Christianity And Aquinas

Christianity began its succession into the most dominant worldwide religion after Jesus’ crucifixion and resurrection. “We heard Him say, ‘I will destroy this temple made with hands, and within three days build another made without hands.” Upon Jesus’ death and resurrection, he completed this task setting forth the development of Christianity. Since Jesus left no formal authoritative power, organization, or agreed upon scriptures, a wide variety of sects gained popularity in the development of Christianity. Most of these sects were later deemed as heretic, one of the most notable being Gnosticism. Gnosticism was a dualist religion believing the material world evil and the invisible spirit realm good. This belief obligated Gnosticism to follow Docetic interpretations. Docetism is the belief that Jesus was never truly man but rather a divine from the spirit world. All forms of Christianity, however, believe Jesus is son of God sent as humanity’s savior from damnation. Docetism, along with other aspects of Gnosticism, drove other Christians condemn Gnosticism as heresy. Gnosticism, however, is more comparable to Canonical Christians than realized. Specifically, the distinction between Docetism and strict Canonical belief is not only insignificant but also justifiable due to Canonical contradictions surrounding Jesus’ existence.

While reading “Summa Contra Gentiles” by Thomas Aquinas I came across the following concerning Mohammad.

     Aquinas’ third way argument states that there has to be something that must exist, which is most likely God. He starts his argument by saying not everything must exist, because things are born and die every single day. By stating this we can jump to the conclusion that if everything need not exist then there would have been a time where there was nothing. But, he goes on, if there was a time when there was nothing, then nothing would exist even today, because something cannot come from nothing. However, our observations tell us that something does exist, therefore there is something that must exist, and Aquinas says that something is God.

Jesus, a name known by billions throughout the world. To each, this name means something different; savior, friend, philosopher, prophet, teacher, fraud, fake, liar. Some even believe that He is just an imaginary character from the minds of those who wrote about Him. The Westminster Dictionary of Theology describes apologetics as, "Defense, by argument, of Christian belief against external criticism or against other worldly views" (Apologetics 31-32). Though there are still many mysteries that surround the ongoing debate about Christianity, evidence can now prove some of what Christians took by faith before. Now, more than ever, there is information to prove the existence of this man that walked

After reading Article 1, Aquinas for Armchair Theologians by Timothy M. Renick most can automatically acquire that Thomas Aquinas was a very influential thinker amongst others when explaining his theological views. His religious views may have differed from others during his time, however, it did influence and encourage others on the different topics of God vs. Satan, and why God has not all the answers, and powers when making sure every human being should not face evil. Aquinas believed that Christians needed to view their basic beliefs in another way to make sense of their own faith when questioning all that God did for each individual. The real question to all this, which a lot of people even question today is “Why is their evil in the World?”

Does God exist? That question has been asked by people for centuries. Christians, Jews, and Muslims would all say that God exists. They would claim that He is the creator of all things and is of a higher being than man is. Others would claim either that God does not exist or that God is not what the Christians, Jews, and Muslims say He is. Both Anselm and Aquinas address this question: Anselm in his "Proslogion" and Aquinas in his "Summa Theologica." The opinions of Anselm and Aquinas as to the nature of God are the same, although Anselm lacks the proof to back up his claims.

He, however, believes that kingship is so important, that a slight change of the type of monarchy would not be that bad. This is interesting, because Aquinas also says that tyranny is the "worst form of government" (18) because it seeks only the good of the tyrant, and is therefore further from the appropriate end of government, which is the common good and unity. The reasons Aquinas seems to change his mind about the idea of tyranny seem

Religion has existed for countless centuries. Christianity is one of the major religions in this world, which had people be criticized, battle in wars, and killed for, but it still survived to this day. The purpose of this paper is to study the source of the religion, recognize the teachings, observe its spread throughout the world, and to identify how it stands among people today. Approaching this paper by a factual report I will explain these major points and why we need to know about this religion and other religions that existed before our generation.

Throughout history, Christianity always had a reputation, or a “name” following it. Different perspectives approached the reputation that was attached to Christianity in different manners. Justin Martyr and Porphyry had objectives when defining whether this “name” really defined Christianity and the past. They wondered whether the past really represented Christianity. Additionally they honed in on the question of was the past that people represented as Christianity really the roots of Christianity? All around Porphyry and Justin was perceptions of what Christianity rooted from and stood for.

