Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

THE POTENTIAL OF A CONDEMNED ANALOGY: AUGUSTINE ON AND

THE POTENTIAL OF A CONDEMNED ANALOGY: AUGUSTINE ON AND This paper investigates Augustine's Christological application of the distinction between the internal and the expressed word and . Although both Plato and Aristotle employed the notion of thought (νóημα) as a voiceless mental discourse, the non‐theological distinction between the internal and the expressed word had been traditionally associated with the Stoics. According to the Stoics, it was not the uttered speech but the internal speech which differentiated human beings from non‐rational animals (Sextus Empiricus, M . 8.275–276). Mere articulated sounds made by crows and parrots could not express the the semantic content carried by rational thought. Philo, in turn, invoked the internal/expressed word distinction throughout his works as he made various points by using figurative exegesis. Eventually, Christian apologists and authors found what was originally a non‐theological notion of a two‐fold logos to be a useful conceptual category for explaining the ‘second God’. Indeed, the Prologue of the Gospel of John had ‘theologized’ the distinction by boldly employing it – or some variations of it – as the Word's role in creation and the Word's ‘becoming flesh’. In the fourth century, certain controversial theologians were adopting the internal/expressed word distinction as a paradigm for Christology. Eusebius attacked Marcellus' http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png The Heythrop Journal Wiley

THE POTENTIAL OF A CONDEMNED ANALOGY: AUGUSTINE ON AND

The Heythrop Journal , Volume 48 (2) – Mar 1, 2007

Loading next page...
 
/lp/wiley/the-potential-of-a-condemned-analogy-augustine-on-and-DEp7hYvS1E

References (5)

Publisher
Wiley
Copyright
Copyright © 2007 Wiley Subscription Services, Inc., A Wiley Company
ISSN
0018-1196
eISSN
1468-2265
DOI
10.1111/j.1468-2265.2007.00312.x
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

This paper investigates Augustine's Christological application of the distinction between the internal and the expressed word and . Although both Plato and Aristotle employed the notion of thought (νóημα) as a voiceless mental discourse, the non‐theological distinction between the internal and the expressed word had been traditionally associated with the Stoics. According to the Stoics, it was not the uttered speech but the internal speech which differentiated human beings from non‐rational animals (Sextus Empiricus, M . 8.275–276). Mere articulated sounds made by crows and parrots could not express the the semantic content carried by rational thought. Philo, in turn, invoked the internal/expressed word distinction throughout his works as he made various points by using figurative exegesis. Eventually, Christian apologists and authors found what was originally a non‐theological notion of a two‐fold logos to be a useful conceptual category for explaining the ‘second God’. Indeed, the Prologue of the Gospel of John had ‘theologized’ the distinction by boldly employing it – or some variations of it – as the Word's role in creation and the Word's ‘becoming flesh’. In the fourth century, certain controversial theologians were adopting the internal/expressed word distinction as a paradigm for Christology. Eusebius attacked Marcellus'

Journal

The Heythrop JournalWiley

Published: Mar 1, 2007

There are no references for this article.