Welcome, Guest: Register On Nairaland / LOGIN! / Trending / Recent / New
Stats: 3,143,375 members, 7,781,050 topics. Date: Friday, 29 March 2024 at 08:04 AM

Doctor Angelicus And His Straws. - Religion - Nairaland

Nairaland Forum / Nairaland / General / Religion / Doctor Angelicus And His Straws. (1680 Views)

Pastor And Native Doctor Confess To Killing People, Paraded With Their Rituals / Pastor And Native Doctor Stripped Unclad In Imo / "I Serve A God Who Answers Prayers" - American Doctor Cured Of Ebola (2) (3) (4)

(1) (Reply) (Go Down)

Doctor Angelicus And His Straws. by PastorAIO: 5:32pm On Oct 07, 2009
Doctor Angelicus was probably (with Santa Augustine) the greatest, most influential, theologian that ever lived. He . . .
was a priest of the Roman Catholic Church in the Dominican Order from Italy, and an immensely influential philosopher and theologian in the tradition of scholasticism, known as Doctor Angelicus and Doctor Communis. He is frequently referred to as Thomas because "Aquinas" refers to his residence rather than his surname. He was the foremost classical proponent of natural theology, and the father of the Thomistic school of philosophy and theology. His influence on Western thought is considerable, and much of modern philosophy was conceived as a reaction against, or as an agreement with, his ideas, particularly in the areas of ethics, natural law and political theory.

I've seen threads on Nairaland where his arguments have been used repeatedly. Catholics tend to cling to his arguments when they have to argue about God and his existence. Not only catholics but others too. Atheists mainly operated by attacking his arguments too. For instance the argument that IF God created the world then who created God. infinite regress blah blah blah . . . (yawn).

One of the greatest theological works is Summa Theologica. This book is unfinished and the reasons for it's incompletion is why I'm starting this thread. One day during the Mass of St. Nicolas he experienced a crisis. Afterwards he was urged to continue writing the book but this is what he says.
“All that I have written seems to me like straw compared to what has now been revealed to me.”

Now I wonder. What could the greatest theologian ever have seen that made his consider his great intellectual achievements to be as worthless straws? This is a rebuff to intellectualism as a whole when it comes to understanding God.

When I see his arguments being put forward by christians, I wonder if they are aware of his condemnation of his own work.
Re: Doctor Angelicus And His Straws. by Nobody: 6:06pm On Oct 07, 2009
What were his arguments like?
Re: Doctor Angelicus And His Straws. by PastorAIO: 6:12pm On Oct 07, 2009
I answer that it can be proved in five ways that God exists.

The first and plainest is the method that proceeds from the point of view of motion. It is certain and in accord with experience, that things on earth undergo change. Now, everything that is moved is moved by something; nothing, indeed, is changed, except it is changed to something which it is in potentiality. Moreover, anything moves in accordance with something actually existing; change itself, is nothing else than to bring forth something from potentiality into actuality. Now, nothing can be brought from potentiality to actual existence except through something actually existing: thus heat in action, as fire, makes fire-wood, which is hot in potentiality, to be hot actually, and through this process, changes itself. The same thing cannot at the same time be actually and potentially the same thing, but only in regard to different things. What is actually hot cannot be at the same time potentially hot, but it is possible for it at the same time to be potentially cold. It is impossible, then, that anything should be both mover and the thing moved, in regard to the same thing and in the same way, or that it should move itself. Everything, therefore, is moved by something else. If, then, that by which it is moved, is also moved, this must be moved by something still different, and this, again, by something else. But this process cannot go on to infinity because there would not be any first mover, nor, because of this fact, anything else in motion, as the succeeding things would not move except because of what is moved by the first mover, just as a stick is not moved except through what is moved from the hand. Therefore it is necessary to go back to some first mover, which is itself moved by nothing---and this all men know as God.

