/lit/ - Literature

greece is only special in that its material survived

Socrates decided to listen to the voice in his head.

>>4381352
chinese and babylonian evidence also remained. However sciences in Babylon and China was only done to reach a certain purpose. Admitetly this was also the case in Greece - Socrates anyone?

>>4381368
>However sciences in Babylon and China was only done to reach a certain purpose.
2/10

>>4381356
This is also what Abraham did.

Tbh OP, the answer is because God wanted to reveal himself in some way to the Greeks. Plato's thought is quite close to Christianity in many ways and Aristotle and he have been greatly influential in the Church. I think that Socrates/Plato/Aristotle was God preparing the Gentile world for Christianity.
Socrates resembles one of the Old Testament prophets in many ways.

If you want an example of how close Plato is to Christianity read The Republic. There is a point where he chastises Homer for his polytheism and says that God could not assume many different forms because that would imply that something perfect (and God is obviously perfect) could become something else, i.e. something less than perfect. This is quite close to Christian theology. There's also a point in the book where a man, I think it's Glaucon, asks Socrates to prove that a man who is good but who suffers and is hated by other men is a happier man than a man that is evil but lives a life of pleasure and approval by other men. That man that is good but who lives a life of suffering is a prototype for Christ. It's uncanny when you read it.

>>4381346
read the origins of greek thought by J.-P. Vernant it's exactly what you're looking for. essential book

as for what made ancient greeks special : nothing really, Confucius worked in the same era as the presocratics. the greek did awesome shit but the idea that they were a 'chosen people' is pretty dated and ideologically connotated

god damnit.

>>4381373

>God wanted to reveal himself in some way to the Greeks

That doesn't make any sense. Why would he and how do you know?

>>4381494
>That doesn't make any sense. Why would he and how do you know?

Like I said, to prepare the Gentile world for Christianity (which took a lot from Judaism).

>how do you know?

I don't, it's speculation.

>>4381513
That God exists at all is speculation, and worse yet, that he's anything like the Bible describes.

>>4381373
>and says that God could not assume many different forms because that would imply that something perfect (and God is obviously perfect) could become something else, i.e. something less than perfect

how is that Christian? Christ was God who became human, suffered and died.

I don't think you're wrong, I'm just wondering how the church fathers accounted for this.

>>4381532
*tip*

>>4381537
>I don't think you're wrong, I'm just wondering how the church fathers accounted for this.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypostasis_%28philosophy_and_religion%29

God did not "become human". Christ existed In the beginning. "Before Abraham was, I am".

God the Father and God the Son have the same substance.

>>4381551
here's a better link
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07610b.htm

>>4381545
Denying God does not make me an atheist.

I'm an agnostic, if anything, but I whether or not God exists, I don't know why we'd base his rules, laws, "personality", and history off of the Bible, nor do I understand why "God" has to be the Abrahamic God. Why not something like the gods of the Hindus, for instance?

>>4381572
According to some Hindus, Jesus was an incarnation of Brahman, as was the Buddha and some other guys.

>>4381572
The difference between the Abrahamic God and the gods of the Hindus is great.
The greatest sin in Judaism, Christianity and Islam has always been idolatry - the worship of false gods.

The first of the Ten Commandments is "thou shalt have no other gods before Me".
There is a philosophical/theological difference between the Abrahamic God and the pagan gods of the Hindus, the ancient Greeks/Romans, the Aztecs/Incans, the Norsemen, the Egyptians and the Canaanites around at the time of Abraham.

This is the main difference - the pagan gods are many, the "Abrahamic" God is one. God is the creator of the Universe. "The gods" are merely aspects of creation. Worshipping God is worshipping the creator and the lawgiver. Worshipping "the gods" is worshipping a part of creation. God is divine, the divine is God.

"The gods" merely are divine, some of them have beards, some have them have four arms, some of them have animal heads, and they all have divinity. Divinity is just an attribute that they have and that they happen to share. In God divinity is not something that can be divided or shared, because that would imply that it could be diluted.

