tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-648884752216444797.post4535393552639001229..comments2024-03-28T06:00:18.802-07:00Comments on bionic mosquito: Indulge Me bionic mosquitohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12002548958078731031noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-648884752216444797.post-86260018125531752932020-12-27T08:08:59.922-08:002020-12-27T08:08:59.922-08:00RMB, one other tidbit: from the very first article...RMB, one other tidbit: from the very first article of the Summa, Thomas writes that there must be some knowledge revealed by God beyond philosophical knowledge - that man is directed to God by something beyond his reason. At this link, you will find the quote (timestamped in the video).<br /><br />https://youtu.be/pT4NUwpsL24?t=482 <br /><br />I don't believe that Luther could disagree with this statement: God's Grace comes first, and without it, we will not come to find God.<br /><br />The balance, proportion, value, etc. between faith, works, grace, reason; these all become objects of debate. But the necessary order (what necessarily must come first), it seems to me, is fully agreed.bionic mosquitohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12002548958078731031noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-648884752216444797.post-53266194463153174912020-12-26T18:02:27.111-08:002020-12-26T18:02:27.111-08:00RMB, in this video (link below) the speaker (Rober...RMB, in this video (link below) the speaker (Robert George, Princeton University) mentions that Luther and Calvin both developed natural law thought.<br /><br />As this is the portion of Aquinas of which I am focused (and has been one of the prime discussion points amongst many in this community), I think this might address further the questions you and I discussed in this thread.<br /><br />https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tM37-dCoKB8&list=PL40ZDMwux6h2y5X7v7IiSqzJZpZ85sHx_&index=5 bionic mosquitohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12002548958078731031noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-648884752216444797.post-23187683218330004792020-12-24T07:40:11.480-08:002020-12-24T07:40:11.480-08:00"...but Aquinas didn't believe that human..."...but Aquinas didn't believe that human reasoning ability was fallen."<br /><br />I don't know that I could say this. Every influential Christian source from the various traditions / denominations that I have read will state - sometimes after some pressing - that Grace comes first. So, to the extent human reasoning was functional / rational, it was through Grace.<br /><br />Yes, I believe in the fallenness of man in all respects: mind, body, and soul.bionic mosquitohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12002548958078731031noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-648884752216444797.post-86383170501114080642020-12-23T19:42:39.580-08:002020-12-23T19:42:39.580-08:00I would be happy for that to be the case. Then Lu...I would be happy for that to be the case. Then Luther isn't finding problems with what sounded valuable in Aristotle/Aquinas. He was finding problems in like you say those who came later who disagreed.<br /><br />I think Aristotle's errors in science were found in geocentrism and maybe shapes of orbits or other astronomical laws. This would make sense because he didn't base his ideas on observation or at least not on detailed, specific observation.<br /><br />I do think you are on to something about works proceeding grace possibly in Aristotle/Aquinas. Aristotle didn't really make comments on Christian theology, but Aquinas didn't believe that human reasoning ability was fallen. So theoretically, a human could act by reason to lead him to faith in Jesus, i.e. works proceeding grace.<br /><br />From your discussions here I know you believe in the fallenness of man's reasoning.RMBhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13603112499567064214noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-648884752216444797.post-41903121031393458742020-12-23T16:52:02.814-08:002020-12-23T16:52:02.814-08:00RMB, so far in the book there is no specific exami...RMB, so far in the book there is no specific examination of this question - at least none come to mind. I will offer my (semi) reasoned speculation.<br /><br />It may have to do with ideas like Aquinas's use of Aristotle's Four Causes. I am thinking about the arguments for Transubstantiation as one example.<br /><br />What is interesting is that thus far in the book, most of Luther's arrows are aimed at later Scholastics like Ockham and Scotus. But these, in some key respects, held ideas contrary to those of Aquinas.<br /><br />Another perhaps relevant point: in his book on Transubstantiation, Salkeld notes that Luther's disagreements with Aquinas on what happens in the Eucharist are really disagreements with later Scholastics that disagreed with Aquinas; at least in Salkeld's view, there was no meaningful disagreement between Luther and Aquinas on this topic.<br /><br />Finally, Luther was obviously on the very far end of the Grace and Works scale. While everything I have read tells me that few, if any, meaningful Christian thinkers thought Works comes before Grace, one can see - I believe - that an exaggerated reading of Aristotle could lead one to believe that man's works can lead him toward the perfect form (perfecting virtue) - something like that.<br /><br />I could be way off on all of this, but this is how I answer if pressed today.bionic mosquitohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12002548958078731031noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-648884752216444797.post-82256492682626598512020-12-23T08:43:51.384-08:002020-12-23T08:43:51.384-08:00I would like to read a description of the issues L...I would like to read a description of the issues Luther took with Aristotle. You have written on how Aristotle's philosophy looks like a good framework for other Christian ideas. And how Aquinas built Christian philosophy into that framework. It sounds like Luther challenging Aristotle was also a challenge of Aquinas.<br /><br />I know from How Should We Then Live? (https://thecrosssectionrmb.blogspot.com/2020/12/how-should-we-then-live-chapter-7-rise.html) that scientists were finding inaccuracies in how Aristotle's philosophy applied to science. Because Aristotelianism was so linked to theology, even scientific challenges could be seen as challenges to biblical truth. But they obviously weren't. Sounds like Luther was figuring out similar things on the theological side.<br /><br />Would like to see just what those errors were and weren't as I see some utility in using Aristotle where his thoughts make sense and align with Scripture.RMBhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13603112499567064214noreply@blogger.com