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

From: David Opderbeck <dopderbeck@gmail.com>
Date: Tue Mar 11 2008 - 20:32:16 EDT

George said: *Don't believe everything you read in a blog. In fact, don't
believe most of
it.
*
I respond: I should make clear that in pointing to Scot McKnight's blog, I
wasn't intending to endorse everything or anything in the comments to any of
the posts. You have to distinguish between the posts themselves -- which on
Scot's blog, I often, but not always, agree with -- and the comments from
readers, which can range from very insightful to misinformed to ludicrous to
malicious. The main thing I wanted to point out is that "progressive
evangelicals" are very willing to discuss these questions.
On Tue, Mar 11, 2008 at 7:16 PM, George Murphy <gmurphy@raex.com> wrote:

> Aquinas concludes his discussion of this issue - whether or not the world
> is
> eternal - in the Summa Contra Gentiles as follows:
>
> "The preceding considerations enable us to avoid various errors made by
> the
> pagan philosophers; the assertion of the world's eternity, the assertion
> of
> the eternity of the world's matter, out of which at a certain time the
> world
> began to be formed, either by chance, or by some intellect, or even by
> love
> or by strive. For in all these cases something beside God is claimed to
> be
> eternal; and this is incompatible with the Catholic faith."
>
> Don't believe everything you read in a blog. In fact, don't believe most
> of
> it.
>
> The complete discussion of this is in Saint Thomas Aquinas, Summa Contra
> Gentiles, Book 2: Creation (Notre Dame, 1975), pp.91-115.
>
> Shalom
> George
> http://web.raex.com/~gmurphy/
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Merv" <mrb22667@kansas.net>
> To: <asa@calvin.edu>
> Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2008 7:06 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.
>

-- 
David W. Opderbeck
Associate Professor of Law
Seton Hall University Law School
Gibbons Institute of Law, Science & Technology
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 20:33:22 2008

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Tue Mar 11 2008 - 20:33:22 EDT