[ / / / / / / / / / / / / / ] [ dir / animu / ara / ausneets / fa / leftpol / sonyeon / vg / vichan ]

/christian/ - Christian Discussion and Fellowship

For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
Email
Comment *
File
Password (Randomized for file and post deletion; you may also set your own.)
* = required field[▶ Show post options & limits]
Confused? See the FAQ.
Embed
(replaces files and can be used instead)
Options

Allowed file types:jpg, jpeg, gif, png, webm, mp4, pdf
Max filesize is 16 MB.
Max image dimensions are 15000 x 15000.
You may upload 5 per post.


The Lord is my light and my salvation; whom shall I fear? the Lord is the strength of my life; of whom shall I be afraid?

File: 0122cd99b5449a7⋯.jpg (170.41 KB, 645x900, 43:60, 2-st-thomas-aquinas-grange….jpg)

dc9b67 No.670777

How much do I need to know to fully understand Summa Theologiae? I know that Christian theology bases itself in Greek philosophy, but do I have to read all works of Plato and Aristotle from cover to cover, or is there a list of concepts that I need to wrap my mind around?

01d2c0 No.670781

just read the church fathers instead. this dude is a larper and constantly quotes pagans instead of the bible for some reason. he rarely references the church fathers, and only does so to attempt to "disprove" them. latins on this board defend this dude but never even read his stuff lmao. also i remember he said that those in heaven are fully aware of those in hell and revel in their suffering since it makes heaven better. just trash theology all around really. this is why latins so often fall victim to scholasticism and basically being pharisees.


984364 No.670782

Believe it or not Summa is easy. It was written for brainlet seminaries so that they would have a solid grasp on theology. If you know basics you will get Aquinas well.

But now, what are basics? Well, I don't know. Once you read into Summa all that he wrote is basics. But I think that it can be summed in:

>Aristotelian four causes

>Distinction between form and matter

>Distinction between natural and supernatural

>Final say of the Church is end of discussion in speculative sense

Eventaully 24 Thomistic Theses of Pius X


4d0b69 No.670809

>>670777

Don't start with the Summa, it will be way over your head. Read Edward Feser's book called Aquinas first. He presents Aquinas in a newbie friendly way. You can't read his works without understanding what substance, essence, form, act, etc. are. Seriously, read Feser's book, he's the leading modern Thomist.


fc3603 No.670813

>>670809

B-b-but I h-have r-r-read Mises and Marx without any problems.


4d0b69 No.670815

>>670813

They don't talk about metaphysics. You don't need the knowledge of specific metaphysical framework to read them.


d8c7f4 No.670859


28337f No.670899

>>670859

>Now everything is known the more for being compared with its contrary, because when contraries are placed beside one another they become more conspicuous. Wherefore in order that the happiness of the saints may be more delightful to them and that they may render more copious thanks to God for it, they are allowed to see perfectly the sufferings of the damned.

>That the saints may enjoy their beatitude and the grace of God more abundantly they are permitted to see the punishment of the damned in hell.

>The blessed in the kingdom of heaven will see the punishments of the damned, in order that their bliss be more delightful for them.

so yeah, avoid this guy and read something more profitable


ed89e3 No.670907

>>670901

welcome to the lake of fire you reprobate get out of this thread


ed89e3 No.670908

>>670809

why do people keep saying the summa is complicated. it's so simple, except that i always read "on contrary" first because i want to know what he actually says, then i check out the objections etc. if there's a term he uses and you don't know just look it up, it really doesn't take much work.

i feel people think aquinas is a lot more complicated than he actually is. lots of stuff is pretty straightforward.


ed89e3 No.670910

>>670781

>those in heaven are fully aware of those in hell and revel in their suffering since it makes heaven better.

honestly why i'm looking forward to heaven.

it's hilarious how you also call one of the most influential philosophers of all time to be trash tier. it's clearly cause you are an ortholarper (it's hilarious how much you're projecting - like literally how was aquinas larping? sorry ol ex-protty, you'll always be a larper), and you have to come to terms that all of western civilization was built from the cat church (meow) that you were raised since a wee protty to hate. God gave you a bit of a brain to realize that being a protty is beyond stupid but you still hate the one true church and decided to LARP, and you feel insecure that no post schism "saint" that the ortholarp church has anywhere of the influence and respect of st. thomas aquinas, the ANGELIC DOCTOR.


