Cosmology - Revision history

Mxmsj: Text replacement - "--" to " — "

2022-12-10T10:04:16Z

Text replacement - "--" to " — "

Mxmsj: Text replacement - "Ã©" to "é"

2022-12-10T09:47:34Z

Text replacement - "Ã©" to "é"

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:47, 10 December 2022
Line 154:		Line 154:
	* [http://www.strangenotions.com/cosmology-and-creation-contrasting-notions/ Fr. Andrew Pinsent, "Cosmology and Creation: Contrasting Notions."]		* [http://www.strangenotions.com/cosmology-and-creation-contrasting-notions/ Fr. Andrew Pinsent, "Cosmology and Creation: Contrasting Notions."]
	* [http://www.geocentrismdebunked.org/alien-theology-of-centrality/ David Palm, "The Center ≠ You're Significant."]		* [http://www.geocentrismdebunked.org/alien-theology-of-centrality/ David Palm, "The Center ≠ You're Significant."]
	* [http://campus.udayton.edu/~physics/rjb/OldClasses/ASI%20347%20Physics%20and%20Literature/Danielson%20-%20The%20great%20Copernican%20cliche.pdf "The Great Copernican ~~ClichÃ©~~."]		* [http://campus.udayton.edu/~physics/rjb/OldClasses/ASI%20347%20Physics%20and%20Literature/Danielson%20-%20The%20great%20Copernican%20cliche.pdf "The Great Copernican Cliché."]

Mxmsj: Text replacement - "â€”" to " — "

2022-12-10T09:31:04Z

Text replacement - "â€”" to " — "

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:31, 10 December 2022
Line 73:		Line 73:
	# The consideration of creatures is further necessary, not only for the building up of truth, but also for the destruction of errors. For errors about creatures sometimes lead one astray from the truth of faith, so far as the errors are inconsistent with true knowledge of God. Now, this happens in many ways.		# The consideration of creatures is further necessary, not only for the building up of truth, but also for the destruction of errors. For errors about creatures sometimes lead one astray from the truth of faith, so far as the errors are inconsistent with true knowledge of God. Now, this happens in many ways.
	# First, because through ignorance of the nature of creatures men are sometimes so far perverted as to set up as. the first cause and as God that which can only receive its being from something else; for ''they think that nothing exists beyond the realm of visible creatures''.<ref>In our day, we call this philosophy "materialism."</ref> Such were those who identified God with this, that, and the other kind of body; and of these it is said: “Who have imagined either the fire, or the wind, or the swift air, or the circle of the stars, or the great water, or the sun and moon to be the gods” (Wis. 13: 2).		# First, because through ignorance of the nature of creatures men are sometimes so far perverted as to set up as. the first cause and as God that which can only receive its being from something else; for ''they think that nothing exists beyond the realm of visible creatures''.<ref>In our day, we call this philosophy "materialism."</ref> Such were those who identified God with this, that, and the other kind of body; and of these it is said: “Who have imagined either the fire, or the wind, or the swift air, or the circle of the stars, or the great water, or the sun and moon to be the gods” (Wis. 13: 2).
	# Secondly, because they attribute to certain creatures that which belongs only to God. This also results from error concerning creatures. For what is incompatible with a thing's nature is not ascribed to it except through ignorance of its ~~natureâ€”as~~ if man were said to have three feet. Now, what belongs solely to God is incompatible with the nature of a created thing, just as that which is exclusively man's is incompatible with another thing's nature. Thus, it is from ignorance of the creature's nature that the aforesaid error arises. And against this error it is said: “They gave the incommunicable name to stones and wood” (Wis. 14:21). ''Into this error fell those who attribute the creation of things, or knowledge of the future, or the working of miracles to causes other than God.''<ref>This is the error of idolatry, which is contrary to the First Commandment to worship God alone. In our day, we might also identify this error with that of the "spiritualists" who claim these supernatural powers for the spirits with whom they communicate.</ref>		# Secondly, because they attribute to certain creatures that which belongs only to God. This also results from error concerning creatures. For what is incompatible with a thing's nature is not ascribed to it except through ignorance of its nature — as if man were said to have three feet. Now, what belongs solely to God is incompatible with the nature of a created thing, just as that which is exclusively man's is incompatible with another thing's nature. Thus, it is from ignorance of the creature's nature that the aforesaid error arises. And against this error it is said: “They gave the incommunicable name to stones and wood” (Wis. 14:21). ''Into this error fell those who attribute the creation of things, or knowledge of the future, or the working of miracles to causes other than God.''<ref>This is the error of idolatry, which is contrary to the First Commandment to worship God alone. In our day, we might also identify this error with that of the "spiritualists" who claim these supernatural powers for the spirits with whom they communicate.</ref>
	# Thirdly, because through ignorance of the creature's nature something is subtracted from God's power in its working upon creatures. This is evidenced in the case of ''those who set up two principles of reality'';<ref>We call the belief that there are two independent divine powers "dualism."</ref> in those who assert that things proceed from God, not by the divine will, but by natural necessity; and again, in those who withdraw either all or some things from the divine providence, or who deny that it can work outside the ordinary course of things. For all these notions are derogatory to God's power. Against such persons it is said: “Who looked upon the Almighty as if He could do nothing” (Job 22:17), and: “You show Your power, when men will not believe You to be absolute in power” (Wis. .12: 17).		# Thirdly, because through ignorance of the creature's nature something is subtracted from God's power in its working upon creatures. This is evidenced in the case of ''those who set up two principles of reality'';<ref>We call the belief that there are two independent divine powers "dualism."</ref> in those who assert that things proceed from God, not by the divine will, but by natural necessity; and again, in those who withdraw either all or some things from the divine providence, or who deny that it can work outside the ordinary course of things. For all these notions are derogatory to God's power. Against such persons it is said: “Who looked upon the Almighty as if He could do nothing” (Job 22:17), and: “You show Your power, when men will not believe You to be absolute in power” (Wis. .12: 17).
	# Fourthly, through ignorance of the nature of things, and, consequently, of his own place in the order of the universe, this rational creature, man, who by faith is led to God as his last end, ''believes that he is subject to other creatures to which he is in fact superior.'' Such is evidently the case with those who subject human wills to the stars, and against these it is said: “Be not afraid of the signs of heaven, which the heathens fear” (Jer. 10:2);<ref>The error reprehended here is that of astrology and any other similar kinds of fatalism or determinism.</ref> and this is likewise true of those who think that angels are the creators of souls, that human souls are mortal, and, generally, of persons who hold any similar views derogatory to the dignity of man.		# Fourthly, through ignorance of the nature of things, and, consequently, of his own place in the order of the universe, this rational creature, man, who by faith is led to God as his last end, ''believes that he is subject to other creatures to which he is in fact superior.'' Such is evidently the case with those who subject human wills to the stars, and against these it is said: “Be not afraid of the signs of heaven, which the heathens fear” (Jer. 10:2);<ref>The error reprehended here is that of astrology and any other similar kinds of fatalism or determinism.</ref> and this is likewise true of those who think that angels are the creators of souls, that human souls are mortal, and, generally, of persons who hold any similar views derogatory to the dignity of man.

