Raphael’s “School of Athens”
Francis Schaeffer on Raphael’s School of Athens:
“The Renaissance is normally dated at the fourteenth, fifteenth, and early sixteenth centuries, but to understand it we must look at events which led up to this, especially its philosophical antecedents during the Middle Ages. And that means considering in a bit more detail the thought of Thomas Aquinas (1225-1274). Aquinas was a Dominican. He studied at the universities of Naples and Paris, and later he taught in Paris. He was the outstanding theologian of his day and his thinking is still dominant in some circles of the Roman Catholic Church. Aquinas’s contribution to Western thought is, of course, much richer than we can discuss here, but his view of man demands our attention. Aquinas held that man had revolted against God and thus was fallen, but Aquinas had an incomplete view of the Fall. He thought that the Fall did not affect man as a whole but only in part. In his view the will was fallen or corrupted but the intellect was not affected. Thus people could rely on their own human wisdom, and this meant that people were free to mix the teachings of the Bible with the teachings of the non-Christian philosophers.
Among the Greek philosophers, Thomas Aquinas relied especially on one of the greatest, Aristotle (384-322 B.C.). In 1263 Pope Urban IV had forbidden the study of Aristotle in the universities. Aquinas managed to have Aristotle accepted, so the ancient non-Christian philosophy was reenthroned.
To understand what result this had, it is worthwhile to look at Raphael’s (1483-1520) painting The School of Athens (c. 1510) to comprehend some of the discussions and influences which followed in the Renaissance period. The fresco is in the Vatican. In The School of Athens Raphael painted Plato with one finger pointed upward, which means that he pointed toward absolutes or ideals. In contrast, he pictured Aristotle with his fingers spread wide and thrust down toward the earth, which means that he emphasized particulars. By particulars we mean the individual things which are about us; a chair is a particular, as is each molecule which makes up the chair, and so on. The individual person is also a particular and thus you are a particular. Thomas Aquinas brought this Aristotelian emphasis on individual things-the particulars-into the philosophy of the late Middle Ages, and this set the stage for the humanistic elements of the Renaissance and the basic problem they created.”
Cited in - Journal of Biblical Apologetics, Vol. 1, No. 1, Fall 2000, pg. 2
View the full painting here
Then here to see how this humanistic dispute is settled.
As Christians, we know that the ancient Greek Philosophers were in darkness and never found God. Scripture says they didn’t even have the least bit of light. This non-Christian philosophy, as Schaeffer says, was “reenthroned” by Thomas Aquinas and is still accepted today in Roman Catholic theology and philosophy. We reject the ancient Greek philosophers as reliable spiritual guides because we hold the biblical view of the Fall. Unlike Thomas’ view that leaves the intellect unaffected, we believe that man is affected as a whole and that depravity is total. The dispute is concerning the “noetic effects” of the Fall.
Rome (and some Protestants including some Reformed that follow Rome on this) affirms the Renaissance view of man’s “R”eason and thus has no virtue of total dependency on God’s Word since doctrine and morals are discovered and determined by sovereign man alone. For more on the Renaissance view of “R”eason, see Dr. Robert Morey’s post: A Simple Fallacy. Poorly treated evangelical students at supossed Christian universities are lied to by their professors and told that spiritual truths, etc., can be learned from the philosophers. These young and gullible students gobble it up as fact, then when they run into a biblicist…well, I’m starting to rant now.
But this is why we reject Natural Theology and Natural Law. Both are fideistic in that they blindly assume the infallibility and sufficiency of man’s reasoning abilities as if they weren’t thoroughly affected by sin. They both operate upon (to quote Van Til) the humanistic principle of autonomy. They both lack basic Christian virtue as well. So when we see professing Christians promoting philosophic ideas of the God-less pagans as spiritual truth, we ought to rebuke them in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ! Much more can be said, but the Apostle Paul wrote:
“I have already charged that all men, both Jews and Greeks, are under the power of sin, as it is written: None is righteous, no not one; no one seeks for God….There is no fear of God before their eyes.” (Romans 3:9-10 and 18)
When he said “None” and “no one,” he meant Plato and Aristotle too…
21 Comments, Comment or Ping
Reformed Mama
Hey Stephen…great article…it is interesting to see the painting you described to us so vividly here at the oasis! I can see why you would stare at it! Just don’t ask me to light candles in front of it, offer prayers or kiss it…yes I went there…
Consider Spurgeon’s wisdom on the subject of philosophy:
“The history of that human ignorance which calls itself “philosophy” is absolutely identical with the history of fools, except where it diverges into madness”. -CH Spurgeon
And this:
“Modern philosophers will accept anything except the bleeding
Substitute for guilty man”. -CH Spurgeon
And this one:
“The hem of Christ’s garment is better than all the robes of philosophy”. -CH Spurgeon
And my fav:
“You will philosophise men into hell, but never into heaven”. -CH Spurgeon
Thank you for this thought provoking article…may we never forget the foolishness we can succumb to and always…”examine ourselves to see whether we are in the faith”…2 Cor.13:5
Aug 29th, 2008
Denise
WOOOOHOOOO!!