6aaac2 No.670916

>>670777

How about you read the Scriptures and the pre-schism Fathers instead?

>>670910

>honestly why i'm looking forward to heaven.

>being in the presence of God isn't enough, I want to revel in the suffering of damned souls

And you have the audacity to call that anon a LARPer.


16f084 No.670988

>>670781

>>670899

>>670901

>>670902

>>670914

he wants to read summa he didnt say the church fathers. So many butthurt orthodox and dyer shills in this thread


ed89e3 No.671030

>>670916

he is 100% a prot convert LARPer, are you one too?

>I want to revel in the suffering of damned souls

Gods Justice is beautiful and perfect. Just as being in the communion of saints. If God's Justice was not perfect and delightful, he wouldn't be God.

ortholarpers are deep down still baptists


ed89e3 No.671034

>>670988

>he wants to read summa he didnt say the church fathers. So many butthurt orthodox and dyer shills in this thread

agreed. they're sad they don't have a philosophical giant that's actually respected around the world and even in secular philosophy like st. thomas aquinas. their so called church is virtually unknown in the west, no influence whatsoever. virtually every world leader meets with the pope. ortholarpers are just jelly.


1fa6d8 No.671047

>>670910

>all of western civilization was built from the cat church

Sure, then it went apostate. That's why things moved leaps and bounds after the protestant reformation and, then, likewise, mainstream protestantism went apostate.

It's almost like institutions keep failing and the faith has to be renewed by actual followers through new methods and that institutions don't represent God…


f948be No.671331

If you want to get direct exposure to the Summa but are still intimidated, A Shorter Summa, (edited) by Peter Kreeft is pretty solid. Essential questions, so you can get used to St. Aquinas's format for the Summa, and copious footnotes as well. Then you can begin on the whole of the Summa. If you're still intimidated by the sheer volume of the Summa Theologiae, you can try the Summa Contra Gentiles aka On the Truth of the Catholic Faith and work your way through that first; bear in mind that SCG is aimed at missionaries trying to spread the faith as opposed to the Summa's "seminary manual for brainlets" aim. Hope this helps, and God be with ye on your endeavor! :)


4d0b69 No.671343

>>670908

Going into the Summa without a solid understanding of Aristotelian metaphysics and physics is simply not smart. Sure, you can understand a good part of the book just by deductive logic alone, but you miss out on crucial things.


1dfd6f No.671344

File: 04f6e53168da359⋯.png (105.04 KB, 500x507, 500:507, our-sun-my-disgust-9752849.png)

>>670910

Oh wow, some child of Our Heavenly Father you are.


b90d30 No.671352

File: 42b94354832d074⋯.jpg (247.16 KB, 635x1024, 635:1024, DCNXIDJWAAAlJPd.jpg)

When posting on the board, please remember to abide by rule 2:

>Interactions must be for the sake of Charity. Post made in the spirit of disruption or spite could earn you a short to permanent ban.

<Charity is a foundational concept in Christianity. It is the virtue of supreme love for God and others. It is the greatest of the three virtues Paul emphasizes, and governs all Christian conduct. Just because this is an 8chan board does not alleviate Christians of their moral duty. All interactions must be done with this in mind.

Let's keep the discussion relevant to OP's questions.


137963 No.671442

It's a good book for philosophy but not for theology.

The book wouldn't change a single its main message if he had never heard of Christ. If you want good philosophical foundations read Plato instead.