Mxmsj: Text replacement - "â€œ" to "“"

2022-12-10T09:21:07Z

Text replacement - "â€œ" to "“"

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:21, 10 December 2022
Line 72:		Line 72:

	# The consideration of creatures is further necessary, not only for the building up of truth, but also for the destruction of errors. For errors about creatures sometimes lead one astray from the truth of faith, so far as the errors are inconsistent with true knowledge of God. Now, this happens in many ways.		# The consideration of creatures is further necessary, not only for the building up of truth, but also for the destruction of errors. For errors about creatures sometimes lead one astray from the truth of faith, so far as the errors are inconsistent with true knowledge of God. Now, this happens in many ways.
	# First, because through ignorance of the nature of creatures men are sometimes so far perverted as to set up as. the first cause and as God that which can only receive its being from something else; for ''they think that nothing exists beyond the realm of visible creatures''.<ref>In our day, we call this philosophy "materialism."</ref> Such were those who identified God with this, that, and the other kind of body; and of these it is said: ~~â€œWho~~ have imagined either the fire, or the wind, or the swift air, or the circle of the stars, or the great water, or the sun and moon to be the gods” (Wis. 13: 2).		# First, because through ignorance of the nature of creatures men are sometimes so far perverted as to set up as. the first cause and as God that which can only receive its being from something else; for ''they think that nothing exists beyond the realm of visible creatures''.<ref>In our day, we call this philosophy "materialism."</ref> Such were those who identified God with this, that, and the other kind of body; and of these it is said: “Who have imagined either the fire, or the wind, or the swift air, or the circle of the stars, or the great water, or the sun and moon to be the gods” (Wis. 13: 2).
	# Secondly, because they attribute to certain creatures that which belongs only to God. This also results from error concerning creatures. For what is incompatible with a thing's nature is not ascribed to it except through ignorance of its natureâ€”as if man were said to have three feet. Now, what belongs solely to God is incompatible with the nature of a created thing, just as that which is exclusively man's is incompatible with another thing's nature. Thus, it is from ignorance of the creature's nature that the aforesaid error arises. And against this error it is said: ~~â€œThey~~ gave the incommunicable name to stones and wood” (Wis. 14:21). ''Into this error fell those who attribute the creation of things, or knowledge of the future, or the working of miracles to causes other than God.''<ref>This is the error of idolatry, which is contrary to the First Commandment to worship God alone. In our day, we might also identify this error with that of the "spiritualists" who claim these supernatural powers for the spirits with whom they communicate.</ref>		# Secondly, because they attribute to certain creatures that which belongs only to God. This also results from error concerning creatures. For what is incompatible with a thing's nature is not ascribed to it except through ignorance of its natureâ€”as if man were said to have three feet. Now, what belongs solely to God is incompatible with the nature of a created thing, just as that which is exclusively man's is incompatible with another thing's nature. Thus, it is from ignorance of the creature's nature that the aforesaid error arises. And against this error it is said: “They gave the incommunicable name to stones and wood” (Wis. 14:21). ''Into this error fell those who attribute the creation of things, or knowledge of the future, or the working of miracles to causes other than God.''<ref>This is the error of idolatry, which is contrary to the First Commandment to worship God alone. In our day, we might also identify this error with that of the "spiritualists" who claim these supernatural powers for the spirits with whom they communicate.</ref>
	# Thirdly, because through ignorance of the creature's nature something is subtracted from God's power in its working upon creatures. This is evidenced in the case of ''those who set up two principles of reality'';<ref>We call the belief that there are two independent divine powers "dualism."</ref> in those who assert that things proceed from God, not by the divine will, but by natural necessity; and again, in those who withdraw either all or some things from the divine providence, or who deny that it can work outside the ordinary course of things. For all these notions are derogatory to God's power. Against such persons it is said: ~~â€œWho~~ looked upon the Almighty as if He could do nothing” (Job 22:17), and: ~~â€œYou~~ show Your power, when men will not believe You to be absolute in power” (Wis. .12: 17).		# Thirdly, because through ignorance of the creature's nature something is subtracted from God's power in its working upon creatures. This is evidenced in the case of ''those who set up two principles of reality'';<ref>We call the belief that there are two independent divine powers "dualism."</ref> in those who assert that things proceed from God, not by the divine will, but by natural necessity; and again, in those who withdraw either all or some things from the divine providence, or who deny that it can work outside the ordinary course of things. For all these notions are derogatory to God's power. Against such persons it is said: “Who looked upon the Almighty as if He could do nothing” (Job 22:17), and: “You show Your power, when men will not believe You to be absolute in power” (Wis. .12: 17).