The gods are like superhumans, they are humans in the sense that they have passions/moods/personalities, and they are super in that they have more power than humans. God is not human, he does not have passions or moods, his will does not change.

The very concept of "God" is different to the pagan "gods". "God" is not one god among many, philosophically or theologically. He is not like Zeus in that he is merely the strongest or most powerful of the gods. No, he is divinity itself, he is godliness. Nothing is god except he. When Moses asked God what his name was he answered, "I AM THAT I AM". He is being itself, he is the thing that says "I am". God is not one being among many, he is the very "thing" (he is not a thing) which makes being or thing-ing possible. Everything that has existence depends upon God for that existence. Nobody depends upon "the gods" for their very existence, "the gods" just inhabit a "higher plane" of existence, they are stronger and have a broader influence.

The reason why God hates the worship of other gods is because the worship of "gods" is the worship of nature, of creation. When a pagan looks at a statue of Venus, for example, and in his spirit bows to it as divine - that's an insult to God, it's applying the substance of God (divinity) to something that is not divine (nature, in this case the nature of femininity/fertility as embodied by Venus). We are part of creation, Venus is part of creation, Ares is part of creation, etc. For us to worship Venus or any other god as divine means that one part of creation is worshipping another part of creation, which is disordered/dysfunctional, as its proper for creation to worship its creator.

Because Democritus.

[spoilers]Also entitled my new childrens book about a 12 year old discovering the unseen world of chemicals [/spoiler]

>>4381585
Maybe that's true, and maybe that's not.

I just don't think we should be using Christ and the Abrahamic God as the basis for the idea of God.

>>4381346
> Was it democracy?
No, ancient Athens was democratic for mere two centuries out of nine in ancient Greece.

>mfw Archimedes literally used the power of the Sun to burn enemy ships

Was he the first mad scientist?

>>4381691
for the last time, if he constructs things it is not evil science, it is evil engineering

>>4381747
Evil applied physics?

>>4381373
>Tbh OP, the answer is because God wanted to reveal himself in some way to the Greeks.

>>4381691
>dealing with your enemies
>mad

only in emasculated 2013

>>4382924
>his enemies
>implying Archimedes' services weren't paid for by the king

Because of philosophy.
Because they began to ask themselves about things.
Because they spoke to each other about the things they understood.
Because they shared their knowledge with each other, and came with imaginative solutions to problems.
Because they gave a sense to their world, and generated it for westerners in the move.

And I would like to imagine, because Atlantis.

>>4381631
oh man I just got a huge head rush reading this...and a mind boner

>>4381513
you fucking JIDF SUN A BITCH

>>4381631

>God does not have passion or moods, his decisions do not change

What about when Jonah goes to Nineva? It clearly says that God was planning to destroy the city, but the people's repentance caused him to feel sympathy and call off Armageddon. It's been years since I read the Bible and I'm sure there are more examples then that, but especially in the Old Testament, God is not the emotionless, perfectly rational figure you're making him out to be

>>4381373

Christianity is close to Platonism because of Plato's influence on the ancient world and not the other way around.

>>4381631
>>4382957
That's true. And God admits that he is a jealous bitch

>>4381631
> canttelliftrollorserious.jpeg

In any case since no thing can come from nothing but god (who always is in every possibility, and always has been) the world must have been made from gods own essence. And since god is perfect the world must thus be perfect, as it is a part of god. Thus the worship of pagan gods is fine, for they are merely devoting themselves to one aspect of god.

>>4381631
why would Elohim be jealous, if there are no other gods? Unless, of course, he was a flawed being unfit for his job and the worship of other gods actually worked to the benefit of the worshippers.

>>4381346
Because the philosophers asserted that we ought to value truth itself and not pure practicality. This is a strong European value (per-19th century) in opposition to the relativism and practical ideology of Eastern cultures.

>>4383485
Pre-19yh century. Typo.

>>4383471
Humanity can understand jealousy and God reveals himself in ways which man is capable of understanding.

