Search Results (3)

After the rise of Christianity in the Roman Empire and the introduction of Buddhism into China, Christianity and Buddhism were both faced with the adjustment of the existing society. In the Roman Empire, faced with some censure, apologists began to write articles to clarify misunderstandings and express their beliefs. At the same time, there are similar argumentative documents on Buddhism in China. Their argumentation ideas also have many similarities, such as, firstly, distinguishing them from the original ideas, then using the existing ideas, and finally, actively integrating them into existing society. However, there are some bigger differences in the background of the debate between the Roman Empire and China—Christianity has strong political independence. The most fundamental difference is the atmosphere of the existing ruling ideology—China has been Confucianized, and the political independence of Confucianism is relatively weak. It is this fundamental difference that finally led to the final difference in the development paths of Christianity in the Roman Empire and Buddhism in China, which then affected their historical paths. Full article

The article presents the theological ideas and mystical–religious teachings of the Greek-Byzantine Church Fathers, which, at the same time, are philosophical because Byzantine theologians also reflected on human and their life, on the relationship between man and God, on the possibilities of God-cognition and obtaining higher sacred knowledge. Based on the analysis of the anthropological and epistemological ideas of the Greek Church Fathers, we highlight that philosophizing was always at the heart of Byzantine theology. Therefore, the Byzantine tradition of the Church Fathers is considered a unique type of philosophy of religion, which originated in the historical formation of the Christian faith in the era of the Triadic and Christological theological debates of the 4th to 7th centuries. This article reflects the teachings of three of the brightest thinkers-theologians of Byzantium—John Climacus, Maximus the Confessor, and Symeon the New Theologian. Their teachings are the foundation and main source of the mystical–religious tradition of Byzantine theology and philosophy. John Climacus’s conception of human self-improvement and self-cognition on the path of theosis is revealed as one of the first philosophical and moral systems of early Byzantium and the source of subsequent Christian concepts of Eastern Christianity. Maximus the Confessor’s conception of the logoi—or energies—of God is presented as a system of symbols with profound philosophical and anthropological meaning. The human being in St. Maximus’s doctrine is the main and self-sufficient symbol of the universe, connecting the two worlds—the Divine and the earthly ones. The doctrine of Symeon the New Theologian on uncreated light is revealed as a personal comprehension of God in the perception of Divine Light. The transforming power of the Light is demonstrated, which changes the nature of a human being and raises an individual to the height of spiritual unity with God. Finally, conclusions are made about the beginning and formation of the philosophy of religion as a special type of philosophical–religious thinking found already in the period of early Christianity. Full article

This brief study addresses the controversial issue of the relationship with the body, with the flesh, on the part of pagan and Christian thinkers at a particularly important point in their evolution, in the late fourth and early fifth centuries, a time in which Neoplatonic thinkers had to defend their doctrinal positions against the increasingly hegemonic position of the triumphant Christianity. In this sense, it is particularly interesting to approach the perspective of two authors who are not strictly speaking philosophers: in particular, Synesius of Cyrene, a thinker in the Neoplatonic tradition who became a Christian bishop, complemented also by some interesting reflections by Eunapius of Sardis, historian and biographer of Neoplatonic philosophers. In the light of this analysis, it becomes clear that the discussion on the value of the body and carnality is an essential point of doctrinal discrepancy in this period and, contrary to what sometimes appears, the discrepancy also pertains to the formation of the intellectual, and Christianity clearly appears as a doctrine obsessed with the flesh to the detriment of the soul. Full article