@TonyReinke neither did Augustine, but you don't have any problem using Augustine's doctrines on grace.
English
Hosanna in Excelsis
11.5K posts
Hosanna in Excelsis
@hugdel
ars est celare artem
Texas, USA Katılım Ocak 2009
396 Takip Edilen475 Takipçiler
Muller: “Aquinas had, most probably, a rudimentary knowledge of Greek.”
[PRRD 2:45]
Tony Reinke@TonyReinke
A Thomistic rebrand that wasn’t gonna stick. … Hurd (April 2022): “Thomas is most famous, well, for a lot of people today he’s not famous for this unfortunately, but he he’s most famous in history for being one of the most biblical theologians of the doctrine of the Holy Trinity. Thomas is as biblicist, as backwoods Bible-thumping biblicist as you can possibly get. I grew up fundamental Baptist. I grew up in a Bible-thumping home. I grew up with King James. I grew up, you know, super super backwood Baptist. Thomas was like epic peak backwood Baptist Bible thumper.”
English
@triplemike90s @5Solas2 like William Lane Craig? that believes in a Triune God with three wills? or should I believe the one with one will?. And the Christ Godhood means that he is consubstancial with the Father, or subordinate?
English
English
Some non-denominational churches have better theology than the Roman Catholic Church.
Pope Respecter@poperespecter1
Non-Denoms are now the largest Protestant "denom". The Reformation ended in a joke.
English
@carleolson my IQ also plunged after becoming Catholic. Probably because I started reading Aquina's Summa...lol
English
Ah, this arrogant piffle brings back some fun memories.
Not only did my IQ apparently plunge into the abyss when I became Catholic, but I was an open book to people (including family and long-time friends) who would rarely (with 3 or 4 notable exceptions) engage with my reasons, study, and journey.
So, I was told:
"You are going to hell. You've rejected the true faith."
"You need to really read the Bible."
"This is just because you like art and music."
"You are so arrogant to think you know more than the Word of God."
"Why join a Church that tells you what you have to think about everything?"
"You're rebelling against your parents."
"You know that Catholics aren't Christian, right?"
The humility and charity in such comments are quite obvious, right?
Ryan Denton@TexasPreacher
I've noticed young men are into RCC/EO because it's trendy, not bc it's true. They like the colors, buzz, & pomp of the thing. It's cooler than to settle for the simplicity of Christ & worshipping Him in Spirit & truth. It's vainglory that leads them, not the Spirit of God.
English
ese pdf que me mandaste prueba mi punto. Este es un gran ejemplo de la gran "fluidez" de la mente de Lutero: ""El doctor Martín Lutero lo quiere así, y dice que un papista y un burro son la misma cosa".
Sinceramente hay que ser muy tonto para dejar que Lutero cambie la biblia en base a su propia autoridad y pensar que esto es la gran maravilla.
Español
Esa fue una traducción palabra por palabra de la Vulgata (latín), lo que la hizo rígida, torpe y poco fluida en alemán. La de Lutero fue desde los idiomas originales. La de Lutero tenía mayor fluidez y contribuyó mucho más al alemán moderno; por eso se conoce mucho más.
Premios Hispanidad Capitán Etayo@Premios_C_Etayo
Luteranos al borde de un ataque de nervios 😁:
Español
@DrJordanBCooper I would never get to the hypostatic union as it is outlined by the Council of Chalcedon going straight to the bible and doing exegesis. Same thing with the consubstantiality of the Trinity.
So, your argument doesn't really work.
English
I recall a conversation with a highly intelligent RC student who was asking me some very specific questions about the logic of the Lutheran view of predestination relative to a specific passage in the Summa. When I shifted the conversation to Ephesians 1, arguing that the position was derived from an exegesis of the text rather than philosophical coherence, he looked at me like I had two heads. After more time talking about the issue, it became apparent that he had never actually wrestled with the issue Biblically on anything but the most surface level. He didn't even know what Ephesians 1 was about until I read it to him.
This gets at a problem I see often among young students of theology today. There is extensive knowledge of certain elements of the history of dogma (a good thing), but almost no engagement with the Biblical text itself. This direct engagement with the Biblical text really is what is most appealing about the Reformation.
Scott R. Swain@scottrswain
What is most attractive about Reformed theology is its exegesis. In the Reformed tradition, there's an intelligent, and often creative, appropriation of the best of Christian philosophy. But, at the end of the day, a tradition stands or falls on its exegesis of Holy Scripture.
English
Catholics won't deny that works are fruit of the faith. We don't say that faith is the fruit of works either. What we are saying is what the bible says: that works play a role in our justification. This comes directly from James and from Paul.
"Was not Abraham our father justified by works when he offered up Isaac his son on the altar?" James 2:21
"for it is not the hearers of the Law who are just before God, but the doers of the Law will be justified." Romans 2:13
English
@michaeljknowles Faith without works is indeed dead, but works are the fruit of the faith, not the other way around!
