need to start afresh when we tackle a particular issue. That means that we are learning to be sophisticated and not to think that we have made novel discoveries when we begin to have opinions about a particular topic:
that it is often only through considerable struggle that one arrives at a particular position on an issue. In that sense we make important discoveries when we come to accept or reject, attack or defend a particular position.
that such activity is fascinating, drawing us on, always with the realisation that there is more than meets the eye.
You will find that you cannot hurry understanding. Better to read a paragraph and puzzle out its meaning and significance than race through a chapter with the result that you only vaguely understand its content. Mind you, a cursory reading may be a preparation for a second or third reading as you come, again slowly, to more adequate understanding. But only as a preparation. Things take time, T. T. T. Give yourself time. Experience the satisfying joy of increased understanding as with the time you have patiently spent you come to real comprehension,
1 Why Be Interested in Philosophy?Why should the believer be interested in philosophy? In what ways is philosophy related to theology? We can take the two questions together.a. The language Christians use in declaring their belief and developing their doctrines has been widely influenced by philosophy. So understanding ideas and methods of philosophy illuminates and clarifies because they are directly related to the believer’s usage, and often to the content of scripture passages.b. Philosophy can illuminate particular ideas: for example word, beginning are creative ideas introduced in the Gospel of John and are also well established concepts in Greek thought as logos, arche. The well established meanings of these crucial terms enabled John to make significant universal claims for Jesus, whom he identifies as logos. They enable him to portray him as agent at the creative act. Understanding the Greek philosophical terms is essential for an adequate understanding of the claim the Gospel of John goes on to make, a claim no Greek would think of making: ‘the word became flesh’.You can’t understand Paul’s use of the Greek term pleroma as he battles the heretics without considering their use of the idea and others associated with it. Take the passage in Colossians 2:9 which reads: ‘For in him dwelleth all the fullness of the Godhead bodily’ (AV). Here pleroma is rendered simply as ‘fullness’ (AV). Other versions think to improve on this. RSV renders the term ‘whole fullness’, NEB renders the term ‘complete being’. Obviously you get little enlightenment for understanding the meaning by scanning the alternative versions. Only with the original context in mind and the contemporary significance of the term can you see that the writer is making a cosmic claim for Jesus. The Gnostics had built a whole structure of the universe into the meaning of the term pleroma. They left no place for the uniqueness of Jesus. Paul is correcting that aberration.We have given two instances where a depth of understanding becomes possible only with the expenditure of effort to explore how some important terms now established in the Christian vocabulary have come to be there. Think for a moment how without this understanding a reader reacts to such passages. Perhaps the sympathetic attitude would be simply to acknowledge that something important is being claimed but to leave alone such ‘deep’ things. Perhaps one even begins to think one’s own thoughts about the terms one meets in Scripture. These may be rather vague. The constructive desire to understand may lead one to the serious discipline of inquiring further. Several passages in the New Testament reveal that the early Christian teachers were even then demanding an effort from their people to go beyond an elementary understanding, for example: ‘let us leave the elementary doctrine of Christ and go on to maturity’ Hebrews 6:1 (RSV), and Paul bemoans the immaturity of his converts at Corinth. He writes that he has ‘fed you with milk not solid food; for you were not yet ready for it, and even yet you are not ready (I Corinthians 3:2 RSV). This plea for progress was made as the Christian leaders and their congregations faced opposition to the Christian beliefs. How can one counter error if one does not understand what one believes and also what the alternatives are?c. It can illuminate particular contexts of exposition within which characteristic terms are used. Take the book of Hebrews for example with its theme of reality in the heavens, the true tabernacle, the ideal priest, beyond the shadows on earth. That reflects a central theme of Plato and the Platonists. The real is the ideal. Earthly, temporal things are shadows, lacking reality, but giving hints of the real beyond.d. Passages of Scripture get illuminated by seeing parallels in philosophical treatments and giving them due consideration. This point differs from 2 above since here there is no direct influence between the philosophical idea and the Christian use. A case study would be the Greek concept of akrasia as providing similarities to Paul’s definition of sin: we do not do what we see as good and we do do what we see as evil (Romans 7:5ff). [See chapter 9]So in describing what happens to the original philosophical materials, we speak of adoption, adaptation, redefinition. The new context of Christian faith provides for and enables new meanings to emerge in relation to terms already rich in meaning. They become the vehicles for expressing Christian claims. Where the church finds heresy, it tackles the meanings given to the essential terms being employed, and progress in understanding is achieved in the counter play of debate and denial. So the opponent is not simply denied. Where something constructive comes out of the encounter, he is first understood.The Christian vocabulary has owed much to philosophical discussions from its very beginning. We have only to consider some of the many terms that have been thought essential for the expression of Christian beliefs. We have already taken a few examples of some used in Scripture with direct links to philosophical discussion.The Christian vocabulary has grown steadily from the very beginnings of Christian belief. As the church moved into different communities and encountered different languages and customs, it developed and expressed its beliefs in different ways. It was inevitable that various ways of explaining Christian doctrines would emerge. This variety of expression emerged so as to connect with the different contexts within which the Gospel was being preached. Different forms of expressing Christian faith emerged and gave rise to differing explanations. As a different context provided for different thoughts about the meaning of faith, so different theologies were created and discussions and disputes took place, even and sometimes especially within the same communities. Traditions emerged and proliferated.So emerged the sad phenomenon that often more effort was expended in defending the tradition than in seeking further and renewed understanding. This was true not only of sophisticated traditions but also of very simple ones. Here the defence was vigorous but often without a real understanding or a willingness to understand. For that might mean revision and change.e. We have spoken of the influence of particular philosophical ideas. We now speak of the influence of philosophy in providing vehicles for systematic expression of ranges of Christian teaching. The Greeks had developed comprehensive systems of philosophy. Here a level of mature philosophical thought emerged as in no other ancient culture.In these systems certain guiding principles (archai) provided unity. So for long afterwards Christians decided: Think as Plato thought. Or, think as Aristotle thought. Then go one stage further and think how Plato might provide for Christian expression. Think Christian teaching in harmony with the Aristotelian approach. Here were resources Christian thinkers knew and employed. So in the early centuries it was the influence of Plato, characteristically exemplified in the writings of Origen and Augustine. Later in the Middle Ages Thomas Aquinas provides the outstanding example of a theologian who thought in Aristotelian terms, becoming the foundation for Catholic theology. The influence of philosophy in providing systematic vehicles for conceiving Christian themes continued to the present time. An acquaintance with such philosophical approaches provides for understanding of the Christian expressions. That is a very good reason for studying them, quite apart from their intrinsic interest.Being aware of these considerations, we may find it enlightening to ask of a Christian teaching, ‘What is the context of this particular expression of belief?’ To give examples: the confession of belief in the incarnation often takes the form, ‘two natures in one person’. The confession of faith in God has sometimes taken the form: ‘three persons in one substance’. If you want to see the rationale for the use of these terms you have to plunge into the philosophical background where the terms ‘nature’, ‘substance’, ‘person’ were developed. For in fact there is a direct connection between the background context and the confessional statements. Without this background it is very easy to end up misunderstanding what the doctrine intended. So as backgrounds change, the form of expression for the Christian