137963 No.671446

>>671034

>everyone who disagrees with me is jelly

Do you truly believe that?


874740 No.671497

File: 2d4c9c56721cc6f⋯.png (437.18 KB, 1254x784, 627:392, 2d4c9c56721cc6f6e3b1441780….png)

>>670777

It's challenging but not impossible.

Study a basic description of aristotelic terminology (substance, essence, being, actus, enetelechy)

Then start from here http://www.catholictheology.info/summa-theologica/

At this link you find the Summa in synthesis plus explanations. You can easily read and understand a topic every day, studying it in less than two months.

then you can go deeper by downloading the Summa and reading the full explanations


874740 No.671500

>>670899

>>670781

It is sad and dishonest that you cherrypick from a book you obviously never read just for the sake of partisan polemics.

And you called larper a Saint. I'd do an exam of conscience if I were you.


874740 No.671504

>>671442

read the first part of the summa contra gentiles, where he speak of the use of philosophy for theology and its limit.

Then spit in your face for speaking in ignorance.


503e31 No.671565

Are you asking because you want to really get deep into Thomas Aquinas and the world of medieval philosophy, or are you looking for more casual knowledge? If the latter, I can second the recommendation for Edward Feser's Aquinas as a good starting point. Otherwise, if you really want to "fully" understand Thomas Aquinas (or any other such author), you will need to go deeper into their world. This blog post has a suggested progression to get into medieval philosophy and Thomas Aquinas' philosophy.

https://lyfaber.blogspot.com/2014/06/how-to-learn-metaphysics.html

And also start learning Latin now. The sooner the better, because developing Latin proficiency takes time. I like the Lingua Latina per Se Illustrata (Orberg) series, and I think there's another post on the same blog where the author recommends it as well.

>>670782

You're right to some degree, that it is, as the preface states, for beginners, but beginners that already have a background in medieval philosophy. If you approach the Summa like that, there will be very much that you don't understand or misunderstand. The same applies to any technical work in any discipline. You don't know what you don't know.


503e31 No.671570

Here's a copy-and-paste of the Latin recommendations I was thinking of.

https://lyfaber.blogspot.com/2012/11/voluntarism-again.html

Lee FaberDecember 1, 2012 at 1:54 AM

Regarding Latin, I think one just needs to suck it up and start to learn. One shouldn't read just Aquinas and/or Scotus anyway. There's Bonaventure, Ockham, and a host of others. My coblogger Michael taught himself in grad school and his latin is now better than mine (and I'm currently teaching it).

So little Scotus has actually been translated that to really understand what his 'vision' is, you need to read more than Wolter's thin selections. And the Wolter-Bychkov Reportatio should not be touched. It is shameful it was ever published.

Credo, regarding your comment, I suppose it depends on what you intend to do: presumably continue on into philosophy Phd? If you plan on having a medieval AOS, you should have some latin.

Also, who is your best friend? There are so few Scotists, after all… I wonder if I know him.

Reply

Michael SullivanDecember 1, 2012 at 3:01 AM

I agree with Faber that, even if you're largely reading in English, if you have a serious interest in medieval philosophy or in medieval anything - or in western civilization at all - then at least some Latin is a necessity.There is simply no way around it.

Learning Latin is neither has hard nor as easy as some people make it out. What it really takes is commitment. It's true that I never had a formal course in Latin and am as self-taught as one can be. Faber says I taught myself in grad school but I began as a sophomore in college. I got a bare-bones grammar, stumbled through it a little, and bought a Vulgate. Using the King James Bible as a constant reference I inched my way line by line through the gospels. I had by that time had two years of ancient Greek so with a Greek/Latin New Testament I stumbled my way through some more, using the more familiar Greek grammar and the more familiar Latin vocabulary to balance each other out. In my college library I took down the Leonine edition of St Thomas' Summa Contra Gentiles and read it using the English translation as a crib.