	# Fourthly, through ignorance of the nature of things, and, consequently, of his own place in the order of the universe, this rational creature, man, who by faith is led to God as his last end, ''believes that he is subject to other creatures to which he is in fact superior.'' Such is evidently the case with those who subject human wills to the stars, and against these it is said: ~~â€œBe~~ not afraid of the signs of heaven, which the heathens fear” (Jer. 10:2);<ref>The error reprehended here is that of astrology and any other similar kinds of fatalism or determinism.</ref> and this is likewise true of those who think that angels are the creators of souls, that human souls are mortal, and, generally, of persons who hold any similar views derogatory to the dignity of man.		# Fourthly, through ignorance of the nature of things, and, consequently, of his own place in the order of the universe, this rational creature, man, who by faith is led to God as his last end, ''believes that he is subject to other creatures to which he is in fact superior.'' Such is evidently the case with those who subject human wills to the stars, and against these it is said: “Be not afraid of the signs of heaven, which the heathens fear” (Jer. 10:2);<ref>The error reprehended here is that of astrology and any other similar kinds of fatalism or determinism.</ref> and this is likewise true of those who think that angels are the creators of souls, that human souls are mortal, and, generally, of persons who hold any similar views derogatory to the dignity of man.
	# It is, therefore, evident that the opinion is false of those who asserted that it made no difference to the truth of the faith what anyone holds about creatures, so long as one thinks rightly about God, as Augustine tells us in his book ''On the Origin of the Soul'' [''De anima et ejus origine,'' IV, 4]. For error concerning creatures, ''by subjecting them to causes other than God,''<ref>Here Aquinas is rejecting the error of supposing that there could be causes operating on the universe independently of God's supreme power. This is the ''metaphysical'' error of polytheism. Such an error has nothing to do with the proper task of the natural sciences, which is to examine physical causes using physical (empirical) methods.</ref> spills over into false opinion about God, and takes men's minds away from Him, to whom faith seeks to lead them.		# It is, therefore, evident that the opinion is false of those who asserted that it made no difference to the truth of the faith what anyone holds about creatures, so long as one thinks rightly about God, as Augustine tells us in his book ''On the Origin of the Soul'' [''De anima et ejus origine,'' IV, 4]. For error concerning creatures, ''by subjecting them to causes other than God,''<ref>Here Aquinas is rejecting the error of supposing that there could be causes operating on the universe independently of God's supreme power. This is the ''metaphysical'' error of polytheism. Such an error has nothing to do with the proper task of the natural sciences, which is to examine physical causes using physical (empirical) methods.</ref> spills over into false opinion about God, and takes men's minds away from Him, to whom faith seeks to lead them.
	# For this reason Scripture threatens punishment to those who err about creatures, as to unbelievers, in the words of the Psalm (27:5): ~~â€œBecause~~ they have not understood the works of the Lord and the operations of His hands, You shall destroy them, and shall not build them up”; and: ~~â€œThese~~ things they thought and were deceived,” and further on: ~~â€œThey~~ did not esteem the honor of holy Souls” (Wis. 7:2122).		# For this reason Scripture threatens punishment to those who err about creatures, as to unbelievers, in the words of the Psalm (27:5): “Because they have not understood the works of the Lord and the operations of His hands, You shall destroy them, and shall not build them up”; and: “These things they thought and were deceived,” and further on: “They did not esteem the honor of holy Souls” (Wis. 7:2122).

	<div style="margin-left:4em">		<div style="margin-left:4em">

Mxmsj: Text replacement - "â€" to "”"

2022-12-10T09:21:03Z

Text replacement - "â€" to "”"

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:21, 10 December 2022
Line 72:		Line 72:

	# The consideration of creatures is further necessary, not only for the building up of truth, but also for the destruction of errors. For errors about creatures sometimes lead one astray from the truth of faith, so far as the errors are inconsistent with true knowledge of God. Now, this happens in many ways.		# The consideration of creatures is further necessary, not only for the building up of truth, but also for the destruction of errors. For errors about creatures sometimes lead one astray from the truth of faith, so far as the errors are inconsistent with true knowledge of God. Now, this happens in many ways.
	# First, because through ignorance of the nature of creatures men are sometimes so far perverted as to set up as. the first cause and as God that which can only receive its being from something else; for ''they think that nothing exists beyond the realm of visible creatures''.<ref>In our day, we call this philosophy "materialism."</ref> Such were those who identified God with this, that, and the other kind of body; and of these it is said: â€œWho have imagined either the fire, or the wind, or the swift air, or the circle of the stars, or the great water, or the sun and moon to be the ~~godsâ€~~ (Wis. 13: 2).		# First, because through ignorance of the nature of creatures men are sometimes so far perverted as to set up as. the first cause and as God that which can only receive its being from something else; for ''they think that nothing exists beyond the realm of visible creatures''.<ref>In our day, we call this philosophy "materialism."</ref> Such were those who identified God with this, that, and the other kind of body; and of these it is said: â€œWho have imagined either the fire, or the wind, or the swift air, or the circle of the stars, or the great water, or the sun and moon to be the gods” (Wis. 13: 2).
	# Secondly, because they attribute to certain creatures that which belongs only to God. This also results from error concerning creatures. For what is incompatible with a thing's nature is not ascribed to it except through ignorance of its natureâ€”as if man were said to have three feet. Now, what belongs solely to God is incompatible with the nature of a created thing, just as that which is exclusively man's is incompatible with another thing's nature. Thus, it is from ignorance of the creature's nature that the aforesaid error arises. And against this error it is said: â€œThey gave the incommunicable name to stones and ~~woodâ€~~ (Wis. 14:21). ''Into this error fell those who attribute the creation of things, or knowledge of the future, or the working of miracles to causes other than God.''<ref>This is the error of idolatry, which is contrary to the First Commandment to worship God alone. In our day, we might also identify this error with that of the "spiritualists" who claim these supernatural powers for the spirits with whom they communicate.</ref>		# Secondly, because they attribute to certain creatures that which belongs only to God. This also results from error concerning creatures. For what is incompatible with a thing's nature is not ascribed to it except through ignorance of its natureâ€”as if man were said to have three feet. Now, what belongs solely to God is incompatible with the nature of a created thing, just as that which is exclusively man's is incompatible with another thing's nature. Thus, it is from ignorance of the creature's nature that the aforesaid error arises. And against this error it is said: â€œThey gave the incommunicable name to stones and wood” (Wis. 14:21). ''Into this error fell those who attribute the creation of things, or knowledge of the future, or the working of miracles to causes other than God.''<ref>This is the error of idolatry, which is contrary to the First Commandment to worship God alone. In our day, we might also identify this error with that of the "spiritualists" who claim these supernatural powers for the spirits with whom they communicate.</ref>
	# Thirdly, because through ignorance of the creature's nature something is subtracted from God's power in its working upon creatures. This is evidenced in the case of ''those who set up two principles of reality'';<ref>We call the belief that there are two independent divine powers "dualism."</ref> in those who assert that things proceed from God, not by the divine will, but by natural necessity; and again, in those who withdraw either all or some things from the divine providence, or who deny that it can work outside the ordinary course of things. For all these notions are derogatory to God's power. Against such persons it is said: â€œWho looked upon the Almighty as if He could do ~~nothingâ€~~ (Job 22:17), and: â€œYou show Your power, when men will not believe You to be absolute in ~~powerâ€~~ (Wis. .12: 17).		# Thirdly, because through ignorance of the creature's nature something is subtracted from God's power in its working upon creatures. This is evidenced in the case of ''those who set up two principles of reality'';<ref>We call the belief that there are two independent divine powers "dualism."</ref> in those who assert that things proceed from God, not by the divine will, but by natural necessity; and again, in those who withdraw either all or some things from the divine providence, or who deny that it can work outside the ordinary course of things. For all these notions are derogatory to God's power. Against such persons it is said: â€œWho looked upon the Almighty as if He could do nothing” (Job 22:17), and: â€œYou show Your power, when men will not believe You to be absolute in power” (Wis. .12: 17).
	# Fourthly, through ignorance of the nature of things, and, consequently, of his own place in the order of the universe, this rational creature, man, who by faith is led to God as his last end, ''believes that he is subject to other creatures to which he is in fact superior.'' Such is evidently the case with those who subject human wills to the stars, and against these it is said: â€œBe not afraid of the signs of heaven, which the heathens ~~fearâ€~~ (Jer. 10:2);<ref>The error reprehended here is that of astrology and any other similar kinds of fatalism or determinism.</ref> and this is likewise true of those who think that angels are the creators of souls, that human souls are mortal, and, generally, of persons who hold any similar views derogatory to the dignity of man.		# Fourthly, through ignorance of the nature of things, and, consequently, of his own place in the order of the universe, this rational creature, man, who by faith is led to God as his last end, ''believes that he is subject to other creatures to which he is in fact superior.'' Such is evidently the case with those who subject human wills to the stars, and against these it is said: â€œBe not afraid of the signs of heaven, which the heathens fear” (Jer. 10:2);<ref>The error reprehended here is that of astrology and any other similar kinds of fatalism or determinism.</ref> and this is likewise true of those who think that angels are the creators of souls, that human souls are mortal, and, generally, of persons who hold any similar views derogatory to the dignity of man.
	# It is, therefore, evident that the opinion is false of those who asserted that it made no difference to the truth of the faith what anyone holds about creatures, so long as one thinks rightly about God, as Augustine tells us in his book ''On the Origin of the Soul'' [''De anima et ejus origine,'' IV, 4]. For error concerning creatures, ''by subjecting them to causes other than God,''<ref>Here Aquinas is rejecting the error of supposing that there could be causes operating on the universe independently of God's supreme power. This is the ''metaphysical'' error of polytheism. Such an error has nothing to do with the proper task of the natural sciences, which is to examine physical causes using physical (empirical) methods.</ref> spills over into false opinion about God, and takes men's minds away from Him, to whom faith seeks to lead them.		# It is, therefore, evident that the opinion is false of those who asserted that it made no difference to the truth of the faith what anyone holds about creatures, so long as one thinks rightly about God, as Augustine tells us in his book ''On the Origin of the Soul'' [''De anima et ejus origine,'' IV, 4]. For error concerning creatures, ''by subjecting them to causes other than God,''<ref>Here Aquinas is rejecting the error of supposing that there could be causes operating on the universe independently of God's supreme power. This is the ''metaphysical'' error of polytheism. Such an error has nothing to do with the proper task of the natural sciences, which is to examine physical causes using physical (empirical) methods.</ref> spills over into false opinion about God, and takes men's minds away from Him, to whom faith seeks to lead them.
	# For this reason Scripture threatens punishment to those who err about creatures, as to unbelievers, in the words of the Psalm (27:5): â€œBecause they have not understood the works of the Lord and the operations of His hands, You shall destroy them, and shall not build them ~~upâ€~~; and: â€œThese things they thought and were deceived,~~â€~~ and further on: â€œThey did not esteem the honor of holy ~~Soulsâ€~~ (Wis. 7:2122).		# For this reason Scripture threatens punishment to those who err about creatures, as to unbelievers, in the words of the Psalm (27:5): â€œBecause they have not understood the works of the Lord and the operations of His hands, You shall destroy them, and shall not build them up”; and: â€œThese things they thought and were deceived,” and further on: â€œThey did not esteem the honor of holy Souls” (Wis. 7:2122).

