modern thought/approach to doctrine--foreign to biblical authors?

by M.J. 2 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  M.J.

  I am not knowledgeable when it comes to philosophy, or its history, so I'm hoping some of you can help me out here.
  
  I was wondering just why someone like Paul never clearly and systematically laid out an overall explanation of eschatology, nature of God, etc...at least not in the way any modern commentator would. Which made me wonder: Is our whole way of thinking and arriving at conclusions different from the biblical authors? Do we assume that everything must fit into some kind of overall theory, while they wouldn't assume that such a thing was necessary? Is our thinking the product of a modern scientific approach to the universe? Does this cause us to create conundrums that wouldn't have existed in the minds of the ancient writers?
  
  I'm pretty convinced that the philosophical assumptions borne from the Age of Enlightenment, i.e., reason is the basis for authority, had a lot to do with the explosion of prophetic speculation and "free market" Christianity of the nineteenth century.
  
  This may turn out to be a bust of a thread, but I'm hoping for a little addition to my knowledge in this department.
• 

  Narkissos

  Great questions and intuitions M.J.

  Systematic treatises certainly existed in the Greek intellectual sphere (e.g. Aristotle), but they were not everybody's concern. Most of the N.T. consists in narratives, circumstantial epistles, probably homelies disguised as epistles (e.g. Hebrews or 1 Peter), and apocalypses -- very different literary genres. What comes closest to a theological treatise is the epistle to the Romans (and its object is limited to a few specific issues).

  But generally I think you are quite right in pointing out that any kind of thinking depends on circumstances (which are not only existing ideological constructions but also social, economical structures). Ideas such as Russell's are unthinkable without all a chain of events including Renaissance, the printing press, humanism, Reformation, Enlightenment, industrial revolution and economical liberalism / capitalism. The "free market" of religion follows an economical pattern.

  Foucault once wrote that, in his view, every period of history gives, as far as ideas are concerned, all that which it is capable of giving. This reflects a post-structuralist tendency to tautology (and as such it is also the thought of a definite period of history), but it is worth pondering I think.
• 

  M.J.

  Great thoughts about thought being a product of one's particular milieu.
  
  Perhaps an argument can be made that trying to turn epistles, apocalypses and homilies into systematic treatises becomes an exercise in cherry picking...diverting attention from the actual message.