Re: [asa] eternal universe in Aquinas' time?

From: Don Nield <d.nield@auckland.ac.nz>
Date: Tue Mar 11 2008 - 19:10:00 EDT

It is worth nothing that some present-day scientist-theologians such as
Polkinghorne and Worthing have made the same point -- even if the Big
bang theory was superseded by a theory of continuous creation, the
ontological dependence on God would remain.
Don

cmekve@aol.com wrote:
> I think Aquinas said that the universe was finite from a theological perspective based on revelation. However, from a purely philosophical approach, he argued that even if [emphasis on "if"] the universe was eternal, it would still have an ontological dependence on God.
>
> Karl [ASA member]
> *************
> Karl V. Evans
> cmekve@aol.com
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Merv <mrb22667@kansas.net>
> To: asa@calvin.edu
> Sent: Tue, 11 Mar 2008 5:06 pm
> Subject: [asa] eternal universe in Aquinas' time?
>
>
> On the 'Jesus Creed' blog that David pointed out, I found this interesting comment...
>
> "In the day of Thomas Aquinas, Genesis was read as pure metaphor, simply because philosophers agreed with theologians that the universe was more or less eternal. ‘Creation’ then, referred to an ontological dependence of Creation on its Creator."
> ----someone named Daniel
>
> Is this really true? Did theologians from a millennium ago really think the universe was eternal? Philosophers I could understand, but I would be interested why any theologians would reach that conclusion --- if they really did. Perhaps I don't understand his latter comment.
>
> --Merv
>
> To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
> "unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
>
>
>

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Tue Mar 11 19:10:50 2008

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Tue Mar 11 2008 - 19:10:50 EDT