	<div style="margin-left:4em">		<div style="margin-left:4em">

Mxmsj: Text replacement - "â€™" to "'"

2022-12-10T08:52:41Z

Text replacement - "â€™" to "'"

← Older revision		Revision as of 10:52, 10 December 2022
Line 73:		Line 73:
	# The consideration of creatures is further necessary, not only for the building up of truth, but also for the destruction of errors. For errors about creatures sometimes lead one astray from the truth of faith, so far as the errors are inconsistent with true knowledge of God. Now, this happens in many ways.		# The consideration of creatures is further necessary, not only for the building up of truth, but also for the destruction of errors. For errors about creatures sometimes lead one astray from the truth of faith, so far as the errors are inconsistent with true knowledge of God. Now, this happens in many ways.
	# First, because through ignorance of the nature of creatures men are sometimes so far perverted as to set up as. the first cause and as God that which can only receive its being from something else; for ''they think that nothing exists beyond the realm of visible creatures''.<ref>In our day, we call this philosophy "materialism."</ref> Such were those who identified God with this, that, and the other kind of body; and of these it is said: â€œWho have imagined either the fire, or the wind, or the swift air, or the circle of the stars, or the great water, or the sun and moon to be the godsâ€ (Wis. 13: 2).		# First, because through ignorance of the nature of creatures men are sometimes so far perverted as to set up as. the first cause and as God that which can only receive its being from something else; for ''they think that nothing exists beyond the realm of visible creatures''.<ref>In our day, we call this philosophy "materialism."</ref> Such were those who identified God with this, that, and the other kind of body; and of these it is said: â€œWho have imagined either the fire, or the wind, or the swift air, or the circle of the stars, or the great water, or the sun and moon to be the godsâ€ (Wis. 13: 2).
	# Secondly, because they attribute to certain creatures that which belongs only to God. This also results from error concerning creatures. For what is incompatible with a ~~thingâ€™s~~ nature is not ascribed to it except through ignorance of its natureâ€”as if man were said to have three feet. Now, what belongs solely to God is incompatible with the nature of a created thing, just as that which is exclusively ~~manâ€™s~~ is incompatible with another ~~thingâ€™s~~ nature. Thus, it is from ignorance of the ~~creatureâ€™s~~ nature that the aforesaid error arises. And against this error it is said: â€œThey gave the incommunicable name to stones and woodâ€ (Wis. 14:21). ''Into this error fell those who attribute the creation of things, or knowledge of the future, or the working of miracles to causes other than God.''<ref>This is the error of idolatry, which is contrary to the First Commandment to worship God alone. In our day, we might also identify this error with that of the "spiritualists" who claim these supernatural powers for the spirits with whom they communicate.</ref>		# Secondly, because they attribute to certain creatures that which belongs only to God. This also results from error concerning creatures. For what is incompatible with a thing's nature is not ascribed to it except through ignorance of its natureâ€”as if man were said to have three feet. Now, what belongs solely to God is incompatible with the nature of a created thing, just as that which is exclusively man's is incompatible with another thing's nature. Thus, it is from ignorance of the creature's nature that the aforesaid error arises. And against this error it is said: â€œThey gave the incommunicable name to stones and woodâ€ (Wis. 14:21). ''Into this error fell those who attribute the creation of things, or knowledge of the future, or the working of miracles to causes other than God.''<ref>This is the error of idolatry, which is contrary to the First Commandment to worship God alone. In our day, we might also identify this error with that of the "spiritualists" who claim these supernatural powers for the spirits with whom they communicate.</ref>
	# Thirdly, because through ignorance of the ~~creatureâ€™s~~ nature something is subtracted from ~~Godâ€™s~~ power in its working upon creatures. This is evidenced in the case of ''those who set up two principles of reality'';<ref>We call the belief that there are two independent divine powers "dualism."</ref> in those who assert that things proceed from God, not by the divine will, but by natural necessity; and again, in those who withdraw either all or some things from the divine providence, or who deny that it can work outside the ordinary course of things. For all these notions are derogatory to ~~Godâ€™s~~ power. Against such persons it is said: â€œWho looked upon the Almighty as if He could do nothingâ€ (Job 22:17), and: â€œYou show Your power, when men will not believe You to be absolute in powerâ€ (Wis. .12: 17).		