I can't see why inserting philosophy leads to confusion — Jack Cummins
I've read Ms. Armstrong and she clearly does not mean philosophical contemplation (i.e. critical-hermeneutic à la Spinoza, Hume, Feuerbach, Nietzsche, Bultmann ...) when she says "contemplation".Karen Armstrong suggests the importance of contemplation of texts. — Jack Cummins
I think that the centre of any ethics of from the NT has to be that of loving others as oneself. Sometimes, I think that people forget that a starting point for loving others is to love oneself. Also, I don't think loving oneself and others is a simple task. — Jack Cummins
I've read Ms. Armstrong and she clearly does not mean philosophical contemplation (i.e. critical-hermeneutic à la Spinoza, Hume, Feuerbach, Nietzsche, Bultmann ...) when she says "contemplation". — 180 Proof
A critical difference is that philosophy relies on reason, the biblical religions on revelation. — Fooloso4
So, I actually was referring to the Hebrew version of the name — Angelo
As per the OP, only philosophical contemplation of the Bible / NT is relevant. — 180 Proof
I have a couple more books which I wish to bring into the thread but will not do so until Monday — Jack Cummins
The blue bus
is calllin' us ...
Driver
where are you
takin' us?
I want it, I want it, I want it, I waaaant it ... (You caaaaan't have it!) — old skoOl ...
Yeah. As per the OP, only philosophical contemplation of the Bible / NT is relevant. Jack Cummins, maybe you too, seem to drift changing the topic's goal posts, as it were, which is okay, but I'm off the bus before any quixotic or anachronistic detours. — 180 Proof
I am sorry if I am sending you off the bus, and I do wish to keep the discussion on the philosophical. But, the Bible is a big topic and I wish to look at it as fully as possibly can. I have a couple more books which I wish to bring into the thread but will not do so until Monday because I am at my mother's house. Generally, my own approach is about trying to use ideas in books as a basis for critical discussion, as when philosophy is just talking purely on the basis of one's own ideas I don't think it goes as far as when it involves considering specific ideas of writers. — Jack Cummins
Our hop-on, hop-off London bus tours give you the flexibility to plan your day, your way. You can choose to stay on board the entire route and let us take you for a scenic spin, or hop-off at the destinations you want to further explore. Once you've seen it, done it and selfied it, you simply wait for the next bus to come along to rejoin the tour. — bigbus tours/ hop-on-hop-off- London
I see that http://www.biblicalphilosophy.org says “Welcome to the website that is committed to the inerrancy of the Bible”: this makes me think that actually it has nothing to do with philosophy, nor with the Bible, — Angelo
Welcome to the website that is committed to the inerrancy of the Bible and its total sufficiency within a philosophical discussion of Christianity. “In Christ are hidden all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge,” wrote the Apostle Paul (Colossians 2:3). On the one hand, many Christians see philosophy (etymology, “love of wisdom”) as a discipline that attacks our Lord Jesus Christ, the Bible, and His people. On the other hand, many Christian philosophers see philosophy as more important than the Scriptures. So, what about a Christian philosophy or Biblical philosophy? Could either of these be consistent with Biblical teaching and with scholarly philosophy? — biblical philosophy
One of the great divisions among Christians who work in philosophy, Biblical philosophy, or Christian apologetics is over presuppositionalism and evidentialism (see below). It will not take much reading on this site to know that I am a convinced presuppositionalist. Simply, one must assume something to have anywhere concrete to begin. René Descartes said, “I think, therefore I am.” Augustine of Hippo said, “I believe in order to understand.” Socrates said, “The unexamined life is not worth living.” Or, one can say, “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.” Or, you can choose your own place to start. I have reviewed what some of these starting points might be.
Thus, I prefer “Biblical philosophy,” rather than “Christian philosophy.” My most basic presupposition is that the Bible is the inerrant and infallible Word of God, that it is the only source of truth that anyone will know in this earthly life, and that it is sufficient for everything that anyone needs to know. "The Bible is true about everything to which it speaks, and it speaks to everything." — biblical philosophy
it seems obvious to me that Jack and other people have no intention to explore every detail and every problem related to the Bible and to philosophy — Angelo
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.