancient book that's been passed down over thousands of years, retranslated, cut up, pasted back together, edited, revised, and then read as literal truth.

>>1804882
I wouldn't say zero but you do bring up a good point. People have always been skeptical, but I think the enlightenment was when more minds started shifting away, with deism and all.

>>1804894
If your entire life's work is explaining that the earth is only six thousand years old, than yes, it is debunked by [numerous] fossils & such that contradict that.

And this applies strictly to young-earth creationism by the way, one can still posit a divine presence without contradiction.

>>1804893
The Enlightenment made some pretty "euphoric," for lack of a better term, attacks on Christianity. Serious critical scholarship of Christian history didn't start until late the late 18th Century, and didn't kick into maximum overdrive until the 19th Century, probably because it was only then and there that scholars could start pursuing such lines of investigation and still have a professional career.

The truth is, anti-Christian intellectualism was more concerned with poking holes in the Gospels than in Genesis, and for good reason. Christianity based primarily on ceremonial expression, is not going to be shaken by Genesis being factual or not, since ceremony-based Christianity is completely fixated on the Resurrection, that's all that people are celebrating every week. Genesis was only a cultural story for the masses, not something you studied or put faith in--they assumed it was true, of course, but they weren't strongly invested in it being true, emotionally speaking. Some sects of Protestants later came to be, because they fixated on the Bible instead of a ceremonial expression of the Resurrection, but intellectual Christianity was seldom present with these sorts anyhow.

>>1804900
What unit of measurement does God use?

>>1804911
A ratio of 1:1.618 Dan Brown novels.

>>1803209
>Is it possible to be christian but also read up on philosophy?

OF COURSE!

Just two examples:

>Aristotle
Theology is based on Aristotle's philosophy.
To be more precise: Theology = Aristotle's philosophy + the Bible

>Derek Prince
He was a philosopher first, and then he became a believer and preacher.
Check his videos on Youtube, they are very interesting.

t. a philosopher who also loves to study all kinds of religions, for example Christianity

>>1804956

What are some Greek philosophies that are similar to those found in the Bible?

>>1804959
None, if we're being honest. There is certainly some common ground in regard Plato, Aristotle and the Stoics, though.

Areopagus sermon
Maybe philosophers in that part of Greece.

>>1804959
You should check out Gnosticism.
It's a kind of a middle ground.

>>1804871

Actually once analytic philosophy became a big thing Aristotle and the Scholastics got reintegrated into the cannon. The issue with philosophy between the Medieval period and the late 19th century was that logic was abandoned so the reasoning got incredibly sloppy. The analytic focus on logic and language allowed us to realize what was actually going on with Scholasticism, which demanded a mastery of logic in order to reach philosophy, which would then have to be mastered in order to become a professional theologian.

Arthur Prior's tensed logic for example is an "Ockhamist logic", and issues pertinent in analytic philosophy like the existence of haecceities and the de dicto/de re distinction have medieval roots. We still haven't even caught up to them in many of these issues since we have only had the tools to actually understand what was going on those works for the last 50 years or so. And whenever analytic philosophers read medieval philosophy the general response is that save the theological focus ( which is pretty easy to abstract away) it is pretty "familiar" to them in the way the philosophy is being done.

It is becoming more well known now that pretty much every subfield of philosophy saw major advances in the medieval period. Hell the first full blown and rigorously developed empiricism appeared in that period.

Really it is the enlightenment era stuff that became outdated once we got rigorous again, and Scholasticism is making a slow comeback. It is more relevant now than it has been since the early 17th century when guys like Descartes were learning material from the first scholastic revival that helped end the intellectual stagnation of the renaissance and reformation.

>>1804959
Neoplatonism

>>1805022
I don't see how Ockham's logic is fundamentally different from Aristotlean logic

>>1805029
He said the Bible, not later Christian theology.

>>1803209
>Christians can't read
>Christians don't have eyes
>Christians are illiterate
Wew lad

>>1803229
Nice b8 m8

Yes, the shitty types of philosophy, mostly the schools that are build around determinism and don't consider the huge role that randomness and luck play in life.

In other words, all the autistic philosophies, such as Scholasticism and analytic philosophy

>>1805091
1. He parses out necessity from determination, unlike Aristotle.
2. Deals with self-referential paradoxes, which Aristotle does not deal with in the Organon as far as I know.
3. Supposition theory is a foundational part of it, which is a medieval innovation that has it's best treatment in Ockham ( arguably).
4. His understanding of temporal semantics in general ( hence why Prior's tensed logic was an "Ockhamist logic").
5. A systematized approach to logical consequences and move towards propositional logic as opposed to only focusing on Aristotelean term based logic.
6. Analyses of hypothetical and impossible syllogisms that were absent in the Organon. ( The hypotheticals begin with Boethius, and we can find talk of impossible syllogisms - that is, correct reasoning from impossible premises- even as far back as Aquinas).
7.A different theory of predication.
8. A reduction of Aristotle's logical categories from 10 to 2.


>>1805166
The Scholastics, and most analytic philosophers, weren't and still aren't determinists. Now it is true that some scholastics like Ockham and Scotus did not buy into chance. But they had the contingency of the will to block determinism. Also, Aquinas did buy into chance ( whether this is coherent with his theological project or not is debatable) and it seems that allot of the other pre 1277 Scholastics did as well.

It is the in the analytic school that we see people accounting for quantum physics through new logics that take indeterminism into account. Probability theory is HUGE in contemporary analytic philosophy as well. Where do you even find evidence that Frege, Russell, Quine, Kripke, Moore and Lewis were determinists ?

>>1803209
new atheism is the weakest philosophy of them all IMO.

Christianity is a philosophy. You can read up on christian writing, which is a type of philosophy.

You can read up on anything else too, and still be christian. Philosophy is just about defending your opinions anyway, and the christian philosophy is just as valid as anything else. There are many christian arguments for whatever you want to believe.

Philosophy is finding someone who agrees with your opinions, and then discovering better arguments to convince other people you are right. You can do that with christianity as well.

File: William_Lane_Craig.jpg (740KB, 1500x2254px) Image search: [Google]

740KB, 1500x2254px

>>1803209

this guy did