I was recently accused of being a sophomoric imbecile. I wrote a little poetic note for him. He was right, I have not read the works of Socrates yet and should not have commented at all. He is a librarian the "man surrounded by books" who I said read few of them. To redeem myself I plan to contribute a little.
To be a participant on this board one must read. To form any position on christianity as you all do, one must read Thomas Aquinas. I have read Thomas Aquinas so I have the jurisdiction to speak of his words and what his words mean. You all do not.
This board is comprised of types of people. Biblical literalists who do not reason which negates the power of their faith (faith meaning religion in this use) which I will elaborate on further. People who read scripture and talk of it's inconsistencies etc. These people are not very knowledgable either. Their reading material needs to be expanded upon. There are also members here who attend traditional four yr colleges and are fairly intelligent. The education they are receiving is dreadfully inadequate but they don't think so. They rarely contribute anything of worth but are higher on the ladder than the next group. "Worshippers of reason", those who hide behind the sciences of reason and do not truly think or investigate for themselves. One of the most respectable groups on this board are the "science buffs". They have read Darwin's works and they read scientific journals regularly. They have much to contribute to the science threads here. Their only negative aspect is the fact that their knowledge is for the most part second hand. I have heard there are practicing scientists here. Another group is Jar and his various followers. The science buffs and Jar are to be respected the most here although they are still ordinary folk. They are by no means brilliant and still fall under those who are scientists obviously.
The following Thomas Aquinas tidbits are meant for at least one group in this list.
A Christian says: "God cannot be described"
Objection: "All throughout Scripture God is described and defined, this view does not accurately address christians or christianity in general."
Thomas Aquinas:
quote:
Although we cannot know in what consists the essence of God, nevertheless in this doctrine we make use of His effects, either of nature or of grace, in the place of a definition, in regard to whatever is treated in this doctrine concerning God; even as in some philosophical sciences we demonstrate something about a cause from its effect, by taking the effect in the place of a definition of the cause.
Scripture when interpreted correctly is extremely powerful. Aquinas epitomizes the strength of Scripture when it is correctly interpreted. A requisite of this is a reasoning mind. This reveals the flaws of a literalist approach, those who attempt to live by and utilize Scripture when they cannot reason out the powerful words. Aquinas can quote the Old, the New, the Apostles, Corinthians: everything because he cannot only reason but he is a true Rennaissance man who knows of all sciences and philosophy. This shows the flaws or weaknesses in two more groups. Firstly, those that read Scripture and talk of it's inconsistences are not educated enough to attempt such a feat. The flaws of the board members who are in 4 year traditional schools are also shown. One does not receive a full, adequate education at these schools. This shows part of why Jar deserves to be respected. Jar recommended the only institution in America where one can become as educated as Thomas Aquinas. St. John's College. Jar, I am forever in your debt.
Now for the final Thomas Aquinas tidbit tonight. In the Ninth Article Thomas Aquinas addresses "WHETHER HOLY SCRIPTURE SHOULD USE METAPHORS?" He establishes that although "poetic"s is the lowest science of all:
quote:
Sacred doctrine makes use of metaphors as both necessary and useful.
His words determine another flaw in the Biblical Literalists that do not reason and are on this board. He gives three reasons as to why using metaphors is "neccessary and useful". The last reason is what is pertinent to a failure of the Biblical literalists who do not reason here:
quote:
Third, because thereby divine truths are the better hidden from the unworthy.
This is all for tonight and please understand that I may not issue more tidbits at all. I may or I may not. I contributed something of worth here and yes, I read. I am gravely concerned that when I become more recognized in the eye of the world people will find out about my activity here and they will read what I have written. I should have maintained internet anonymity, but I did not. Perhaps some will find this post.
™ Version 4.2