The second proo[/b]f is from the nature of the efficient cause. We find in our experience that there is a chain of causes: nor is it found possible for anything to be the efficient cause of itself, since it would have to exist before itself, which is impossible. Nor in the case of efficient causes can the chain go back indefinitely, because in all chains of efficient causes, the first is the cause of the middle, and these of the last, whether they be one or many. If the cause is removed, the effect is removed. Hence if there is not a first cause, there will not be a last, nor a middle. But if the chain were to go back infinitely, there would be no first cause, and thus no ultimate effect, nor middle causes, which is admittedly false. Hence we must presuppose some first efficient cause---which all call God.

[b]The third proof
is taken from the natures of the merely possible and necessary. We find that certain things either may or may not exist, since they are found to come into being and be destroyed, and in consequence potentially, either existent or non-existent. But it is impossible for all things that are of this character to exist eternally, because what may not exist, at length will not. If, then, all things were merely possible (mere accidents), eventually nothing among things would exist. If this is true, even now there would be nothing, because what does not exist, does not take its beginning except through something that does exist. If then nothing existed, it would be impossible for anything to begin, and there would now be nothing existing, which is admittedly false. Hence not all things are mere accidents, but there must be one necessarily existing being. Now every necessary thing either has a cause of its necessary existence, or has not. In the case of necessary things that have a cause for their necessary existence, the chain of causes cannot go back infinitely, just as not in the case of efficient causes, as proved. Hence there must be presupposed something necessarily existing through its own nature, not having a cause elsewhere but being itself the cause of the necessary existence of other things---which all call God.

[b]The fourth proo[/b]f arises from the degrees that are found in things. For there is found a greater and a less degree of goodness, truth, nobility, and the like. But more or less are terms spoken of various things as they approach in diverse ways toward something that is the greatest, just as in the case of hotter (more hot) which approaches nearer the greatest heat. There exists therefore something that is the truest, and best, and most noble, and in consequence, the greatest being. For what are the greatest truths are the greatest beings, as is said in the Metaphysics Bk. II. 2. What moreover is the greatest in its way, in another way is the cause of all things of its own kind (or genus); thus fire, which is the greatest heat, is the cause of all heat, as is said in the same book (cf. Plato and Aristotle). Therefore there exists something that is the cause of the existence of all things and of the goodness and of every perfection whatsoever---and this we call God.

[b]The fifth proo[/b]f arises from the ordering of things for we see that some things which lack reason, such as natural bodies, are operated in accordance with a plan. It appears from this that they are operated always or the more frequently in this same way the closer they follow what is the Highest; whence it is clear that they do not arrive at the result by chance but because of a purpose. The things, moreover, that do not have intelligence do not tend toward a result unless directed by some one knowing and intelligent; just as an arrow is sent by an archer. Therefore there is something intelligent by which all natural things are arranged in accordance with a plan---and this we call God.
In response to the first objection, then, I reply what Augustine says; that since God is entirely good, He would permit evil to exist in His works only if He were so good and omnipotent that He might bring forth good even from the evil. It therefore pertains to the infinite goodness of God that he permits evil to exist and from this brings forth good.

My reply to the second objection is that since nature is ordered in accordance with some defined purpose by the direction of some superior agent, those things that spring from nature must be dependent upon God, just as upon a first cause. Likewise, what springs from a proposition must be traceable to some higher cause which is not the human reason or will, because this is changeable and defective and everything changeable and liable to non-existence is dependent upon some unchangeable first principle that is necessarily self-existent as has been shown.

http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/source/aquinas3.html
Re: Doctor Angelicus And His Straws. by PastorAIO: 2:43pm On Oct 08, 2009
https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-315294.0.html

Check the above for another attempt to use the angelic Doctors arguments.
Re: Doctor Angelicus And His Straws. by Tudor6(f): 7:28pm On Oct 08, 2009
Its evident our very own Deep sight is Doctor Angelicus. . . . Now I believe in re-incarnation.
Re: Doctor Angelicus And His Straws. by PastorAIO: 3:38pm On Oct 09, 2009
Ineffability or Genesis

The Way that can be told of is not an unvarying way;
The names that can be named are not unvarying names.
It was from the Nameless that Heaven and Earth sprang;
The named is but the mother that rears the ten thousand creatures, each after its kind. (chap. 1, tr. Waley)

These famous first lines of the Tao Te Ching state that the Tao is ineffable i.e. Tao is nameless, goes beyond distinctions, and transcends language.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tao_Te_Ching
1

The tao that can be told
is not the eternal Tao
The name that can be named
is not the eternal Name.

