FRDB Archives

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.


Go Back   FRDB Archives > Archives > Religion (Closed) > Biblical Criticism & History
Welcome, Peter Kirby.
You last visited: Today at 03:12 PM

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 03-30-2013, 05:58 AM   #21
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 3,058
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mountainman View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeffrey Gibson View Post
But why would any Christian, not to such prominent ones as Athanasius, or such Christian sympathizers like Constantine, give a rats ass about a purely philosophical dispute over, or a notice of, what a pagan philosopher said, let alone view it as in any way threatening to their concept of what God did in the incarnation -- which ultimately was what the Arian controversy was about?
The Arian controversy was a reaction to the appearance of the Jesus figure and the New Testament as the holy writ of the sceptical Greek world.
Here we go again! Back now to saying without any proof that the referent of the "he" each of Arius' sophisms was Jesus.

I wish you'd keep your claims straight.

Jeffrey
Jeffrey Gibson is offline  
Old 03-30-2013, 01:06 PM   #22
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Bronx, NY
Posts: 945
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeffrey Gibson View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by mountainman View Post



My position is that Arius was trying to deal with the sudden and unexpected "elevation to the purple" of the new testament bible story figure of Jesus over the traditional ideas of divinity. My claim is that these traditional ideas of divinity, at that time c.325 CE, were Platonic and that Plotinus (in his "Enneads", preserved in Porphyry) recapitulated the Platonic literature.

In dealing with John's connection of the purportedly historical Jesus with the Greek logos, Arius was pointing out that the logos is not the same as the Plotinic conception of the (supreme) One (whom the Christians call the God Father).
Please show me where even Plotinus says that the Logos was the same as the One.

Jeffrey
They are the same. That they usually appear to be different is a question of vantage point. In a mingling with the one, in a "oneness", such as Plotinus experienced four times, there is no distinction, there's only one. But away from such a union, we perceive the one through the logos.

Lecture here.
Horatio Parker is offline  
Old 03-30-2013, 03:22 PM   #23
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Mondcivitan Republic
Posts: 2,550
Default

Horatio,

The videos in the link will not run.

DCH

Quote:
Originally Posted by Horatio Parker View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeffrey Gibson
Please show me where even Plotinus says that the Logos was the same as the One.
They are the same. That they usually appear to be different is a question of vantage point. In a mingling with the one, in a "oneness", such as Plotinus experienced four times, there is no distinction, there's only one. But away from such a union, we perceive the one through the logos.

Lecture here.
DCHindley is offline  
Old 03-30-2013, 03:38 PM   #24
Contributor
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: nowhere
Posts: 15,747
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DCHindley View Post
Horatio,

The videos in the link will not run.
He was using a mobile URL. Try here.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Horatio Parker View Post

They are the same. That they usually appear to be different is a question of vantage point. In a mingling with the one, in a "oneness", such as Plotinus experienced four times, there is no distinction, there's only one. But away from such a union, we perceive the one through the logos.

Lecture here.
spin is offline  
Old 03-30-2013, 04:23 PM   #25
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Bronx, NY
Posts: 945
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by spin View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by DCHindley View Post
Horatio,

The videos in the link will not run.
He was using a mobile URL. Try here.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Horatio Parker View Post

They are the same. That they usually appear to be different is a question of vantage point. In a mingling with the one, in a "oneness", such as Plotinus experienced four times, there is no distinction, there's only one. But away from such a union, we perceive the one through the logos.

Lecture here.
Now I see: m.youtube.com

Stupid ipad...(I don't mean that)

Thanks Spin
Horatio Parker is offline  
Old 03-31-2013, 06:47 PM   #26
Contributor
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Falls Creek, Oz.
Posts: 11,192
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeffrey Gibson View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by mountainman View Post
Were there "many philosophers" in attendance at the Council of Nicaea?

