Amaleq13

Perhaps the specific passage from Paul that I have been continually referencing and continually redirecting your attention to as you have repeatedly wandered off-point?

Elijah

I thought we already established it could be read rationally but you believe it shouldn't because you believe they were supernaturalists. You've provided no evidence of this or how you decide if it should be read supernaturally/irrational or metaphysically/rationally and you don't want to discuss the philosophy at hand (in the philosophical forum no less ) because you think it's a red herring. So tell me, how do we decide if Paul is speaking metaphysically about spirits as natural phenomenon in nature that we are familiar with or about ghosts?

GakuseiDon

I agree. Does quantum mechanics rule out the existence of demons and magic? No, AFAIK. Similarly, platonism doesn't appear to have ruled out the supernatural back then. I agree it was rational, but I'm unaware of anyone using platonism as an attempt to rule out the supernatural. If you know of anything along those lines, I'd love to read it.

I find that a remarkable statement, I'm afraid. To my eyes, Tertullian clearly believed in the existence of demon spirits. Which leads to this:

What do you mean by he thought that angels and demons were rational? Do you mean, he believed they existed, but that their existence fitted in with platonic thought? Or he believed they didn't exist?

Elijah

IMO A basic understanding of physics rules out demons and magic; before you ever get to the quantum/ideal thinking. You can misunderstand metaphysics as having supernatural thinking (as in post #30 by yourself) but once you have a basic understanding of the metaphysics of the time that should be dead.

Are you unaware that the philosophers were about reason and against how the people commonly understood god? The very paper you sent me is about a reasonable platonically influenced Christian tearing down a superstitious position of a pagan.

But what is his understanding of demons and spirit? The cartoon understanding you are accusing him of, or a natural understanding? I posted many references which I think show a natural philosophy influence; please post what you think demonstrates a supernatural foundation. (I really thought you knew he would help my case here, or hadn’t read it at all.)
His understanding of angel and demon he considered rational. Like today someone could say that someone has a demon in them when in reality they just have a faulty/destructive meme running amok. No one rationally believes that the memes are of supernatural origin today and there is no reason to believe he thought it then other than preconceived notions.

bacht

But we would not have you ignorant, brethren, concerning those who are asleep, that you may not grieve as others do who have no hope.
For since we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so, through Jesus, God will bring with him those who have fallen asleep.
For this we declare to you by the word of the Lord, that we who are alive, who are left until the coming of the Lord, shall not precede those who have fallen asleep.
For the Lord himself will descend from heaven with a cry of command, with the archangel's call, and with the sound of the trumpet of God. And the dead in Christ will rise first;
then we who are alive, who are left, shall be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air; and so we shall always be with the Lord.
Therefore comfort one another with these words. 1Thes.4

So this is not connected to Jewish apocalyptic expectations going back at least to Daniel? This is philosophical rather than eschatological?

GakuseiDon

His understanding appears to be the cartoon one I am accusing him of, I'm afraid.

Elijah

What evidence please?

GakuseiDon

Tertullian, Apology:
http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0301.htm

From dwelling in the air, and their [demons'] nearness to the stars, and their commerce with the clouds, they have means of knowing the preparatory processes going on in these upper regions, and thus can give promise of the rains which they already feel.

I just can't see Tertullian talking about memes here.

Elijah

Resurrection of the dead isn’t directly related to philosophy but to some of the principals in metaphysics.
The Jews weren’t known as believers in reincarnation or of an afterlife so a physical resurrection of the dead was necessary for eternal life. The reason they didn’t believe in afterlife was because they didn't see a place in their world view for you to go live after you die which is in my mind the key principle of supernaturalism, an alternate realm where magical entities live and go about their lives.

Elijah

How about other spiritual but natural phenomenon.