The unnamable is the eternally real.
Naming is the origin
of all particular things.
http://academic.brooklyn.cuny.edu/core9/phalsall/texts/taote-v3.html

“If you can talk about it, it ain’t Tao.
If it has a name, it’s just another thing.

Tao doesn’t have a name.
Names are for ordinary things.
http://www.beatrice.com/wordpress/tao-te-ching
Re: Doctor Angelicus And His Straws. by PastorAIO: 3:52pm On Oct 09, 2009
Those who know do not talk.
Those who talk do not know.

Tao Teh Ching
Re: Doctor Angelicus And His Straws. by DeepSight(m): 3:58pm On Oct 09, 2009
Pasor/ Tudor, what do you make of Dr Angelicus' arguments as set out above.

They are very compelling lines of reasoning, and in different words, are basically what i have been trying to communicate.
Re: Doctor Angelicus And His Straws. by PastorAIO: 4:30pm On Oct 09, 2009
Deep Sight:

Pasor/ Tudor, what do you make of Dr Angelicus' arguments as set out above.

They are very compelling lines of reasoning, and in different words, are basically what i have been trying to communicate.

I am not convinced by them. They are weakened by the infinite regress counter argument. I think it is based on a different understanding of the relationship between Time and Eternity from how I understand it.
Re: Doctor Angelicus And His Straws. by DeepSight(m): 4:39pm On Oct 09, 2009
What do you make of this term:

"The oneness of infinity".

Does it mean anything to you?

Can i propose this to you as a counter to the eternal regress argument?

Does not the change of state argument reinforce that things pre-exist. . .
Re: Doctor Angelicus And His Straws. by PastorAIO: 5:11pm On Oct 09, 2009
I can extrapolate a number of meanings from that phrase. Infinity is an opposite to Finite. Finite says there is a limit. Finite refers to a quantity. A limited quantity. Infinite then suggests an unlimited quantity.

Let's think about that word quantity. Counting suggests that there are a multiplicity of something. Multiplicity is the opposite of one, or oneness. So to me the 'oneness of infinity' is an oxymoron. If it is one then it has been counted and found to be one. If it is infinite it is definitely not one, but you'll go on counting forever.

By the way, Eternity has nothing to do with passing time. An infinite length of time does not equal eternity. Eternity means No Time. Not a long time.

Change of State suggests that something Exists in Power as well as Act, not that it pre-exists at a previous time.
Re: Doctor Angelicus And His Straws. by DeepSight(m): 5:34pm On Oct 09, 2009
Pastor AIO:

I can extrapolate a number of meanings from that phrase. Infinity is an opposite to Finite. Finite says there is a limit. Finite refers to a quantity. A limited quantity. Infinite then suggests an unlimited quantity.

Let's think about that word quantity. Counting suggests that there are a multiplicity of something. Multiplicity is the opposite of one, or oneness. So to me the 'oneness of infinity' is an oxymoron. If it is one then it has been counted and found to be one. If it is infinite it is definitely not one, but you'll go on counting forever.

By the way, Eternity has nothing to do with passing time. An infinite length of time does not equal eternity. Eternity means No Time. Not a long time.

Change of State suggests that something Exists in Power as well as Act, not that it pre-exists at a previous time.

Your post reminds me how glad i am to have your excellent mind back.

But - ! You have not grasped it yet.

Let us for a moment indulge in a fantasy, for the purpose only of understanding the term "Oneness of Infinity"

Let us imagine a time when nothing existed, no universe,no big bang, nothing.