English
How many times does the phrase "faith alone" appear in the Bible? And what specifically does the Bible say about "faith alone"?
Frank Turek@DrFrankTurek
IMPORTANT QUESTION: Is salvation by faith alone, or by faith plus works?
English
are you seriously saying that "works of the law" are the same as good works?. What are you going to do with all your scholars that affirm that works of the law refer to those things that make a Jew Jew, like circumcision.
Doug Moo, N.T Wright, Scot McKnight, to name a few. How come you are right and they are wrong?
English
Respectfully to Michael, this is slop apologetics not meant to actually engage the question or engage with scripture.
Scripture lays out the concept very clearly in multiple passages. You cannot escape it.
“For we hold that one is justified by faith apart from works of the law.”
Romans 3:28
“For what does the Scripture say? “Abraham believed God, and it was counted to him as righteousness.” Now to the one who works, his wages are not counted as a gift but as his due. And to the one who does not work but believes in him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is counted as righteousness, just as David also speaks of the blessing of the one to whom God counts righteousness apart from works:”
Romans 4:3-6
“But if it is by grace, it is no longer on the basis of works; otherwise grace would no longer be grace.”
Romans 11:6
“For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast.”
Ephesians 2:8-9
“yet we know that a person is not justified by works of the law but through faith in Jesus Christ, so we also have believed in Christ Jesus, in order to be justified by faith in Christ and not by works of the law, because by works of the law no one will be justified.”
Galatians 2:16
Michael Knowles@michaeljknowles
How many times does the phrase "faith alone" appear in the Bible? And what specifically does the Bible say about "faith alone"?
English
@MethodMinistry You refuted sola scriptura, because "scripture interprets scripture" is not in the bible. It is a creation of protestantism.
English
There is nothing in ST I, Q. 1 that contradicts the internal unity of Thomas’s thought. In Article 3, Thomas explicitly argues that Sacra Doctrina is a single, unified science. This means that once a metaphysical truth is utilized within theology, it is no longer merely 'philosophy'—it is subsumed into a higher, sacred wisdom. To attempt a surgical separation between the 'metaphysical system' and the 'dogma' is to violate the very unity Thomas insists upon.
Furthermore, the central pillar of his system—the metaphysics of Esse—is not a pagan import but is eminently biblical. Thomas himself confirms this in ST II-II, Q. 174, A. 6, where he credits the revelation at the burning bush, not Aristotelian deduction, for the 'fuller instruction' of the human race regarding the simplicity of the Divine essence. For Thomas, the 'I AM' of Exodus 3:14 is the genetic source of his metaphysics.
You need to reread Thomas.
English
Based on Thomas' own principles, there can be no necessary bridge from accepting his views on natural theology/metaphysics to accepting his views on, say, transubstantiation or Mary because of the strict distinction between what is known by natural or supernatural revelation.
English
@RyanHurst171 @PerfInjust but the founding Fathers were almost all Masons. @grok, were the founding fathers freemasons?
English
Your reminder that Roman Catholicism in America is a minority identity and offers many of the privileges of minority status (group-solidarity, victimhood, ingroup preference).
This is its main appeal, along with zero ecclesial accountability.
Faith Merrill@itsFaithMerrill
Just a reminder to Trump and his team Don’t mess with the Catholic Church. We will defeat you.
English
you are wrong. His metaphysical views are primarily based on revelation. You want to make it look as if those are separated from it, and so there is no neccesary bridge. But that is false. The greatest contribution of Aquinas to the science of being is the real distinction between Esse and Essence, and this is based not only on the platonic concept of participation, or on the distinction between matter and form, but on his very understanding of Exodus 3:14. "I AM THAT IAM" is for Thomas the confirmation that God is pure act, and from that point onwards he recast all the Aristotellian and Platonic categories. Thomas didn't just "use" Aristotelianism; he transformed it. He adjusted the metaphysical definitions of "person," "substance," and "relation" specifically so they could accommodate God (Ipsum Esse) & the Trinity. Therefore, the metaphysics is not a bridge that you can decide to cross or not, because it is the very foundation of his Theology on Mary, the Saints, Justification, Transubstantiation, Baptismal Regeneration, etc.
English
This is wrong. The explanations of supernatural dogmas use the metaphysical system, but which dogmas are affirmed does not logically follow from the metaphysical system, since supernatural revelation provides truths from beyond the realm of philosophy, i.e. the realm of natural reason. So, for example, Thomas will use his Aristotelianism to explain the meaning and details of Trinitarian doctrine, but whether or not God is a Trinity is determined, according to Thomas, solely from God's revelation of Himself and does not logically follow from the metaphysics established via natural reason.
To miss this relies a complete and fundamental failure to understand Thomas and medieval scholasticism more generally.