Absolutely right Stephen!!!
Rom 12:2 Do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewal of your mind, that by testing you may discern what is the will of God, what is good and acceptable and perfect.
Col 2:8 See to it that no one takes you captive by philosophy and empty deceit, according to human tradition, according to the elemental spirits of the world, and not according to Christ.
1Co 1:20 Where is the one who is wise? Where is the scribe? Where is the debater of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world?
1Co 2:14 The natural person does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are folly to him, and he is not able to understand them because they are spiritually discerned.
1Co 2:15 The spiritual person judges all things, but is himself to be judged by no one.
1Co 2:16 “For who has understood the mind of the Lord so as to instruct him?” But we have the mind of Christ.
Spiritual things are spiritually taught and understood. No lie is of the Truth, either, as John says.
1Co 1:22 For Jews demand signs and Greeks seek wisdom,
This is seen by RC Sproul (sorry to walk on anyone’s toes): http://www.psychoheresy-aware.org/sproul11_6.html
The notion “all truthis God’s truth” is what such folks believe, and therefore think Truth IS found in error! I believe, therefore, such folks are man-centered and are NOT Solo-Scriptura.
There’s MY rant. LOLOL.
Aug 29th, 2008
Sir Aaron
I’ve always found this idea that the “intellect” was unaffected by the fall to be, well stupid. I say this for two reasons. First, the Bible clearly says we can’t know everything about God. Do we at all recall what God told Job?
“Can you discover the depths of God? Can you discover the limits of the Almighty?
Secondly, even before I was saved I understood that even what my intellect may know, my heart often ignores. I could know the truth and yet deny it. As a saved man, the Bible reaffirms this to me. The problem isn’t necessarily that we don’t know the truth, it’s that fallen humans reject the truth.
For they exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen.
(Rom 1:25)
Aug 29th, 2008
Sir Aaron
I should add that God certainly didn’t leave Israel to her own devices to find the truth, did He? Certainly the Jews could have ascertained the ten commandments by reason…
Aug 29th, 2008
Stephen Macasil
Reformed Mama,
Yes, I recall describing Raphael’s classic masterpiece and it’s depiction of the reality of humanistic philosophy’s bankruptcy.
And I’m not surprised that you threw in a jab to the Eastern Orthodox subscribers, for they too have a humanistic theology that is built on the foundation of pagan philosophy.
And as always, thanks for the “right-on-time” quotes from Spurgeon that always seem to be more relevant today than when he spoke and wrote them.
Aug 29th, 2008
Stephen Macasil
Denise,
I don’t recall ever getting a WOOOOHOOOO!! before, but I’m glad you support the post. So many “Christians” just love them philosophers, or as Dr. Morey calls them: foolosophers!
I’m also thankful for your rant. You’re a good ranter because your foundation is SOLID, for it is a biblical foundation unlike the yahoo’s that have a “philosophic foundation” for a Christian worldview (although such a thing cannot exist).
And your Scripture citations were very edifying!
Don’t be quiet!
Aug 29th, 2008
Stephen Macasil
Sir Aaron,
Thanks for your testimony. You’ve raised a good point in that it is possible to know [about] the truth and yet deny it.
Even more shocking is the reality that professing Christians can claim to know and believe the truth, yet their apostate thought reveals their spiritual sickness while all along they have no problem with pagan philosophy.
To these we must appeal to for Reformation!!!
Viva la Reformacion…
And it begins with “dethroning” what Schaeffer said had been “reenthroned” by Thomas.
Scripture is the origin of theology, not homosexual Greek philosophers that subjugate women and children and reserve “human nature” to only the “rational elite.”
Sorry, still ranting…
Aug 29th, 2008
Sir Aaron
It is interesting where philosophy will take you. Francis Schaeffer noted that some of the great thinkers realized that if there was no God, there was no limits on human action.
Aug 29th, 2008
Stephen Macasil
Dr. Morey points out in his next book how it was the “Christian” philosophers that went against the grain, and according to Schaeffer they met opposition from the unbelievers that had given up the seemingly bankrupt pursuit of morals and ethics without God. Morey says Schaeffer’s famous cry in mocking those befuddled Christians was “just give us until tomorrow!”
Well, it’s already past tomorrow and “Christian” philosophers have still not provided any basis for morals and ethics.