A stagnant nothingness of black.

There is absolute nothingness. it is this nothingness that is infinite, because of its "zero" nature. If you conceptualize it aright, you will also see that that very nothingness, because it is vacant, leaves open infinite possibilities.

This is why the figure "0" (zero) is used to represent infinity.

This infinity, is an intangible emptiness, and not something that can be counted in terms of being double or multiple.
It is thus in reality ONE great infinity only.

My idea is that there is power embedded in that great oneness, and i suspect that that is the very foundation of God and Eternity, although i cannot elaborate on that here.

By the way, on change of state, if i see ice, i know that with heat, it will become water - not dissappear. With further heat, it will become stream, - not dissapear. You can't destroy it, you can only change its state. This suggests that the universe is defined by a change of state from Energy to Matter. What Energy was that? I think the Big Bang was the moment of "Let there be light". . . and Divine Energy exploded into matter. . .
Re: Doctor Angelicus And His Straws. by PastorAIO: 6:36pm On Oct 10, 2009
Hmmm . . . , okay.
Deep Sight:

Your post reminds me how glad i am to have your excellent mind back.


Thank you.
Deep Sight:


But - ! You have not grasped it yet.

Let us for a moment indulge in a fantasy, for the purpose only of understanding the term "Oneness of Infinity"

Let us imagine a time when nothing existed, no universe,no big bang, nothing.

A stagnant nothingness of black.

There is absolute nothingness. it is this nothingness that is infinite, because of its "zero" nature. If you conceptualize it aright, you will also see that that very nothingness, because it is vacant, leaves open infinite possibilities.



I don't think that the human mind can truly imagine nothing.  We can imagine empty space (a vacuum) but not pure nothing.  The brain is developed to deal with a 3 dimensional spatial reality.  If you want to investigate something else then you've got to go beyond cerebral conceptualising.   

That word conceptualize is very important because rightly all we are making are concepts.  The brain conceptualizes in a very limited way.   We cannot imagine the non existence of Space (a real nothingness).  Yet we know that Space is just another fabric of creation just like stones and trees etc. 

If you cannot appreciate the limitations imposed on us that is when you are likely to make statements like a 'nothingness of black'.  Nothing isn't black.  Nothing isn't even a spatial vacuum.  It is the brain that conceptualises and uses associations that decides to represent the idea of nothing with the colour black. 

I don't see how nothingness, however misconstrued, is an infinity of possibilities.  I would imagine that the world, even as it is now, has an infinity of possibilities.  (note that I'm also making a distinction between 'being an infinity of possibility, and Having an infinity of possibilities). 
I also don't see how having or being an infinity of possibilities leads you to say that Nothing is infinity.  Every morning I wake up I face an infinity of possibilities for the way my day will turn out.  That doesn't make my day infinite, or me infinite.  Like I said before Infinity has to do with quantities and not the nature of being (any being).  The infinity should then refer to an attribute of the object that can be measured rather than to the essence of the object.  ie, it can be infinitely tall, or infinitely stupid.  But it can't just be infinite, full stop.

The same goes for the term Great.  What does God is Great mean?  Great at what?  Is it the size of him that we are referring to?  or is he a great monster, committing great monstrosities.  Great what?  What is the attribute that he is great at?  Without that I can only conclude that someone is talking nonsense, nice sounding nonsense but nonsense all the same.  God is Great!   Whatever.

Same goes for Perfect.  God is Perfect?  A perfect what.  I've met some perfect clowns but I'm sure that is not what we are trying to say God is.
Re: Doctor Angelicus And His Straws. by PastorAIO: 6:43pm On Oct 10, 2009
Deep Sight:


This is why the figure "0" (zero) is used to represent infinity.


I thought infinity was represented by an 8 lying on it's side.

Deep Sight:

This infinity, is an intangible emptiness, and not something that can be counted in terms of being double or multiple.
It is thus in reality ONE great infinity only.

Perhaps there are no words for what you are trying to say so you have to resort to Oxymorons. Many have done so before. Check out a philosopher called Geber.

