Philo Judaeus
Philo Judaeus is regarded as one of the greatest Jewish-Hellenistic philosophers of his age. In a majority of his writing he quotes bible verses, speaks of a path to the Lord and does so with such image producing words. While reading Philo it is hard to discern his philosophical views, and surgically placed words, from those influenced of his religious background. He brings fourth an interesting combination of philosopher poet or preacher. Philo Judaeus was very religious and portrayed such in his writings. I believe and assume Philo had as well, that the truly aware man is made up of three parts: the philosopher, the poet and the preacher. Without the other two one cannot truly exist, therefore all of the greats such as Plato, Huxley, Conger and of course Philo must have a been truly aware. For their love of wisdom, endeavor for ultimate reality and their amazing talent for language is unmatched and greatly appreciated all who read their work. Several scholars have used the writings of Philo to explain theological conceptions found in the writings of the Christians, and also to better understand debates and conflicts witnessed in the New Testament.
Philo's words paint a religious picture of heaven and faith. His eyes see a splendor one can only hope to view, and describes a soul every human spirit seeks. The word God has appeared liberally in every piece written by the great man. He uses it with such confidence yet makes sure to keep its use full of meaning, careful to not let it disappear with the other text. In one of Philo's earlier pieces, "The Creation of the world" he describes the intricate thought process God went through in forming this beautiful world we now exist on. He valiantly wrote that, "We must form a similar opinion of God, who, having determined to found a mighty state, first of all conceived its form in his mind, according to which form he made a world perceptive only by the intellect and then completed one visible to the external senses using the first one as a model." (Creation of God 3) He spoke of God not solely for reference but in attempt to persuade his readers to fallow the path of the Lord. In his writing "Confusion" he simply states his love for the church by this one quote, "And therefore, when they say: "We are all sons of one man, we are peaceful" (Genisis 42:11), I marvel at their harmonious band.
Certainly, Socrates’ arguments about the limitations of godly knowledge of the “moral good” devolve the idea of divine command as a cause of piety, but more importantly, it defines the philosophical evaluation of piety as a way to educate Euthyphro to analyze his pre-assumed beliefs with greater conviction. In this dialogue, the issue of the “moral good” becomes a more complex relationship between Euthyphro’s religious and moral perception of philosophy: “I told you a short while ago, Socrates, that it is a considerable task to acquire any precise knowledge of these things” (177). This new perspective defines the effectiveness of Socrates’ argument to dispel the overly confident assumption that the gods approve of piety, since piety has its own unique qualities that need to be defined. This moral and religious relationship is ambiguous because Socrates has opened the possibility of Euthyphro coming to his own conclusions about the gods and the “moral good”, which should be presumed by religious doctrines or in the divine command of the
Phil Jackson’s idea of the nature of God is contrasting, as he believes in Buddhism, which has Buddha, and Humanism, in which there is no God. Jackson considers himself as a Zen Christian. A Zen Christian is a religion that combines the emptiness mind of Buddhists and the compassion of a Christian, such like Christ. Buddhists believe in the nature of the Buddha and idolizing the enlightenment he brings to life. Buddha is not necessarily the deity, but he is highly respected. He believes in the concept of self-awareness, mindfulness, and acceptance, which corresponds with the Pantheistic, Buddhist view of his life (Fittipaldi, 1982, p. 69-71). As for his naturalist, humanist view of life, there is no nature to a God. The humanist believes that a man is apart of nature and there is nothing else that exists outside of the world that he should experience (Norman, 2004, p. 11). The “Christian” part of Zen Christianity lines up with his humanist view due to the belief in compassion. There is a compassion for humans because of Christ and in humanists due to them wanting to be connected. Jackson’s belief in ...
He does this through a heated debate characters of Demea, Cleanthes, and Philo, who each have different perceptions. Demea argues that the nature of God is unknowable and incomprehensible to humans that it is sacrilege to assign God limited and corrupted attributes of human beings. Cleanthes, on the other hand, argues that the nature and existence of God can be determined through human experience, since “no question of fact can be proved otherwise (Hume 44).” Philo argues between Demea and Cleanthes by pinpointing paradoxes and inconsistencies for each line of Demea and Cleanthes’ debate. Therefore, he ultimately believes that nothing can be known with absolute certainty. When arguing of the cause and effect of God’s existence, it is Demea that presents the argument that all human have a sense of God’s existence from “a consciousness of his imbecility and misery” that leads him to “seek protection from that Being on whom he and all nature are dependent (Hume 58).” He continues to state
...ery discussion upon established creeds, and upon first principles of religion, that until the system of government should be changed, those subjects could not be brought fairly and openly before the world; but that whenever this should be done, a revolution in the system of religion would follow.” This reason means that he went to all these churches, and they all preached different things about God. That what they preached they would follow it even if not true.
Philonous questions Hylas to what people know about the world, first inspecting secondary qualities, for example, heat or cold, to demonstrate that such qualities don't exist outside the human mind. Hylas' perspective on the matter is annihilated by Philonous. “But shall we be able to discern those degrees of heat which exist only in the mind, from those which exist without it?” (Berkeley 78). He tries to inspire others to concede that their experience of the world in a general sense includes pain and pleasure and that these senses can't exist in material items. Then he compels others to concede that none of these sensible qualities can exist outside of their brain.
