www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life Scripture and Patristic Writings Romans 5:19

But what that really means is truth itself is unknowable.

From G.E. Lessing
The value of man does not consist in the truth which he possesses, or means to possess, but in the sincere pain which he hath taken to find it out. For his powers do not augment by possessing truth, but by investigating it, wherein consists his only perfectibility. Possession lulls the energy of man, and makes him idle and proud. If God held inclosed in his right hand absolute truth, and in his left only the inward lively impulse toward truth, and if He said to me: Choose! even at the risk of exposing mankind to continual erring, I most humbly would seize His left hand, and say: Father, give! absolute truth belongs to Thee alone.

My favorite quote from Lessing.

One of the many reasons I would guess Herr Lessing was not on the good side of the church authorities!

AMM:

The Truth is Jesus Christ. He is Truth incarnate. He is knowable. We "know" Him, not as an intellectual exercise, but by the living experience of being part of a faith community and asking for the gift of faith in Him that can come as part of being incorporated into Him by Baptism. Here "know" has its Biblical meaning: to have an intimate relationship with; akin to the marital relationship.

As my pastor preached--the sermon that triggered my own pilgrimage at the age of six--"Faith is a gift. It is a gift you have to ask for. Not everyone has it because they do not ask for it. When you ask, you must continue to ask and ask and ask and ask until you get it. God does not just give His gifts on the first request. A man must persist in his asking for God's gifts, especially the gift of faith. There are probably many people in this church this morning who do not have the gift of faith. They may know all the prayers. They may know all the right actions. But they do not have the gift of faith that carries a man through life's troubles to the Kingdom."

I can tell you it takes time. It took me nearly a year before things started to "kick in" and my prayer seemed answered.

In Christ,

BOB

Well, Germany in the 18th century was quite the interesting place. Frederick of Prussia made it a law that scholars had academic freedom. Lessing never got in trouble with the Church. In fact, the only real controversy concerning Lessing happened after his death, when Friedrich Jacobi published correspondence between Lessing and Jacobi on pantheism. Lessing was a pantheist and he also hinted that he believed in reincarnation. Anyway, German theologians were given a wide range of latitude in the 18th and 19th centuries. That is not to say that no one ever got in trouble. Jacobi managed to get Fichte fired for atheism because of some things Fichte had written (Fichte was not an atheist, he was misinterpreted). But Schleiermacher was official court preacher in Berlin and didn't have any problems.

The German Enlightenment was quite different from the French and English Enlightenments. Intellectuals in Germany were not typically hostile to the Church as they were in France and as some were in England. They certainly advocated a heretodox view of Christianity, but for the most part, they stayed in the good graces of the Church (the state Lutheran Church that is). In part this could be because none of the major German thinkers sought to dismantle the Church. They were interested only in reforming the theology of the Church.

Joe

Yes, this is very different Bob. Christ as the Truth is the Truth as a person. Lessing was talking about propositional truth grasped by the intellect.

Joe

I thought I remember he was in some controversy over something. This article says the following:


http://www.kirjasto.sci.fi/lessing.htm

That does show that even despite any controversy he may have been in, he pretty much continued to function as normal, which I think does say a lot about the atmosphere in Prussia as you mentioned.

I think the faith of Lessing is that there is a truth out there, and that the joy of life is the process of attempting to ascertain as much of the truth as we can grasp to the extent our intellect is capable. There is no actual knowable truth which we can objectively point to. You can see the seeds of post-modernism in a person like Lessing.

The "gift of faith" then in my interpretation of someone like Lessing is that we have the gift of intellect which allows us to grow and try and reach the truth. We've been given the power of reason and cognition. It is the tools to build a faith that is the gift, not the faith itself. It's something of a reversal of what's being talked about here.

In also think the Pauline view does not make sense in the view of Lessing, since the choice of Adam doesn't represent a fall from an ideal state. It is a waking up to the power to choose and seek, even if the choice is wrong, and that is really the fullest extent of being human. I think the quote you posted, which is a great one, shows that for someone like Lessing the Garden of Eden would not have been paradise. Paradise is the ability to discern, to choose, to fail, but to succeed on one's one - it's freedom. The idea that we are born in to a state of fallenness I don't think works for this faith either, since without the power of cognition we can be neither fallen nor risen.

JOE:

And this is the very place where Christianity slams into the Enlightenment. Tot the Enlightenment, truth is reduced to an intellectual exercise that can then become ethereal. But we have the answer to Pontius Pilate's question, "What is truth?" He stands in our midst each time "two or three are gathered together in My Name."

For us, then, we are talking on two different planets and from two radically different starting points.

In Christ,

BOB

I think the product of the Enlightenment is not that truth is an intellectual exercise, but that truth is substantiated through observation and empirical evidence; and therein lies the conflict.

There are limits to the 'new science' brought forth by the Enlightenment. That is because its measure of truth is anthropocentric. That way of knowing is a flawed method of understanding metaphysics and theology, which can only be known through faith and reason.

I guess if that's true, then that explains why theology is now an obscure discipline and not viewed as a credible mechanism for understanding or explaining natural phenomenon.

There is a difference between God's energies and His essence. There is a difference between His infinity in His Person with us and dwelling among us as the human Person Jesus Christ, and his infinite God-head. It is still Him; and He Is and therefore He is infinite. The difference in our degree of union with Him, in Him, by Him (Father, Son and Spirit).



Respectfully, I disagree. What you just stated is reducing Truth to an intellectual process of observation and deduction. The process of observation and deduction and repeatable tests is the product of the "enlightenment." However, Truth is more than merely that process. Truth is Jesus Christ, the Person who is fully human and fully Divine. That is not a conclusion; that is premise, that was revealed to us by Him and which we accept on faith.

-- John

I think that theology is anthropocentric as well. Any attempt at knowing that involves language is going to be anthropocentric to the extent that it is mediated through linguistic signs. That is one reason the apophatic way is so necessary in true theology. The apophatic way keeps theology from becoming idolatry.

Joe

No, on two points.

First, theology is the direct knowledge and experience of God. Hence, it is not now, nor was it ever, a "credible mechanism for understanding and explaining natural phenomenon." That's the job of science: Athens, not Jerusalem; the academy, not the monastery. Theology can and often does include the mind, but it is not solely or even primarily intellectual. Theology, at least in the Eastern Church, is primarily a matter of the whole man (body, mind and heart/soul) responding to the grace of the Holy Spirit.

Second, theology is an "obscure discipline" in only where faith is lacking. However, I think you intended "theology" in its modern, Western definition: as a kind of religious philosophy. As such, it is indeed an "obscure discipline" when there is little faith and grace; but where faith and grace abound, the intellectual approach can be (and often is) rich, alive and rewarding.

My two cents' worth.

-- John

John,
Very good thoughts. I also think that this is really what St. Anselm meant by "faith seeking understanding." Theology is reflection on our encounter with the energies of God. The best theology simply articulates that encounter in terms that are understandable to people of faith.

Joe