My idea is that there is power embedded in that great oneness, and i suspect that that is the very foundation of God and Eternity, although i cannot elaborate on that here.

By power do you mean possibility?


By the way, on change of state, if i see ice, i know that with heat, it will become water - not dissappear. With further heat, it will become stream, - not dissapear. You can't destroy it, you can only change its state. This suggests that the universe is defined by a change of state from Energy to Matter. What Energy was that? I think the Big Bang was the moment of "Let there be light". . . and Divine Energy exploded into matter. . .

But in the universe today there is still an interchange between energy and matter. Energy is a part of creation and not pre-existent to it. just like space and Time.
Re: Doctor Angelicus And His Straws. by vanni(f): 10:01am On Oct 11, 2009
lmao
Re: Doctor Angelicus And His Straws. by DeepSight(m): 10:38am On Oct 11, 2009
Ah, Pastor, I give it to you. Your reasoning is really worth engaging with, and i am most pleased.

Although i still believe that we are at odds in grasping what i am trying to communicate. But i agree with you that that is probably the result of lacking the words to express my ideas properly. You see, somethings do transcend words.

I will proceed within a latter post to address the issues you raised in reaction to my post, while i will try as much as possible to focus on the topic: Dr. Angelicus' postulations.

However, before we proceed, please do clear something up for me. I have told you before that you seem to have a very contradictory and hazily defined stance. You denied that, but it has reared its head again. . . Despite being titled "Pastor", you have opened a thread declaring that religion makes people "stoopid". . . In that thread you also said something along the lines of the atheists being right after all. . .

In this, i hope you are not making the fundamental mistake 99% of NL atheists make: namely that they see dubious fallacies within religion and therefore conclude that the Creator does not exist. They do not realize that although their hatred of religion is quite justifiable, this is nonetheless entirely different from the Cosmological Question of the Existence of God.

So please, can you indulge me, and set out your core-convictions on Theological, Spiritual and Religious matters very briefly. It would help me understand your perspective much better.

Better still, i will open a separate thread to address you specifically. Meet me there.
Re: Doctor Angelicus And His Straws. by DeepSight(m): 2:33pm On Sep 08, 2010
Pastor AIO:

I thought infinity was represented by an 8 lying on it's side.

No doubt it is: but in philosophical and representational terms zero is the nothingness which is indicative of an infinite void. The concept of zero is philosophically perhaps the deepest thing which a philosopher may contemplate. It has a very direct co-relation to the infinity within God. This is why the co-relation with representational mathematics derives the sequence (at least in our base 10) as follows -

0 - 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7 - 8 - 9 - 0

The zero at either end is indicative of a possible infinity in the sequence.
Re: Doctor Angelicus And His Straws. by Syphonn(m): 10:18am On Nov 12, 2017
WHAT DO YOU CONSIDER AS A CHURCH
In the Bible, the word the christian church is a translation of the Greek word ekklesia, which means “a calling.” It never refers to a building or meeting place, but always to people, to the “calls” of the world society by God. calling them to His service.

The Christian Church of the Bible is not a cold and stone building, but a group of warm and loving people specially chosen by God.

Read more: http://www.busygisting.com/what-do-you-consider-as-the-church-the-congregation-or-the-physical-building/

(1) (Reply)

Pastor E.a.adeboye Follows Nairaland On Twitter! / Keshi: TB Joshua's Anointing Water Saved Us From Mali's Juju / The President General League Of Imam And Alfas South-west Edo And Delta Is Dead

(Go Up)

Sections: politics (1) business autos (1) jobs (1) career education (1) romance computers phones travel sports fashion health
religion celebs tv-movies music-radio literature webmasters programming techmarket

Links: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10)

Nairaland - Copyright © 2005 - 2024 Oluwaseun Osewa. All rights reserved. See How To Advertise. 87
Disclaimer: Every Nairaland member is solely responsible for anything that he/she posts or uploads on Nairaland.