Then I began to realize more formal study was necessary if my knowledge was going to be better than ad hoc. After graduating with my B.A. I set myself to study latin in the summer before grad school (I was also on my honeymoon). I worked through Wheelock, which I hated, then discovered Henle, and in the next six months to a year while doing graduate coursework and working my part-time job I worked through the four volumes of Henle, which I thought was much better and under whom I felt like I was starting to get a handle on the language. For some years I did the Liturgy of the Hours (or a lot of it anyway) in Latin, which helped a great deal. I bought a bunch of Bolchazy-Carducci readers and worked my through a number of them. When I wrote my M.A. thesis on Scotus' Questions on the Metaphysics I was able to correct the Wolter/Etzkorn translation against the critical edition.

Reply


503e31 No.671571

>>671570

Continued…

Michael SullivanDecember 1, 2012 at 3:02 AM

If I knew then what I know now I would advise a learner to skip over Wheelock and all his ilk, and buy Hans Orberg's Lingua Latina series, with the supplemental readers, maybe a little extra grammatical practice, and go for it. It is by far the best approach, and I've worked through most of the course twice. After that I would advise finding an old copy of Beeson's A Primer of Medieval Latin, read as much of the Vulgate as you can stand, then get hold of Deferrari's Dictionary of St Thomas Aquinas and read some St Thomas. At that point reading almost any scholastic will be pretty easy (understanding him might be another matter). Through all this I would also recommend using your downtime to listen to Evan Millner's Latinum recordings. They used to be available as a free podcast but now I think you have to buy them on mp3 cds or direct downloads. But they're cheap, there are hundreds of hours of them, and Mr Millner has a complete audio-only course, similar to but better than Pimsleur, beginning with the absolute basics, a complete survey of grammar and conversational Latin, and working up to continuous readings from the classics and many other Latin texts. I've read a very great many Latin textbooks but I think someone could do very well with the Lingua Latina books and the Latinum recordings.

If one follows a program like this one learns far more Latin than is or seems strictly necessary to read the scholastics, but that's a good thing. I like being able to read - not translate - Virgil and Cicero on sight without a dictionary. But the other thing is, unless your Latin is solid you won't really read the scholastics, you'll translate them and consult them. Decoding a sentence or two of Aquinas is one thing. Reading hundreds or thousands of pages of Sentences commentaries is another and requires comfort and familiarity with the language. But it takes a commitment to the project. For myself I greatly regret my wasted childhood. In better days one would, if intending to be a scholar, graduate high school or its equivalent having a better mastery of Latin than I have now, but no more, alas. There was no one to teach me.

However, not wanting to scare off the more casual leaner, even being able to decode a few sentences with effort is vastly better than being totally reliant on the mercy of a translator. One can reach that kind of basic familiarity with Latin in a few dedicated months.

Reply


503e31 No.671574

A lot could be said about Latin. If you look on the Latin subreddit (forgive me), there is a Discord server invite stickied. The #resources channel has a lot of good files posted, including the majority of the Orberg series I recommended. I do strongly recommend buying the print copies as possible, however.

https://www.reddit.com/r/latin/

https://www.hackettpublishing.com/lingua-latina-per-se-illustrata-series


503e31 No.671575

If anyone's interested in more Latin resources, let me know. Otherwise, I'll just leave it at that.


3bf202 No.671606

>>670777

You know two things prier to Thomas Aquarius, A.) Aristotle' categories that's the philosophical model Aquarius had to use to fight with the Islamic cultural clash, but I'm warning it's tedious as a jog in hell.

B.) the pseudo-isidorian decretals, Aquarius believed in a few forged documents to support his claims. There's no need for you to follow the same errors.




[Return][Go to top][Catalog][Nerve Center][Cancer][Post a Reply]
Delete Post [ ]
[]
[ / / / / / / / / / / / / / ] [ dir / animu / ara / ausneets / fa / leftpol / sonyeon / vg / vichan ]