教义发展是什么意思?

N. Russell
{"title":"教义发展是什么意思?","authors":"N. Russell","doi":"10.1093/OSO/9780199644643.003.0005","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This chapter, the first to address ‘the larger questions’, discusses the philosophical and theological context in which Palamas worked. The East made a distinction between the ‘outer wisdom’ of the pagan Greek philosophers and the ‘inner wisdom’ of the Church Fathers. Palamas rejected the parity of the two wisdoms espoused by Barlaam, who argued that ‘truth is one’, but did not repudiate philosophy as such. All parties to the controversy, however, gave priority to the Church Fathers, taking as their chief authority Dionysius the Areopagite. The correct exegesis of Dionysius became central to the debate. Methodological issues that were discussed explicitly include the relationship between dogmatic and mystical theology, and between theology and contemplation, and the correct explication (anaptyxis) of Christological dogma. The chapter concludes with a discussion of the different ways in which theological decisions were made authoritative in the East and in the West.","PeriodicalId":195211,"journal":{"name":"Gregory Palamas and the Making of Palamism in the Modern Age","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-03-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"What does doctrinal development mean?\",\"authors\":\"N. Russell\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/OSO/9780199644643.003.0005\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This chapter, the first to address ‘the larger questions’, discusses the philosophical and theological context in which Palamas worked. The East made a distinction between the ‘outer wisdom’ of the pagan Greek philosophers and the ‘inner wisdom’ of the Church Fathers. Palamas rejected the parity of the two wisdoms espoused by Barlaam, who argued that ‘truth is one’, but did not repudiate philosophy as such. All parties to the controversy, however, gave priority to the Church Fathers, taking as their chief authority Dionysius the Areopagite. The correct exegesis of Dionysius became central to the debate. Methodological issues that were discussed explicitly include the relationship between dogmatic and mystical theology, and between theology and contemplation, and the correct explication (anaptyxis) of Christological dogma. The chapter concludes with a discussion of the different ways in which theological decisions were made authoritative in the East and in the West.\",\"PeriodicalId\":195211,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Gregory Palamas and the Making of Palamism in the Modern Age\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-03-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Gregory Palamas and the Making of Palamism in the Modern Age\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/OSO/9780199644643.003.0005\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Gregory Palamas and the Making of Palamism in the Modern Age","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/OSO/9780199644643.003.0005","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

这一章,第一个解决“更大的问题”,讨论帕拉马斯工作的哲学和神学背景。东方把异教希腊哲学家的“外在智慧”和教父的“内在智慧”区分开来。巴拉姆主张“真理是一体的”,但帕拉马斯拒绝巴拉姆所支持的两种智慧的对等性,但并没有否定哲学。争论的各方,然而,优先考虑教会的父亲,作为他们的主要权威狄奥尼修斯的政教合一。狄奥尼修斯的正确解经成为争论的中心。明确讨论的方法论问题包括教条主义和神秘主义神学之间的关系,神学和沉思之间的关系,以及对基督论教条的正确解释(倒序)。本章最后讨论了在东方和西方,神学决定被赋予权威的不同方式。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
What does doctrinal development mean?
This chapter, the first to address ‘the larger questions’, discusses the philosophical and theological context in which Palamas worked. The East made a distinction between the ‘outer wisdom’ of the pagan Greek philosophers and the ‘inner wisdom’ of the Church Fathers. Palamas rejected the parity of the two wisdoms espoused by Barlaam, who argued that ‘truth is one’, but did not repudiate philosophy as such. All parties to the controversy, however, gave priority to the Church Fathers, taking as their chief authority Dionysius the Areopagite. The correct exegesis of Dionysius became central to the debate. Methodological issues that were discussed explicitly include the relationship between dogmatic and mystical theology, and between theology and contemplation, and the correct explication (anaptyxis) of Christological dogma. The chapter concludes with a discussion of the different ways in which theological decisions were made authoritative in the East and in the West.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信