Pico begins his essay by informing his readers that he knows where humans stand in the divine order of the world. Pico believes that humans were the last creatures created by God, and that God's purpose, in creating them, was to fulfill his desire for someone to appreciate the great wonders and beauties of his world:
The four fundamental claims of the Catholic Intellectual Tradition, Human beings exist in a relation to a triune God, God’s presence in the world is mediated through nature and reality, faith and reason are compatible, the dignity of the human being is inviolable and therefore the commitment to justice for the common good is necessary. However, the great books in the Catholic Intellectual tradition show that they represent these fundamental claims in a broad distinctive way. This essay will show that these readings better represent one of the fundamental claims, human beings exist in a relation with a triune God, from the view point of three great books from the bible, Genesis, Exodus and the Gospel of Matthew. The Bible clearly supports the
Throughout this first step, the authors illustrate the dissimilarities of belief and time. However, Paul’s letter to the Galatians urges them to shun untruthful doctrine of the Jewish Christians. Throughout this period, Paul lectures the people that the conflicts of the flesh and the Spirit are huge. For starters, Paul discussions are about the ones that have elected to follow the Spirit and dodge the enticement of immoral needs.
Socrates (470-399 BC) was a credited philosopher born in the city of Athens to father Sophroniscus and mother Phaenarete. Despite his world-renowned contributions, he did not leave any written accounts of his life. His story was taught through the writings of his students Plato and Xenophon, along with Aristotle and Aristophanes in various forms of dramatic texts and histories. Among others, Plato wrote many dialogues that quoted Socrates’ exact words. Much of what we know comes from this greatly influenced student. However, Plato being a literary artist, leads many to think that he brightened up Socrates’ teachings as a result of his positive bias. For this reason, much of his history remains uncertain.
The argument from design discussion occurs in parts two through five of the Dialogues, and begins with Demea professing that what needs to be questioned is God’s nature, not his existence, since all three of the members already agree that God exists. He says that humans are weak and will never be able to understand God’s nature, stating “finite, weak, and blind creatures, we ought to humble ourselves in his august presence, and, conscious of our frailties, adore in silence his infinite perfections, which eye has not seen, ear has not heard, neither has it entered into the heart of man to perceive” (Hume 607). By this, Demea means that understanding God’s nature is beyond the capacity of human understanding, and humans will never have a clear answer regarding it. Philo agrees with Demea on this idea, but also says that he does not assume that God is like humans in any way at all. To defend his argument, he says “Wisdom, thought, design, knowledge— these we justly ascribe to him, because these words are h...
“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance” –George Bernard Shaw. The bodies politic in Plato’s “Allegory of the Cave” and the Bible, the Commonwealth and Israelites, both have shallow beliefs and believe what they know to be true. The Platonic Prisoner, from Plato’s “Allegory of the Cave”, and Moses, from the Book of Exodus in the Bible, both attempt to influence others with their newfound knowledge and wisdom because they feel the obligation to do so.They end up with different overall responses from their body politic as their relationships undergo change. For relationships to function, the bodies politic need to trust each other as well as courage. Relationship also need perseverance to last.
Imagine the time just after the death of Socrates. The people of Athens were filled with questions about the final judgment of this well-known, long-time citizen of Athens. Socrates was accused at the end of his life of impiety and corruption of youth. Rumors, prejudices, and questions flew about the town. Plato experienced this situation when Socrates, his teacher and friend, accepted the ruling of death from an Athenian court. In The Last Days of Socrates, Plato uses Socrates’ own voice to explain the reasons that Socrates, though innocent in Plato’s view, was convicted and why Socrates did not escape his punishment as offered by the court. The writings, “Euthyphro,” “The Apology,” “Crito,” and “Pheado” not only helped the general population of Athens and the friends and followers of Socrates understand his death, but also showed Socrates in the best possible light. They are connected by their common theme of a memoriam to Socrates and the discussion of virtues. By studying these texts, researchers can see into the culture of Athens, but most important are the discussions about relationships in the book. The relationships between the religion and state and individual and society have impacted the past and are still concerns that are with us today.
Philo on the other hands contends that Cleanthes cannot objectively make that claim. Philo recognizes the problems that Cleanthes’s argument of design brings by being a priori, he recognizes how the causes and effects affect the overall argument made by Cleanthes and is able to pin point where it was this was problematic, that order may not necessarily exist due to an intelligent designer, and that since humans where not all knowing like God there were some aspects that Cleanthes argues are just impossible to know with their limited intellect. In part 2 Philo effectively communicates to Cleanthes that his claims could be reduced to speculation as opposed to being regarded as matters of
Philosophy is a subject where there is no sound answer or argument for any question. Plato's beliefs were created through educated assumptions and provide a valid argument. One can continue their journey on this Earth trying to finding true perfection, however the chances are very slim according to Philosophy. Rather, one should embark in a more adventurous journey, a journey into the mind since it is the only housing of true perfection. A journey into a Philo Sophia
Philosophy can be defined as the pursuit of wisdom or the love of knowledge. Socrates, as one of the most well-known of the early philosophers, epitomizes the idea of a pursuer of wisdom as he travels about Athens searching for the true meaning of the word. Throughout Plato’s early writings, he and Socrates search for meanings of previously undefined concepts, such as truth, wisdom, and beauty. As Socrates is often used as a mouthpiece for Plato’s ideas about the world, one cannot be sure that they had the same agenda, but it seems as though they would both agree that dialogue was the best way to go about obtaining the definitions they sought. If two people begin on common ground in a conversation, as Socrates often tries to do, they are far more likely to be able to civilly come to a conclusion about a particular topic, or at least further their original concept.