90
edits
Changes
→Philosophical Implications
Luther rejected and challenged scholastic methodology in positing that application of logic to theological questions was corrosive and destructive. When looking for theological truth one ought to consult Scripture—both logic and the tradition were not apt resources. Luther indicated his disdain for scholastic philosophy in an explicit treatise entitled, “Disputation Against Scholastic Philosophy,”<ref> Theodor Dieter, <i>Der junge Luther und Aristoteles: Historisch-systematische Untersuchungen zum Verhältnis von Theologie und Philosophie</i> (Berlin and New York: de Gruyter, 2001), 28–37. </ref> in which he hammered the scholastics for their integration of Aristotelian logic in theological thought and condemned the methodology more generally. Now, this separated the theologian from the preceding tradition in a way that was unprecedented. One could simply go to scripture to uncover theological truths; they need not consult with the traditional theological wisdom or apply logic,necessarily, to find the best or most reasonable conclusions. Truth, for Luther, was only revealed through the medium of divine revelation; philosophy wasn’t any help.
Not only does the theme of individualism emerge in suggesting that the theologian be separated from logic and tradition, but also that theology itself should be distinct and isolated from philosophy. And so , a trajectory was established regarding the relationship between philosophy and theology changed—from there being : from a former synthesis and mutual dependency to the two being opposed and oppositea suggested dissonance. In other words, I contend this was a turning point in Christian history when faith became something in paradox to reason.
===Sociological Implications===
