Talk:Credo quia absurdum

Old VfD

Article listed on Wikipedia:Votes for deletion Apr 21 to Apr 29 2004, consensus was not reached but used own discretion to redirect to Fideism. Graham  :) | Talk 21:13, 29 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Discussion

• Dictionary definition. Transwiki to wiktionary. Gentgeen 21:54, 21 Apr 2004 (UTC)
• Already listed in Latin phrases. Redirect or delete. Rossami 22:47, 21 Apr 2004 (UTC)
• Redirect to Fideism, where the source and meaning of the quote are discussed. Smerdis of Tlön 02:47, 22 Apr 2004 (UTC)
• No one's mentioned it's also unspeakably ghastly. Delete. Quick! Pteron 06:13, 23 Apr 2004 (UTC)
• Did I fail to mention that this is unspeakably ghastly, and absurd?
• Delete - for reasons above - Tεxτurε 15:31, 26 Apr 2004 (UTC)

End discussion

Mistranslation?

My Latin is more than slightly rusty, but the entire gist of this page seems to me wrong based on a mistranslation. As far as I can tell, there is no causality either in the main page nor in the quotation from Tertullian. Not "I believe because it is absurd" but "I believe that which is absurd." The point is not an explanation of what why he believes but, rather, to state that we recognize that our beliefs are not all rational. This is rather similar to the argument made by many that science and faith are separate and, thus, not contradictory. Tertullian's point was that Jesus resurrection was no less certain because it is wholly outside the bounds of our understanding of how life and universe operate. I don't know that the subject doesn't warrant a page, but I am in no position to write it myself -- unless the above is sufficient basis -- but I tend to think this extant part should be excised and promptly.Czrisher (talk) 16:25, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

you are in fact right, and I will give it a try. DGG (talk) 05:24, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

No, the causality is in the "quia". "Credo quia absurdum" means "I believe because it is absurd." You are probably thinking of "quod". "Credo quod absurdum" would indeed mean what you're refering, but that's not what's there. Ordie (talk) 22:58, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

The article says "poorly translated" and "misquoted". Well, that's big news to us who always studied Tertulian's works. As far as I know, "Credo quia absurdum" is this emperor's 15 minutes of fame and you need to provide more than your opinion to challenge it. This article should be edited, although that might upset those of you who want to edit mankind's history everyday. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.31.33.109 (talk) 13:59, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

---

It is indeed a mis-quotation. The original phrase is "credibile est, quia ineptum est" ("it is credible, because it is ridiculous") http://www.tertullian.org/articles/evans_carn/evans_carn_03latin.htm (p. 18 line 25). 67.244.8.252 (talk) 06:30, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

Further to the above, I would point out that the mis-quotation has achieved greater notoriety than the original, and suggest that, with this caveat, the phrase "Credo quia absurdum" does merit an entry. 67.244.8.252 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 06:36, 27 January 2012 (UTC).

How much difference is there between the meanings of "credo quia absurdam" and "credibile est, quia ineptum est" ? Checking the translation at New Advent of "credibile est, quia ineptum est", it runs "it is by all means to be believed, because is absurd". Is "credo quia absurdam" best thought of as a "misquotation" or as a "paraphrase"? Kalidasa 777 (talk) 22:35, 10 November 2013 (UTC)

Voltaire

as there are a number of interpretations and reflections here, maybe the famous quote by voltaire would be worth mentioning - “Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities.” ― Voltaire, Questions sur les Miracles à M. Claparede, Professeur de Théologie à Genève, par un Proposant: Ou Extrait de Diverses Lettres de M. de Voltaire http://www.goodreads.com/quotes/20527-those-who-can-make-you-believe-absurdities-can-make-you — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.253.66.198 (talk) 22:51, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

An Enlightenment invention

Probably the most important part regarding this entire phrase is entirely left out by this Wikipedia page, which is not a very good thing at all. Why isn't it in the lead that this phrase is attributed to Tertullian? More importantly, why isn't it explained anywhere that the entire phrase, supposedly said by Tertullian, was just invented by the Enlightenment thinkers, in large part, Voltaire? An important paper was published last year in Cambridge's journal Church History which finally cracked the code on the circumstances concerning the invention. I might as well quote the full abstract;

Tertullian is widely regarded as having originated the expression Credo quia absurdum (est) (I believe because it is absurd) and the phrase often appears in contemporary polemics about the rationality of religious belief. Patristic scholars have long pointed out that Tertullian never said this or meant anything like it. However, little scholarly attention has been paid to the circumstances in which this specific phrase came into existence and why, in spite of its dubious provenance, it continues to be regarded by many as a legitimate characterization of religious faith. This paper shows how Tertullian's original expression—“It is certain, because impossible”—was first misrepresented and modified in the early modern period. In seventeenth century England a “credo” version—I believe because it is impossible—became the common form of Tertullian's maxim. A further modification, building on the first, was effected by the Enlightenment philosophe Voltaire, who added the “absurdity condition” and gave us the modern version of the paradox: I believe because it is absurd. These modifications played a significant role in Enlightenment representations of religion as irrational, and signal the beginning of a new understanding of faith as an epistemic vice. This doubtful maxim continues to play a role in debates about the cognitive status of religious faith, and its failure to succumb to the historical evidence against it is owing to its ongoing rhetorical usefulness in such debates. (Source: Harrison, Peter. "“I Believe Because it is Absurd”: The Enlightenment Invention of Tertullian's Credo." Church History 86.2 (2017): 339-364.)

Pretty important details that need to be added to the page and needs a section on its own, in fact. Secondly, the article has a huge sourcing problem. Of the (only) five references in the article, four of them are clearly unreliable. Two of them go to NewAdvent, one goes to tertullian.org, and another to a Google Books link to some book and ... just that. No page reference, anything. This will be a bit troublesome to fix. 70.49.181.61 (talk) 19:01, 18 November 2018 (UTC)

Well, I fixed it.70.49.181.61 (talk) 21:55, 18 November 2018 (UTC)

The article should no longer be ranked as a stub.64.229.115.87 (talk) 06:08, 26 November 2018 (UTC)

@Troyspears: Hey Troy, I've undone your edits on this page since they were inaccurate. Since I'm the one who basically wrote the article, I'll have to note that the article doesn't actually defend Tertullian's quote in any way, shape or form, rather, simply explains what he meant. Secondly, I've removed the wiktionary definition of the original Latin phrase since scholars all agree that those peripheral definitions are certainly not what Tertullian was talking about, and so to include them would be misleading.Wallingfordtoday (talk) 05:37, 4 December 2018 (UTC)