# Thirdly, because through ignorance of the creature's nature something is subtracted from God's power in its working upon creatures. This is evidenced in the case of ''those who set up two principles of reality'';<ref>We call the belief that there are two independent divine powers "dualism."</ref> in those who assert that things proceed from God, not by the divine will, but by natural necessity; and again, in those who withdraw either all or some things from the divine providence, or who deny that it can work outside the ordinary course of things. For all these notions are derogatory to God's power. Against such persons it is said: â€œWho looked upon the Almighty as if He could do nothingâ€ (Job 22:17), and: â€œYou show Your power, when men will not believe You to be absolute in powerâ€ (Wis. .12: 17).
	# Fourthly, through ignorance of the nature of things, and, consequently, of his own place in the order of the universe, this rational creature, man, who by faith is led to God as his last end, ''believes that he is subject to other creatures to which he is in fact superior.'' Such is evidently the case with those who subject human wills to the stars, and against these it is said: â€œBe not afraid of the signs of heaven, which the heathens fearâ€ (Jer. 10:2);<ref>The error reprehended here is that of astrology and any other similar kinds of fatalism or determinism.</ref> and this is likewise true of those who think that angels are the creators of souls, that human souls are mortal, and, generally, of persons who hold any similar views derogatory to the dignity of man.		# Fourthly, through ignorance of the nature of things, and, consequently, of his own place in the order of the universe, this rational creature, man, who by faith is led to God as his last end, ''believes that he is subject to other creatures to which he is in fact superior.'' Such is evidently the case with those who subject human wills to the stars, and against these it is said: â€œBe not afraid of the signs of heaven, which the heathens fearâ€ (Jer. 10:2);<ref>The error reprehended here is that of astrology and any other similar kinds of fatalism or determinism.</ref> and this is likewise true of those who think that angels are the creators of souls, that human souls are mortal, and, generally, of persons who hold any similar views derogatory to the dignity of man.
	# It is, therefore, evident that the opinion is false of those who asserted that it made no difference to the truth of the faith what anyone holds about creatures, so long as one thinks rightly about God, as Augustine tells us in his book ''On the Origin of the Soul'' [''De anima et ejus origine,'' IV, 4]. For error concerning creatures, ''by subjecting them to causes other than God,''<ref>Here Aquinas is rejecting the error of supposing that there could be causes operating on the universe independently of God's supreme power. This is the ''metaphysical'' error of polytheism. Such an error has nothing to do with the proper task of the natural sciences, which is to examine physical causes using physical (empirical) methods.</ref> spills over into false opinion about God, and takes ~~menâ€™s~~ minds away from Him, to whom faith seeks to lead them.		# It is, therefore, evident that the opinion is false of those who asserted that it made no difference to the truth of the faith what anyone holds about creatures, so long as one thinks rightly about God, as Augustine tells us in his book ''On the Origin of the Soul'' [''De anima et ejus origine,'' IV, 4]. For error concerning creatures, ''by subjecting them to causes other than God,''<ref>Here Aquinas is rejecting the error of supposing that there could be causes operating on the universe independently of God's supreme power. This is the ''metaphysical'' error of polytheism. Such an error has nothing to do with the proper task of the natural sciences, which is to examine physical causes using physical (empirical) methods.</ref> spills over into false opinion about God, and takes men's minds away from Him, to whom faith seeks to lead them.
	# For this reason Scripture threatens punishment to those who err about creatures, as to unbelievers, in the words of the Psalm (27:5): â€œBecause they have not understood the works of the Lord and the operations of His hands, You shall destroy them, and shall not build them upâ€; and: â€œThese things they thought and were deceived,â€ and further on: â€œThey did not esteem the honor of holy Soulsâ€ (Wis. 7:2122).		# For this reason Scripture threatens punishment to those who err about creatures, as to unbelievers, in the words of the Psalm (27:5): â€œBecause they have not understood the works of the Lord and the operations of His hands, You shall destroy them, and shall not build them upâ€; and: â€œThese things they thought and were deceived,â€ and further on: â€œThey did not esteem the honor of holy Soulsâ€ (Wis. 7:2122).