>>4381346
lol it was because the greeks had slaves to give them free time to loaf around and think about philosophy. same with the romans.

>>4383502

>begins post with 'lol'

Lol didn't read

>>4383518
lol haha...lol

>>4383502

Spartans had a gazillian of helots and they didn't philosophy.

>>4383709
Because it was so unmanly.

>>4381545

>post reddit age
>believing in god

it's like i don't even have to argue with you
we zeitgeist now

>>4383471
>why would Elohim be jealous, if there are no other gods?

This is how I explain it. Imagine seeing your wife flirting with a moron that would abuse and leave her if he ever got her hands on her. You are jealous because A. your wife rightfully ought to love you and not be flirting with other men, B. your wife is best off loving you who care for her and not a man who doesn't care for her at all. This is why God is a "jealous god", because we owe Him our love (because He's our creator), and so when he sees us loving false "gods" instead of Him He is rightfully indignant. See, God wants us to love Him, "the gods" do not care whether you love them, they just want to make a transaction with you (like child sacrifice in exchange for a good crop yield). God wants your heart, in the same way that a man wants his wife's heart. And so when God sees men flirting with deities that don't really give a shit about them it "upsets" Him (of course, God being "jealous" and "upset" are anthropomorphisms, but they do express a theological truth - that our hearts rightfully belong to God and not to idols).

>>4383974
are jews the most idolatrous religious group

>>4384591
The modern jews that follow the talmud, yes. The ancient israelites that followed the mosaic law, not at all - they were the best people back then.

>>4381346
>dem dreds
You're now aware that Gabriel was rasta as fuck.

>>4387326
Why is Talmud idolatrous?

I know Karaite Judaism doesn't follow it and supposedly it's purer and closer to the original Judaism, but why is Talmud idolotry?

>>4387385


the talmud is full of all kinds of shit.

>>4387326
>The ancient israelites that followed the mosaic law, not at all - they were the best people back then

Yup, what with all the prophets telling them to keep up the good work and not to turn away from their ways etc.

>>4387412
/pol/ pls go
you obiviously don't know shit about talmudic depth

>>4387412
/pol/ pls go
you don't know shit about talmudic depth

>>4387412
anybody who tries to "cite" Talmud like that obviously doesn't know shit about what the Talmud is or how it works.

>>4381370

I don't know about Babylon and China but I know in Egypt all of their "muh mathematics" was for plotting land out; they never got into the abstract stuff the Greeks did.

>>4382957

The Bible anthropomorphizes God for didactic purposes.

>>4387412

Half that shit isn't even in the Talmud it's in obscure medieval rabbinical pamphlets and shit. And what's in the Talmud, half of THAT is just reporting the opinion of a rabbi which isn't accepted by the other rabbis. The Talmud presents "bad" opinions - "Rabbi Jonas ben Abraham said it was okay to pick peanuts on the Sabbath, but he was laughed out of the room" etc. And of the rest, it's misinterpreted - interpreting the Talmud is extremely difficult and requires years of study and an intimate familiarity with Hebrew and Aramaic.

You just put something anti-semitic into google image search.

>>4381356
the "daemon"?

>>4381537
>In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
>The same was in the beginning with God.
>All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.
>In him was life; and the life was the light of men.
>And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not.

Don't be mistaken by the modern Protestant interpretation. Protestantism came about as a reaction against Aquinas's scholasticism. They felt it was an introduction of foreign, pagan elements, when really it was a rediscovery of the wisdom which first produced Christianity.

In the Gospels, Christ is literally the Word of God become a man. Typically this is assumed to be a symbolic restatement of Christ as the Son of God, but it's the Son of God attribution that's symbolic, the Word is physical and real. The Incarnation isn't so simply "God became man" as you may have heard, it is "the Word made flesh". A man was born who both perfectly spoke the Truth and perfectly embodied the Truth.This is what was meant when Jesus said "I have not come to abolish the Law, but to fulfill it." He was the fulfillment of the Law, as he was the Law.

