Is ancient philosophy the cause of the decline of theology, the study of God and our existence? Plato, Socrates, Pythagoras, Plotinus, Aristotle and subsequent philosophers and their various schools attempted to explain our existence without the knowledge and certainty of a higher power. They developed extreme systems for the appearance of our solar system, humanity, plants, animals and humanity’s relationship with nature and each other. When the church fathers appeared on the scene beginning with Origen, Athanasius, Cyril and the like, they felt a need and did in fact attempt to explain our existence using these ancient Greek, philosophical concepts. These concepts were science to them and became the reason for our being, both to the Greeks and Romans and Christians. These concepts continued to be the reason for being with the Fathers although under a new concept, Christ. The Fathers thought that they had to work these two, sometimes opposing systems into one great creation story. The unfortunate consequence is that philosophical and theological concepts merged with the likes of very influential theologians like Augustine. The church fathers attempted a merger of philosophy and theology with a disastrous result. The church fathers abandoned God because of their need to explain their existence with philosophical concepts. Hebrew history would have worked much better. Truth as expounded by Christ and the apostles got lost in the mix. Divine and natural laws were put aside and truth became some fanciful concoction of ancient, Greek, philosophical thought and divine revelation. Truth and reason were distorted with the resultant effect of 2000 years of confusion.
We now have research institution who seek new knowledge based on empirical evidence in a secular environment. Secular sciences have no room for theology. I propose that such a separation is a very good outcome. Some say that universities fail to combine all new knowledge into a database of truths which would demonstrate knowledge’s interrelationships. They do not like the idea that knowledge has become secularized and segregated. But that outcome is good. What philosophers and theologians fail to realize is that knowledge is different from truth. In classical logic, 'everything must either be or not be." The ancients were not aware of the interconnectedness of the natural world, salvation history and human history. Knowledge was imbedded in a theological ethic that had a supernatural end but was explained philosophically. Early universities, upon the rediscovery of the ancients, taught medicine, law and theology under this philosophical bent. Finally attempts were made to separate theology and philosophy. The scholastics made the pursuit of knowledge an end in itself devoid of religious necessities. Nominalism rejected universals or abstract objects. Humanists wrote about antiquity and a renewed confidence in the ability of human beings to determine for themselves truth and falsehood. The Reformation secularized knowledge and rulers championed rival doctrines in their universities. The Protestants fell into interdoctrinal disputes and theology became muddled with scientific knowledge. Romanticism was characterized by its emphasis on emotion and individualism as well as glorification of all the past and nature, preferring the medieval rather than the classical. Luckily there appeared great minds like Kepler, Galileo, Descartes, and Newton. A shift occurred to the natural sciences. Knowledge was secularized. Secularization was complete with empiricism. The Popes unwittingly cooperated in the secularization of Catholic universities by allowing natural sciences to be confused with creation science. Finally, we can see that truth is a completely different science from knowledge, which is gained from empiricism. One does not need science to explain creation if one believes in God.
Knowledge is not truth. Knowledge is the progression of accumulated ideas, mathematical formulas, and empirical evidence which will eventually reveal truth. Knowledge is changeable and cumulative. Truth is finite, definite and unchangeable. When theologians and philosophers, and now, secular scientists come to that realization, their cooperation will reveal marvelous results. They will come to realize that natural law can be explained by divine law and that existence is created by the synergy between the two. Scientist will realize that natural law is governed by and is in fact divine law. Rightly so. God must be separated from modern science but both sides must be promoted, studied, relished and projected as independent modes, the later to seek knowledge and the former to seek and obtain truth.
We now have research institution who seek new knowledge based on empirical evidence in a secular environment. Secular sciences have no room for theology. I propose that such a separation is a very good outcome. Some say that universities fail to combine all new knowledge into a database of truths which would demonstrate knowledge’s interrelationships. They do not like the idea that knowledge has become secularized and segregated. But that outcome is good. What philosophers and theologians fail to realize is that knowledge is different from truth. In classical logic, 'everything must either be or not be." The ancients were not aware of the interconnectedness of the natural world, salvation history and human history. Knowledge was imbedded in a theological ethic that had a supernatural end but was explained philosophically. Early universities, upon the rediscovery of the ancients, taught medicine, law and theology under this philosophical bent. Finally attempts were made to separate theology and philosophy. The scholastics made the pursuit of knowledge an end in itself devoid of religious necessities. Nominalism rejected universals or abstract objects. Humanists wrote about antiquity and a renewed confidence in the ability of human beings to determine for themselves truth and falsehood. The Reformation secularized knowledge and rulers championed rival doctrines in their universities. The Protestants fell into interdoctrinal disputes and theology became muddled with scientific knowledge. Romanticism was characterized by its emphasis on emotion and individualism as well as glorification of all the past and nature, preferring the medieval rather than the classical. Luckily there appeared great minds like Kepler, Galileo, Descartes, and Newton. A shift occurred to the natural sciences. Knowledge was secularized. Secularization was complete with empiricism. The Popes unwittingly cooperated in the secularization of Catholic universities by allowing natural sciences to be confused with creation science. Finally, we can see that truth is a completely different science from knowledge, which is gained from empiricism. One does not need science to explain creation if one believes in God.
Knowledge is not truth. Knowledge is the progression of accumulated ideas, mathematical formulas, and empirical evidence which will eventually reveal truth. Knowledge is changeable and cumulative. Truth is finite, definite and unchangeable. When theologians and philosophers, and now, secular scientists come to that realization, their cooperation will reveal marvelous results. They will come to realize that natural law can be explained by divine law and that existence is created by the synergy between the two. Scientist will realize that natural law is governed by and is in fact divine law. Rightly so. God must be separated from modern science but both sides must be promoted, studied, relished and projected as independent modes, the later to seek knowledge and the former to seek and obtain truth.
RSS Feed