How do you answer this question Jeffrey?
Do you answer it with a yes or a no?
I answer it by asking what this is quote from and whether the Greek word for "philosopher" stands behind the expression you have in quotes, and if it does, what meaning the term bore" at the time in which the writer of your quote wrote.

Fr. 5.6 from Philip of Side, Fragments: Supporters of Arius at the Council of Nicaea


Quote:

Anonymous Ecclesiastical History 2.12.8-10

[p. 47, lines 5-19 Hansen][160]

(8) When these things were expressed by them—or rather, through them, by the Holy Spirit—those who endorsed Arius' impiety were wearing themselves out with murmuring (these were the circles of Eusebius of Nicomedia and Theognis of Nicaea, whom I have already pointed out earlier), and yet they were looking with favor on the "hirelings" of Arius, certain philosophers who were indeed very good with words; Arius had hired them as supporters of his own wickedness, and arrived with them at that holy and ecumenical council.

(9) For there were present very many philosophers; and having put their hopes in them, as I have said just now, the enemies of the truth were reasonably caught, along with the one who actually taught them their blasphemy. The Holy Scripture was fulfilled in him and in them, which says, "Cursed is everyone who has his hope in a mortal man, and whose heart has departed from the Lord."[161]

(10) For truly, the blasphemous heart of the fighter against God, Arius, and of those who shared in his impiety, departed from the Lord—they dared to say that the Son of God, the creator of the universe and the craftsman of both visible and invisible created natures, is something created and something made.




εὐδαιμονία | eudaimonia
mountainman is offline  
Old 03-31-2013, 06:51 PM   #27
Contributor
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Falls Creek, Oz.
Posts: 11,192
Default

Thanks very much Horatio for the link to Pierre Grimes: Plotinus' The Good or The One

I am finding this quite fascinating.


Can anyone advise what Greek term Plotinus used for "The Good"?





εὐδαιμονία | eudaimonia
mountainman is offline  
Old 04-02-2013, 04:33 PM   #28
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 3,058
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Horatio Parker View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeffrey Gibson
Please show me where even Plotinus says that the Logos was the same as the One.

Jeffrey
They are the same. That they usually appear to be different is a question of vantage point. In a mingling with the one, in a "oneness", such as Plotinus experienced four times, there is no distinction, there's only one. But away from such a union, we perceive the one through the logos.

Lecture here.
Please give me texts from Plotinus where Plotinus says the Logos is the same as "the One".

Jeffrey
Jeffrey Gibson is offline  
Old 04-02-2013, 04:46 PM   #29
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 3,058
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mountainman View Post
T.


Can anyone advise what Greek term Plotinus used for "The Good"?
Why do you not know this already?

FYI, it is τὸ ἀγαθὸν.

Jeffrey
Jeffrey Gibson is offline  
Old 04-02-2013, 07:08 PM   #30
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Bronx, NY
Posts: 945
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeffrey Gibson View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Horatio Parker View Post

They are the same. That they usually appear to be different is a question of vantage point. In a mingling with the one, in a "oneness", such as Plotinus experienced four times, there is no distinction, there's only one. But away from such a union, we perceive the one through the logos.

Lecture here.
Please give me texts from Plotinus where Plotinus says the Logos is the same as "the One".

Jeffrey
Plotinus does not say that. And I didn't say that he did.

I said they are the same, but not without qualification, a critical qualification.

The Logos is a view of the One from a lower reality. There is always a relationship, a context, as these things exist as much(or more) internally in the psyche as externally.

Quote:
It is the soul that desires to know. Therefore the soul must examine it's own nature in order to know itself...
I put it the way I did to emphasize the ubiquity of the One, without which there is no reality, a point often lost, especially among those who attempt to read Platonic metaphysics as a flow chart or a set of stereo instructions.

Quote:
We call the Intelligence the image of the One
In discussing it now, we can only speak of it's image, because to be in union with the One itself there is nothing but the One.
Horatio Parker is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 05:26 PM.

Top

This custom BB emulates vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.