Attention: Starting December 14, 2019 Yahoo Groups will no longer host user created content on its sites. New content can no longer be uploaded after October 28, 2019. Sending/Receiving email functionality is not going away, you can continue to communicate via any email client with your group members. Learn More
- Nov 21, 2018Hello Stephen,One thing you should keep in mind is that the apostle Paul was not really understood at all by his immediate followers. Christianity quickly became, for most of its gentile converts, the preaching of one God (as opposed to polytheism) and the imparting of a high moral code.You might know of the church of Marcion where the OT was rejected, and almost all of what was becoming the NT was rejected except, I think, Paul and the Gospel of Luke. Also Gnosticism certainly knew the OT but only to attack it.At any rate, there has been all sorts of history.We can only rejoice at the very strong affirmation of the OT in the Protestant scholarship and theology especially after WWII.John-----Original Message-----
From: stephen theron stephentheron@... [hegel] <hegel@yahoogroups.com>
To: hegel@yahoogroups.com <hegel@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Tue, Nov 20, 2018 7:43 am
Subject: Re: [hegel] Some thoughts on Jean Wahl
Thanks John, very pleased to get this.Re your first point. The impression I get from Acts and elsewhere is that the Gospel was mostly taken up by the Greek-speaking Jews. Thus the later or "deutero-canonical" OT books (miscalled Apocrypha in some traditions: there are real apocrypha) are and were in Greek, many of them, if I err not (e.g. Book of Wisdom, not sure offhand about Ecclesiasticus (Sirach). But I don't recall exactly the historical reasons for the distinctions, exclusions by some etc. But anyhow, I mean, Greek, the koine, was a language in full use among educated Jews, just as are the major European languages today. Footnote: Matthew of course was written first in Aramaic, I think (and maybe some other documents, proto-docs.?).Yes, Jewish Christianity, the tradition, rather died out. I read about it in Danielou's mammoth history of theology or something similar. But it can, be, perhaps is being, revived. For example, has Geza Vermes, the Catholic priest, really given up Christianity in "reverting" to Judaism? Well, perhaps he has.Incidentally, and totally distracting, I saw in York a pillar, among the Roman ruins there, commemorating Titus's "triumph" of AD 70 at Jerusalem. That was "the world" then. Time fell away, for me.Stephen Theron.From: hegel@yahoogroups.com <hegel@yahoogroups.com> on behalf of John Bardis jgbardis@... [hegel] <hegel@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: 19 November 2018 16:12
To: hegel@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [hegel] Some thoughts on Jean WahlHello Stephen T.,And yet the New Testament is written in Greek.Especially after the fall of Jerusalem in about 70AD virtually all Christians were gentiles.It is almost a miracle in the history of Christianity that what we call the Od Testament was preserved as a holy book for Christians.As you probably know there was a great enthusiasm for ancient Greece in 18th century Germany (coupled with an unfortunate trend towards anti-Semitism). So there was a trend to separate Christianity from Judaism and to see it as the Greek, Hellenistic movement that it truly was.There have been attempts to find Judaism in the Phenomenology of Spirit. But it just isn't there. But finally Hegel does deal with Judaism in his lectures on determinate religion. He sees it there as something of a sibling of the religion of ancient Greece. Both religions are then "sublated" in the religion of ancient Rome--which is then "sublated" in Christianity.There is a development, though, from the lecture manuscript of 1821 to the lectures of 1824. Perhaps due to complaints from his students, the account of Judaism in 1824 is much more favorable than that in 1821.The situation is quite different with Schelling. Schelling was a child prodigy and learned both Hebrew and Arabic at a quite early age. While still in high school he would tutor college students in these languages. After turning way from religion for a number of years, he then turned back to religion in a big way. He then, among other things, became quite a significant Old Testament scholar.And Old Testament scholarship rose to remarkable heights in the German Protestant scholarship of the 19th century (with the Hegel school leading the way in many respects)--which continues even today, especially in America--and with the participation of Catholics since Vatican II.John-----Original Message-----