In 312 CE, Roman Emperor Constantine achieved a victory at the Milvian Bridge. The night previous to this battle, Constantine dreamt of a cross inscribed in hoc signo vinces, in this sign you will conquer. As trivial as this dream may seem, it ultimately signified the beginning of the rise of Christianity. With his victory, Emperor Constantine converted to Christianity and supported and encouraged it throughout the empire. In 313 CE, another milestone occurred as the emperors, both Constantine I of the West and Licinius of the East, signed the Edict of Milan declaring that the Diocletianic Persecution would end, and Christianity would be tolerated in the Roman Empire. This religion began to flourish as people quickly converted from pagan

At first glance the words “Tradition” and “tradition” may appear to be identical concepts. Upon further study, examination, and contemplation, however, these two words differ in their precise definitions. “Tradition” carries more weight and meaning than the word “tradition.” Similarly, “Truth” and “truth” do not denote the exact same principle. In fact, philosophers and religious scholars have been debating the origins of the latter two doctrines since the Middle Ages. The major dispute associated with “Truth” with a capital T and “truth” with a lower-case “t” focuses around the field of study in which each is used. According to two prominent thinkers of the

1.) Thomas Aquinas believes that humans are born with a clean slate in a state of potency and acquire knowledge through sense experiences by abstraction of the phantasms. His view on how man acquires knowledge rejects Plato’s theory that humans are born with innate species. Along with Plato’s theory of humans understanding corporeal things through innate species, Aquinas also rejects Plato’s theory that in being born with innate species, humans spend their lives recollecting their knowledge.

Among various political, social, and religious strife, the Medieval Literature is characterized by Christian influence and beliefs. In medieval texts, authors highlight the importance and grandeur of the Christian faith by contrasting it with descriptions of foreign lands. As a result, people received a false view of these faraway lands that included Syria and India. In texts such as Sir John Mandeville’s The Book of Marvels and Travels and Geoffrey Chaucer’s “The Man of Law’s Tale” offer examples of othering by their misunderstanding of foreign people and criticism of their religion which in turn facilitates the authors in defining the Christian European identity.

A tyrannical government to Aquinas is when the private good of the ruler is more emphasized than the common good of the people. So Aquinas gives justifications for not obeying a tyrant and explains that God’s will always comes first. As Aquinas says, “there are two ways in which subjects many not be obliged to obey superiors in all things” , and those two ways are if God’s will is different from the tyrant’s will and also if the tyrant’s rule is not legitimate. (Aquinas 183).Thus , Aquinas advises the people to not hastily rebel. The reason is if one fails , the tyrant can be more furious, or the next ruler can be more harsh. If one endures tyranny, it shows faith to God. But Aquinas also illustrates the point that the people are allowed to rebel if the damage done by tyranny exceeds what may occur in a rebellion. Aquinas believed in that the ruler should be the shepherd who achieves for the common good. But if there is tyrannical order, the people usually endure or rebel. If the people endure, tyranny survives, if the people rebel, tyranny may fall apart or even be

According to Aquinas the best form of Earthly government is the presence of a monarch within a state. Monarchies have power over everyone yet justice belongs to all equally. Aquinas’s position on the best earthly form of government derives from his strong position on natural law and moral value. Aquinas believes that a monarchy is the best-suited form of government because it is natural for one person to govern over others. He pushes the idea that a monarch should be wise and just within its approach to rule over the people. If power needed to be constrained Aquinas believed that a constitution would be ideal for diffusion of power within the state. A monarch would also be able to allow a separation between the state and church thus creating two different factors that allow for the common good to be constructed. A good monarch would facilitate survival of individuals within a community and make a conscious effort to promote the voice of the individual being. Aquinas justifies that any monarch that does not follow these basic principals is not flawed, but rather a reflection of the people. A bad monarch would be allowed to rule at the hands of Gods will and his disproval would never be recognized because a bad ruler a method of God communicating his disapproval of the people through the head of state. This ideology left the monarch, as a very powerful figure that could essentially rule without fault and no consequences would be held in his account.