1 of 1
| Theoretical Philosophy » Is God responsible for sin? » 6/08/2019 6:21 pm |
- Bellarmine
- Replies: 2
-
I just watched a talk by Ed Feser on YouTube entitled "Edward Feser "Classical Theism and the Nature of God""
He talked about the idea that things can only exist in reality if they first exist in the intellect of God. He gave as examples roundess and redness.
Which made me think - "what about sin?" Can sin only exist in reality if it first exists in God's intellect? I learned years ago that God did not create sin but that we did (do) by taking the good things that God has made and twisting them into evil to suit our own purposes (i.e.: God created sex - a good thing - but then we take that good thing and create pornography and prostitution). But is it right to say they we could only create sin if it first existed in the intellect of God? So we could only create pornography if it first existed in God's mind.
Something in this doesn't seem right to me.
Would love to hear your thoughts
Thanks
| Theoretical Philosophy » An infinite universe with a prior cause? » 5/05/2018 7:55 pm |
- Bellarmine
- Replies: 0
-
I read in a blog called "A bagful of Insights" that even if the universe were infinite it would still require a cause, and if I'm understanding it correctly that the universe could also have a prior cause even if infinite. I can't wrap my head around an infinite anything having a prior cause and would love to read some thoughts and clarification on it from members. Here are the relevant quotes:
"In fact, as some philosophers have pointed out (e.g., Edward Feser), he (Aquinas) didn’t think that the temporal beginning of the universe was something that could be demonstrated philosophically – and argued that it would still require a cause, even if it were itself infinite."
"Oderberg asserts that even if (say) the universe were eternal, and had no beginning, it certainly does not preclude the possibility of a first member, the existence of which is metaphysically necessary – not to mention metaphysically (as opposed to temporally) prior – for the existence of such a universe."
| Theoretical Philosophy » Atheist and laws of Physics » 4/18/2018 8:03 am |
- Bellarmine
- Replies: 6
-
In a conversation yesterday with an atheist and explaining to him Aquinas' Second Way. His objection: "why can't the five major laws of physics be the sustaining cause of all things?"
My reply was that the laws of Physics are contingent themselves and so cannot be the sustaining cause of everything else that is contingent.
Just curious how some of you (who much more experienced than me) would have handled this objection. I ask this knowing it's not the last conversation I will have with him.
Thanks in advance!
| Theoretical Philosophy » Third Way » 4/06/2018 1:48 pm |
- Bellarmine
- Replies: 3
-
I find it odd that Aquinas believed in a beginning yet he appeals to infinity when formulating the Third Way. How do we reconcile this?
Thanks in advance!
| Theoretical Philosophy » Intentionality » 2/24/2018 10:43 am |
- Bellarmine
- Replies: 2
-
All:
Can anyone steer me towards any online articles, blogs or books on intentionality of the mind? I've read a bit about it in Ed Feser's "Aquinas" and I've heard David Bentley Hart speaking about it but I still don't understand it well enough to teach it (I'm a Catechist for a teen RCIA group).
Thanks in advance!
| Theoretical Philosophy » Infinite Regress » 2/11/2018 1:52 pm |
- Bellarmine
- Replies: 3
-
Thank you both! The examples you provided and the link to the article were both very helpful.
Much appreciated!
| Theoretical Philosophy » Infinite Regress » 2/10/2018 8:36 pm |
- Bellarmine
- Replies: 3
-
All:
This is my first post so hello to all!
I'm a catechist who teaches an RCIA teen class and would like to introduce my students to the second way. I have a question I'm hoping for help with; I need to understand why Aquinas is accepting of the possibility of an infinite regress when looking at a linear explanation of creation but is not accepting of a infinite regress when considering the hierarchical explanation of creation. I'm struggling to understand the distinction between the two.
Thanks in advance for the help!
1 of 1