From: stephen theron stephentheron@... [hegel] <hegel@yahoogroups...com>
To: hegel@yahoogroups.com <hegel@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Mon, Nov 19, 2018 6:40 am
Subject: Re: [hegel] Some thoughts on Jean Wahl
Yet we don't want to forget that Christianity is and ever will be a form of Judaism, the religion of Israel, the "fulfilled" form, namely. My impression is that Hegel became more aware of and gave increasing place to this in later years, which is not to say that he especially emphasised it.Stephen Theron.From: hegel@yahoogroups.com <hegel@yahoogroups.com> on behalf of John Bardis jgbardis@... [hegel] <hegel@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: 18 November 2018 22:26
To: hegel@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [hegel] Some thoughts on Jean WahlHello Stephen,The section isn't as vague as all that. Of course we would have to look at it. It certainly begins, though, in the situation of Rome. And really one could just as well say it begins with just the general situation. To a large extent this would be determined by the influence of Platonism in some form or another. But it has absolutely nothing to do with Judaism. And, whatever the general situation from which it starts, it very quickly becomes explicitly about Christianity. So Christianity is not really the unhappy consciousness as such. It is rather the eventual cure for the unhappy consciousness.The Unhappy Consciousness is quite explicitly a syllogism. Its three moments are the universal, the particular and the individual moments. So if Wahl only deals with the first two moments of the Unhappy Consciousness--then that is obviously completely inadequate.The first moment of the Unhappy Consciousness--where God is all and man and the world is nothing--is the unhappy consciousness in its proper form..... This gives the name to the development. But it is a development. It is a syllogism. It is not a simple thing. But perhaps Wahl presents it like this, dealing with only the first moment to any extent. Perhaps this has led to the habit, by Sartre for instance, of referring to the unhappy consciousness as a thing rather than a syllogism. And ever since then we hear talk about the unhappy consciousness as though it were a thing--as though it were only its first moment.And perhaps in the beginning it is necessary just to try to convey one simple idea from Hegel. Perhaps that was all that Wahl could hope to do back then. But today we should be able to engage with the whole section, with the whole syllogism. After all it ain't that long. What? Did Wahl just get bored or something that he only went 2/3 the way through?John-----Original Message-----
From: 'Stephen Cowley' stephen.cowley@... [hegel] <hegel@yahoogroups.com>
To: hegel <hegel@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Sun, Nov 18, 2018 4:04 pm
Subject: Re: [hegel] Some thoughts on Jean Wahl
I’m note sure about that. Epicureanism would fit the bill about as well – at least in the more pious form it is given by Diogenes Laertius. Neo-Platonism led on to Gnosticism and according to its way of thinking the pure beyond is accessible to the intellect, plus “What is there is also here” as Plotinus says, if I remember correctly. The section is couched in such general terms that one guess is as good as another. Perhaps it is supposed to apply to any situation where the traditional order of faith has broken down, or been trampled down by the Roman Legions....Stephen CowleyFrom: jgbardis@... [hegel]Sent: Saturday, November 17, 2018 3:14 PMSubject: Re: Fw: [hegel] Some thoughts on Jean WahlHello Stephen,Yes, to say that the unhappy consciousness has to do with Judaism is incorrect. As you point out, obviously Judaism is not a third to Stoicism and Skepticism. The true third to Stoicism and Skepticism, where God is everything and we are nothing, would be Neo-Platonism.This Neo-Platonism very quickly becomes Christianity--and Judaism doesn't enter in at all. Hegel does attempt to correct this in his lectures on determinate religion.The third form of the unhappy consciousness, by the way, has to do with the confession and forgiveness of sins to a priest. The priest, as the mediator between God and man, is then transformed into the embodiment of reason. And the forgiven person becomes more or less happy. This forgiveness is a precursor to the mutual forgiveness between the beautiful soul and the agent later in the book.John - << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>