Christianity isn't "belief" for the sake of "belief", that makes no sense. Christianity is living as Christ did, the perfect being, like the unaffected Buddha or the stoic Sage impossible to harm. Christ lived in such a way, and died in such a way, that his life was synonymous with his teachings. He was his teachings. For "I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me."

>>4389658
lol forgot image

Nobody smart posts on /lit/ and that's a fact.

It's a fact. This is a forum for fuck-ups and retards.

>>4389658
> literally the Word of God become a man
is it me or this smells pomo?

>>4381346
It's all Thales' fault

>>4381631
>God is not human, he does not have passions or moods, his will does not change.
You confuse your fanfic for the canon.

>>4381631
>God is not human, he does not have passions or moods, his will does not change.

He is not indeed. You are, though. Why, then, are you even trying to comprehend how does its ``mind'' work? Why are you even assuming it is possible? Who is the highest power, him or you?
At least Calvin had the guts to admit that it doesn't make any sense.

>>4381346
How does Greece have the reputation of being democratic? Even Athens was incredibly restrictive in its 'democracy', wasn't it? And isn't the tyrant a greek phenomena?

>>4389721
Yes, but they were the first to recognize all this.

>>4389686
>Why, then, are you even trying to comprehend how does its ``mind'' work?

I am not at all. I can't know God's mind. I can know that God's mind is infinite. I can't know what the infinite really is because I am limited.

>>4388472
>>4388478
>>4388511
>>4389631
“Goyim were born only to serve us. Without that, they have no place in the world – only to serve the People of Israel.”

“Why are gentiles needed? They will work, they will plow, they will reap. We will sit like an effendi and eat… That is why gentiles were created."

Now don't come telling me that Ovadia didn't understand the Talmud and that he had no influence in Israel.

>>4390664
"The Jewish People have lost one of the wisest men of his generation." - Benjamin Netanyahu, Prime Minister of Israel

>worshipping dead kike on stick

ok

>>4390664
This is grossly anti-semitic. You should seek professional help, or maybe visit a Holocaust museum in order to grasp the pain that the Jewish people have suffered.

>>4388472


indeed the talmud has depth, you can find a sophism for justifying pretty much anything you want with the right interpretation! god bless talmudic scholarship.

>>4381373
That's thrasymachus the sophist that poses that question just a heads up, right before the story of the ring of gyges

>>4391007
Interestingly, Ovadia Yosef argues that the victims of the Holocaust deserved it because they were bad people and didn't follow G-d's commandments.

>>4381346
>I know mathematics and physics together with other sciences were active all around in the ancient world.
Nope.

Go read Kuhn and Popper.

>>4389668

Traditional theology.

>>4392102
I love how ignorant some cunts are, eh?

Also, given you seem inclined to know: when I stick my dick in the bible, does that mean that I've fucked the logos. Answer in relation to the effability of divine knowledge.

>>4389658
>Don't be mistaken by the modern Protestant interpretation. Protestantism came about as a reaction against Aquinas's scholasticism.
I thought it was all the abuses and corruption of the Church did that. Martin Luther's 99 Theses was basically sperging over all the shit the Church says but doesn't do.

>>4392189
Martin Luther was yet another late medieval heretic who was saved by the Princes of Germany breaking with Rome for fiscal reasons.

If you want to see the real word in that era, go ask the Anabaptist peasants and artisans.

Luther: Bad on Theology, Bad on Nobility. He was just another fucking Anti-Pope.

>>4381631
The Hindus have this too. Brahman is the undivided essence of divinity and the gods are powerful beings who are closer to Brahman than we are. Not really different than the Catholic tradition of sainthood, only these saints personify elemental and primal forces.

>>4392202
>If you want to see the real word in that era, go ask the Anabaptist peasants and artisans.

Did they leave records?

>>4392214
>Did they leave records?
Usually their trials for death. Also their programme, religious tracts, wood blocks, records of their revolutionary town councils. Blisset's _Q_ is a decent enough novelisation. Or you can read Engel's German Peasants War.

OMNIA SUNT COMMUNIA