Of course they appeal to the invention of pagan man called “natural law theory” which claims there is a system of right and wrong “out there” somewhere that man can reason to apart from special revelation, and is available to anyone (except women, children, retarded people, or uneducated barbarians).
Craig A. Boyd says even God is bound by the “natural law.” Boyd is professor of philosophy and director of faith integration at Azusa Pacific University. He says this in a book I read called “A Shared Morality.” The book has the “School of Athens” as it’s cover image. It is a very disturbing book; very unbiblical (like philosophers care about being biblical).
R. Scott Clark claims that the natural law and the ten command are essentially identical. Scott is Associate Professor of Historical and Systematic Theology, but rarely exhibits any exegetical work in his theorizing. He defends David Van Drunen (another WSC prof) against the criticism that:
a) Van Drunen has a PhD in pagan philosophy from the Jesuit intitution Loyola University Chicago,
b) Wrote a book on the Jesuit Roman Catholic doctrine of “natural law” (not a refutation, rather, a hearty endorsement),
c) The book was financially underwritten by the Jesuits themselves (Acton Institute), and is published, marketed, and supported by Rome,
d) The book is dedicated to a Jesuit priest that denies the gospel!
A, B, C, and D, are certainly grounds for suspicion of this professor at a supposed “Reformed” seminary that claims the doctrinal heritage of its founders in PA (where Morey graduated).
A friend of mine recently dropped out of Westminster CA after taking a look around at the Roman Catholic influence and being frightened that he would become like them. I agreed with his decision.
Natural Law theory attempts to find a universal, objective, and transcultural shared system of morals and ethics apart from Scripture. This exercise in futility is merely a scheme of Satan aimed at the destruction of sola scriptura.
Once Rome (through the help of her darkness-partners strategically placed in Protestant schools) can establish the majority Protestant vote that the Bible really isn’t too needed in issues outside church walls, she will be one step closer to Ignatius’ vision and promise to Paul III to win back to Rome what the Reformation stole away!
I wrote about this a while back here: http://biblicalthought.com/blog/ad-maiorem-dei-gloriam/
R. Scott Clark joined the discussion for a bit, then bailed out once he saw he was refuted by God’s Word. Click through and scroll down to see just how much of an idiot he is. All he cares about is what certain theologians taught and believed - but he will choose them over Scripture any day of the week…
This is a rant-y subject, I guess.
Aug 29th, 2008
Reformed Mama
Let the ranting continue…semper ranting…??
Aug 29th, 2008
Firstperson i
That was a really good read.
Aug 30th, 2008
muhammad
why hate when you talk so much of love.
Aug 31st, 2008
Travis
Muhammad,
what do you mean?
Aug 31st, 2008
H8n S8n
QUESTION(S) FOR BT GANG - Please.
”””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””
I generally do not participate here because this/your level of
Theology is far outside of mine.
My field is Worship, Apologetics & Cults.
“”"”"”"”"”"”"”"”"”"”"”"”"”"”"”"”"”"”"”"”"”"”"”"”"”"”"”"”"”"”"”"”"”"”"”"”"”"”"”
Question #1:
How is monism and dualism related to mysticism?
Question #2
What is Zoroastrianism and is it actually a western religion?
Question #3
And if it is why?
Thanks Guys
Here is a little teaser to this weeks next Sundays “Worship Series”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pRV9QCXLtHQ
Haten
Sep 4th, 2008
Stephen Macasil
H8n, I just sent you an email on this.
Sep 4th, 2008
Denise
Hmm…where did the “Muslim” go?
Sep 5th, 2008
Stephen Macasil
Denise,
Travis asked him too difficult a question. He headed for the hills.
Sep 5th, 2008
Anonymous
I have heard professors from Westminster Seminary CA, and this blog misrepresents and horribly attacks them and the institution. I have heard Dr. VanDrunen lecture on natural law at Christ Reformed Church where Dr. Riddlebarger pastors, and let me say that I was given misleading information from people at FCC as to what natural law adherents teach. Don’t be afraid to read what these men have to say; if you don’t agree with them at the end, then that’s fine. But don’t say that they are not Reformed or that they are stupid or idiots.
Sep 6th, 2008
Stephen Macasil
What misleading information were you given about what natural law adherents teach? And who from FCC gave it to you?
Sep 6th, 2008
Travis
Anonymous,
Also. If I could ask a question, what did they teach Natural Law is? can you give us some quotes or a weblink? And, How is it different from what the people at FCC said it was?
Sep 7th, 2008
Denise
I’d like to see specific examples from Anon too. Or is this only going to be a general slam of this website with no evidence?
Sep 9th, 2008
Reply to “Raphael’s “School of Athens””