Mxmsj: /* Links */

2014-11-14T14:05:19Z

Links

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:05, 14 November 2014
Line 154:		Line 154:
	* [http://www.strangenotions.com/cosmology-and-creation-contrasting-notions/ Fr. Andrew Pinsent, "Cosmology and Creation: Contrasting Notions."]		* [http://www.strangenotions.com/cosmology-and-creation-contrasting-notions/ Fr. Andrew Pinsent, "Cosmology and Creation: Contrasting Notions."]
	* [http://www.geocentrismdebunked.org/alien-theology-of-centrality/ David Palm, "The Center ≠ You're Significant."]		* [http://www.geocentrismdebunked.org/alien-theology-of-centrality/ David Palm, "The Center ≠ You're Significant."]
			* [http://campus.udayton.edu/~physics/rjb/OldClasses/ASI%20347%20Physics%20and%20Literature/Danielson%20-%20The%20great%20Copernican%20cliche.pdf "The Great Copernican ClichÃ©."]

Mxmsj: /* Medieval */

2014-11-14T14:01:44Z

Medieval

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:01, 14 November 2014
Line 125:		Line 125:
	:; J. Goldberg, [http://books.google.com/books?id=IJFp0nTZC2QC&pg=PT14&dq=%22removed+the+earth+from+its+privileged+position%22%22&hl=en&sa=X&ei=RnxKVO3nM4eBygT2qIKQBw&ved=0CDYQ6AEwBA#v=onepage&q=%22removed%20the%20earth%20from%20its%20privileged%20position%22%22&f=false ''The Tyranny of Cliches'']		:; J. Goldberg, [http://books.google.com/books?id=IJFp0nTZC2QC&pg=PT14&dq=%22removed+the+earth+from+its+privileged+position%22%22&hl=en&sa=X&ei=RnxKVO3nM4eBygT2qIKQBw&ved=0CDYQ6AEwBA#v=onepage&q=%22removed%20the%20earth%20from%20its%20privileged%20position%22%22&f=false ''The Tyranny of Cliches'']

	:: Before Copernicus the consensus among Western scientists and theologians was, in accordance with Aristotle, that the Earth was either at, or was, the anal aperture of the universe, literally.		:: Before Copernicus the consensus among Western scientists and theologians was, in accordance with Aristotle, that the Earth was either at, or was, the anal aperture of the universe, literally.<ref>[http://www.geocentrismdebunked.org/alien-theology-of-centrality/ David Palm, "The Center ≠ You're Significant."]</ref>

	=== Modern ===		=== Modern ===

Mxmsj: /* Links */

2014-11-14T14:00:50Z

Links

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:00, 14 November 2014
Line 153:		Line 153:
	[[Category:Cosmology]]		[[Category:Cosmology]]
	* [http://www.strangenotions.com/cosmology-and-creation-contrasting-notions/ Fr. Andrew Pinsent, "Cosmology and Creation: Contrasting Notions."]		* [http://www.strangenotions.com/cosmology-and-creation-contrasting-notions/ Fr. Andrew Pinsent, "Cosmology and Creation: Contrasting Notions."]
			* [http://www.geocentrismdebunked.org/alien-theology-of-centrality/ David Palm, "The Center ≠ You're Significant."]

Mxmsj: /* The Meaning of the Center of the Universe */

2014-11-14T13:59:00Z

The Meaning of the Center of the Universe

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:59, 14 November 2014
Line 117:		Line 117:
	== The Meaning of the Center of the Universe ==		== The Meaning of the Center of the Universe ==

	:; ~~Medieval<nowiki>:</nowiki> last, least, lowest~~		=== Medieval ===

			:; C. S. Lewis

	:: [Ptolemy's] astronomical system was universally accepted in the Dark and Middle Ages. The insignificance of Earth was as much a commonplace to Boethius, King Alfred, Dante, and Chaucer as it is to Mr. H.G. Wells or Professor Haldane. Statements to the contrary in modern books are due to ignorance. . . . the spatial insignificance of Earth, [was] asserted by Christian philosophers, sung by Christian poets, and commented on by Christian moralists for some fifteen centuries, without the slightest suspicion that it conflicted with their theology.<ref>C.S. Lewis, ''Miracles: A Preliminary Study'', 78, quoted by David Palm in [http://www.geocentrismdebunked.org/alien-theology-of-centrality/ "Geocentrists Peddle Alien Theology of Centrality."]</ref>		:: [Ptolemy's] astronomical system was universally accepted in the Dark and Middle Ages. The insignificance of Earth was as much a commonplace to Boethius, King Alfred, Dante, and Chaucer as it is to Mr. H.G. Wells or Professor Haldane. Statements to the contrary in modern books are due to ignorance. . . . the spatial insignificance of Earth, [was] asserted by Christian philosophers, sung by Christian poets, and commented on by Christian moralists for some fifteen centuries, without the slightest suspicion that it conflicted with their theology.<ref>C.S. Lewis, ''Miracles: A Preliminary Study'', 78, quoted by David Palm in [http://www.geocentrismdebunked.org/alien-theology-of-centrality/ "Geocentrists Peddle Alien Theology of Centrality."]</ref>

			:; J. Goldberg, [http://books.google.com/books?id=IJFp0nTZC2QC&pg=PT14&dq=%22removed+the+earth+from+its+privileged+position%22%22&hl=en&sa=X&ei=RnxKVO3nM4eBygT2qIKQBw&ved=0CDYQ6AEwBA#v=onepage&q=%22removed%20the%20earth%20from%20its%20privileged%20position%22%22&f=false ''The Tyranny of Cliches'']

			:: Before Copernicus the consensus among Western scientists and theologians was, in accordance with Aristotle, that the Earth was either at, or was, the anal aperture of the universe, literally.

			=== Modern ===

	:; Modern		:; Modern

	:: Center stage, spotlight, star of the show. The best seats are closest to the center.		:: Center stage, spotlight, star of the show. The best seats are closest to the center.

			=== Post-modern ===

	:; GKC		:; GKC

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:04, 10 December 2022
Line 2:		Line 2:
	== The proper domains of religion, philosophy, and science ==		== The proper domains of religion, philosophy, and science ==

	Revelation tells us '''Who''' created everything--the Triune God.		Revelation tells us '''Who''' created everything — the Triune God.

	Philosophy tells us '''what kind of being''' must be at the origin of all things--a self-sufficient being whose necessary attributes make it proper to call that being "God."		Philosophy tells us '''what kind of being''' must be at the origin of all things — a self-sufficient being whose necessary attributes make it proper to call that being "God."

	Science tells us '''how''' one thing causes another within the observable universe--how forms of matter and energy interact with each other in space and time.		Science tells us '''how''' one thing causes another within the observable universe — how forms of matter and energy interact with each other in space and time.

	=== Theological understanding of all that is ===		=== Theological understanding of all that is ===
Line 59:		Line 59:
	Either God or evolution, not both.		Either God or evolution, not both.

	* [[A Catholic View of Evolution]]--St.John Paul the Great said that evolution is "more than a theory."		* [[A Catholic View of Evolution]] — St.John Paul the Great said that evolution is "more than a theory."