English
@PerfInjust If only these caths knew what our founders had to say about Rome and her place in the USA.
English
@petrogustavo primera vez en la vida que estoy de acuerdo con Gustavo Petro. Pero en esto tiene toda la razón. Eso si, bajo la premisa de que existe una teoría de la guerra justa, a la que el Santo Padre igual suscribe.
Español
El derecho de la Iglesia católica y su Papa de pedir la paz del mundo viene directamente de las mismas palabras de Jesús. Jesús pregonaba la Paz. Nadie puede amenazar a ninguna persona porque pregona la paz.
FactPost@factpostnews
New reporting reveals the Pentagon threatened Pope Leo XIV’s ambassador over the Pope's anti-war statements: "America has the military power to do whatever it wants in the world. The Catholic Church had better take its side.”
Español
@MethodMinistry but there was 3 centuries before the reformation. And yet you still reject it.
English
There was no monolithic systematic theology of the first millennium of Christianity. There was theological diversity.
Roman Catholics and Eastern Orthodoxs aren't being honest with church history.
English
Hosanna in Excelsis retweetledi
Anthropic asked the Vatican for help because their AI was moving too fast for them to control.
A 60 year old Catholic priest who used to be a tech executive is now writing the rules for how Claude thinks.
Here is how a man of God ended up inside one of the most powerful AI companies on earth.
His name is Father Brendan McGuire. He runs a small parish in Los Altos, California. Some of Silicon Valley's top AI researchers sit in his pews on Sundays.
But before he was a priest, he was one of them.
Studied cryptosystems at Trinity College Dublin in the 1980s. Moved to America. Became the executive director of PCMCIA, the organization that basically standardized how memory cards work in every computer. Had degrees in engineering and software. Could have been a millionaire in the Valley ten times over.
He walked away from all of it to serve God.
But then Anthropic called.
Chris Olah, one of Anthropic's co-founders, reached out to him directly. McGuire said they were basically asking the Vatican for help because the industry was moving so fast down this road that they needed someone to pump the brakes.
His words: "They basically were asking for direct help from the Vatican to convene and help the industry, because the industry was going so fast down this road."
So this priest, along with a Vatican Bishop named Paul Tighe and a tech ethics director from Santa Clara University, sat down and helped rewrite the Claude Constitution. That is the set of rules that tells Claude what it can and cannot do. What it should care about. How it should think.
A priest helped write the conscience of an AI.
And it gets wilder.
Anthropic actually sued the US government because the Pentagon wanted to use their AI for autonomous warfare and domestic surveillance. Anthropic said no. Got effectively blacklisted for it.
Catholic scholars then filed a federal court brief defending Anthropic, saying their ethical limits represent "minimal standards of ethical conduct for technical progress."
McGuire almost filed his own brief. He said "they are having a moral conversation. They may not call it moral, but I call it moral."
Meanwhile this 60 year old priest is now writing a novel using Claude about a monk and his AI companion. The working title is "The Soul of AI: A Priest, an Algorithm, and the Search for Wisdom."
He also said something that stuck with me.
"I think we have to help these machines be tilted towards good, otherwise they are just going to reflect back the good and evil of the world. That is a horrifying thing, right?"
The biggest AI companies in the world are building machines that think. And the person they called to make sure those machines have a conscience was not another engineer.
It was a priest.
English
@CraigACarter1 what it is really needed in Protestantism is the metaphysics of Esse. That goes well beyond Aristotelianism and incorporates Platonism. Aquinas makes the perfect syntesis.
English
Protestantism flourishes within a broad Aristotelianism but not within a broad Kantianism.
Scott R. Swain@scottrswain
Christian Aristotelianism is a broad discourse within which one finds many ongoing debates. Being Protestant means you don’t have to take an oath of loyalty to any single thinker or school within this discourse. Loyalty to the truth, even above one’s friends, is what matters.
English
Protestants like to defend sola fide using Eph 2:9. The problem is that they ignore other things that Paul has to say about salvation:
Hosanna in Excelsis@hugdel
the problem for you is that Paul views Salvation in a more comprehensive way than you. In Ephesians 2:9 he talks about the past dimension of justification, using the aorist. But he can also talk about the fact that we are being saved, and that we are getting closer to be saved. Unless you see the whole picture, you are going to get him wrong: Salvation as a process in the present: "by which you also are being saved, if you hold firmly to the word which I preached to you, unless you believed in vain". 1 Cor 15:2. The greek shows a present passive verb, not an aorist. This means that salvation is a process and not a one time event. Salvation as an ongoing process with results in the future: "Do this, knowing the time, that it is already the hour for you to awaken from sleep; for now salvation is nearer to us than when we first believed". Rom 13:11. How can salvation be nearer in your view?. Particularly if you already believe!. This is the sort of analysis that you need to do. Not just quoting a verse in isolation and just ignoring the rest.
English