	== Philosophies of Science ==		== Philosophies of Science ==
Line 93:		Line 93:
	:: Nothing in this passage prohibits Catholics from accepting or rejecting the Big Bang as a ''physical'' theory about the observable universe. Assent to or dissent from this set of conjectures about astrophysics cannot change the theological view that the Triune God revealed by Jesus Christ is the author of all that is nor the metaphysical view that only the existence of an infinite, eternal being can explain the existence of the universe.		:: Nothing in this passage prohibits Catholics from accepting or rejecting the Big Bang as a ''physical'' theory about the observable universe. Assent to or dissent from this set of conjectures about astrophysics cannot change the theological view that the Triune God revealed by Jesus Christ is the author of all that is nor the metaphysical view that only the existence of an infinite, eternal being can explain the existence of the universe.

	:: Aquinas was concerned with ''metaphysical'' errors about creation, not about errors in physics, chemistry, and biology as we know them today--those "natural sciences" did not exist eight hundred years ago. It is a serious philosophical error to rip Aquinas' words about metaphysical errors out of context and apply them to questions in astrophysics of which he was not aware.		:: Aquinas was concerned with ''metaphysical'' errors about creation, not about errors in physics, chemistry, and biology as we know them today — those "natural sciences" did not exist eight hundred years ago. It is a serious philosophical error to rip Aquinas' words about metaphysical errors out of context and apply them to questions in astrophysics of which he was not aware.

	:: Our theological and philosophical conviction that ''one God created all things'' does not specify any particular kind of physics, chemistry, or biology. Metaphysics cannot dictate conclusions for the natural sciences nor can the natural sciences dictate metaphysical conclusions. '''Supposing that theories from the natural sciences determine our view of God is the very mistake that the preacher is critical of in the case of the saganists.''' The preacher conflates metaphysics and the natural sciences--just as his opponents do!		:: Our theological and philosophical conviction that ''one God created all things'' does not specify any particular kind of physics, chemistry, or biology. Metaphysics cannot dictate conclusions for the natural sciences nor can the natural sciences dictate metaphysical conclusions. '''Supposing that theories from the natural sciences determine our view of God is the very mistake that the preacher is critical of in the case of the saganists.''' The preacher conflates metaphysics and the natural sciences — just as his opponents do!

	:: It is wrong to think that preachers must advocate for particular theories about nature in the pulpit in order to defend the Church's philosophy and theology. No physical theory can immediately confirm or contradict the Church's dogma that one God created everything. The dogma that one God created everything does not immediately confirm or contradict any proper theory from the natural sciences. Preachers must engage theological disagreements using appropriate theological methods; they must engage philosophical disagreements using proper philosophical methods; they should not imagine that either faith or philosophy gives them authority over the findings of the natural sciences.		:: It is wrong to think that preachers must advocate for particular theories about nature in the pulpit in order to defend the Church's philosophy and theology. No physical theory can immediately confirm or contradict the Church's dogma that one God created everything. The dogma that one God created everything does not immediately confirm or contradict any proper theory from the natural sciences. Preachers must engage theological disagreements using appropriate theological methods; they must engage philosophical disagreements using proper philosophical methods; they should not imagine that either faith or philosophy gives them authority over the findings of the natural sciences.
Line 108:		Line 108:
	:: Supposing for the sake of argument that the Big Bang theory is "a bunch of malarkey," it does not follow that rejecting it changes our theology or metaphysics in any way. The scientific dispute is about how best to interpret scientific observations of our universe. Catholics may accept or reject properly bounded scientific theories without ceasing to be in good standing in the Church. When the preacher implies that the only way to be a faithful Catholic is to reject the theory of the Big Bang, he oversteps the limits of his authority as a priest.		:: Supposing for the sake of argument that the Big Bang theory is "a bunch of malarkey," it does not follow that rejecting it changes our theology or metaphysics in any way. The scientific dispute is about how best to interpret scientific observations of our universe. Catholics may accept or reject properly bounded scientific theories without ceasing to be in good standing in the Church. When the preacher implies that the only way to be a faithful Catholic is to reject the theory of the Big Bang, he oversteps the limits of his authority as a priest.

	:: I agree that we need to reject ''atheistic interpretations'' of the Big Bang or of evolutionary theory, but those interpretations are philosophical arguments that must be dealt with philosophically--not by pretending that the Church's dogma is attached to one particular scientific cosmology. Opposition to the arrogance of scientists who trespass on the grounds of philosophy and theology does not license us to trespass on their proper domain.		:: I agree that we need to reject ''atheistic interpretations'' of the Big Bang or of evolutionary theory, but those interpretations are philosophical arguments that must be dealt with philosophically — not by pretending that the Church's dogma is attached to one particular scientific cosmology. Opposition to the arrogance of scientists who trespass on the grounds of philosophy and theology does not license us to trespass on their proper domain.

	=== Theistic ===		=== Theistic ===

Cosmology - Revision history

Mxmsj: Text replacement - "--" to " — "

Mxmsj: Text replacement - "Ã©" to "é"

Mxmsj: Text replacement - "â€”" to " — "

Mxmsj: Text replacement - "â€œ" to "“"

Mxmsj: Text replacement - "â€" to "”"

Mxmsj: Text replacement - "â€™" to "'"

Mxmsj: /* Links */

Mxmsj: /* Medieval */

Mxmsj: /* Links */

Mxmsj: /* The Meaning of the Center of the Universe */

Mxmsj: Text replacement - "â€" to "”"