Another Theology Blog

22 Feb

Grand Reopening

So, I’ve officially decided to resurrect this blog. You might notice that several posts have been removed when you browse through the archive; in retrospect, I feel some of the things I wrote were inappropriate. I removed everything with even a whiff of hatred concerning homosexual individuals, for example; but I did keep the posts that disagreed with certain policies I now approve of or am indifferent to, because their tone was civil.

Therefore, remember this rule of thumb: if it was written prior to 2010, a post might not reflect my current views on a subject.

Anyway, I hope to have the first post up later today.

Ciao!

22 Mar

Meaning of Life Monday

After careful deliberation, I’ve concluded that “Meaning of Life Monday” is more catchy and deft than “Meaning of Life Friday,” which lacks the prerequisite alliteration/consonance for a continued posting theme.  Thus, ladies and gentlemen, without further ado, I present you with the purpose of everything!

Play Fetch

21 Mar

Mac Attack!!!

Okay guys. The buying-a-new-computer saga continues.

My dad came down with a cold this weekend, so we decided to stay home and go out to the Apple Store later. Even worse, I came down with indecision. I can’t settle on whether I should just go with a 2.66 GHz processor, or fork over $270 to upgrade to a 2.93 GHz processor. What do you guys think? What course of action should I choose?

20 Mar

Meaning of Life Friday

Spider Pig!

18 Mar

Podcasting?

I’m getting a Mac this weekend. I might start podcasting Maronite morning and evening prayer. What do you all think of that? Would it be something you would enjoy?

15 Mar

Support Christian Missionaries

Hey everyone! I just got back from an absolutely delicious Bar-BQ hosted by the Baptist Church I used to attend. Anyway, I met a missionary who’s doing some evangelization over in London, England (God knows they need it there). My chat with him got me to thinking, “what have I done for missionaries lately?” The answer? Not much. But that’s going to change!

This is where you, my gentle readers, come into play. Email me stuff about missionaries in your life, and if you provide a link to their website, I’ll put them up on my new sidebar (on the left) labeled “Missionaries.”  They don’t have to be Catholic.  As long as they fit under the Mere Christianity (read “orthodox”) category, I’ll feature them.  

I encourage all of you to make submissions and browse through the missionaries already listed.  Feel free to drop any of them a donation on their website, or at least offer them a prayer of thanksgiving and encouragement.

28 Feb

Whether St. Thomas Aquinas is ever Wrong?

Objection 1:  It would seem the Angelic Doctor is never wrong, because I really like him.

Objection 2:  Further, everything I’ve read by him so far is right.

Objection 3:  Further, the Church says he’s a really cool guy.

On the Contrary:  St. Thomas Aquinas falsely claims that the argument of Objection 6 is not demonstrative in Article 2 of Question 46 when, in fact, it is demonstrative.  He does this because he misunderstands an objection to his position that it cannot be demonstrated the world has a beginning in time.  Instead, he maintains the clearly absurd notion that it is possible to have an infinite regress in time (an infinite past).

I Answer That:  The original objection to St. Thomas’ position is “…if the world always was, the consequence is that infinite days preceded this present day. But it is impossible to pass through an infinite medium. Therefore we should never have arrived at this present day; which is manifestly false.”  The Angelic Doctor answers “…passage is always understood as being from term to term. Whatever bygone day we choose, from it to the present day there is a finite number of days which can be passed through. The objection is founded on the idea that, given two extremes, there is an infinite number of mean terms.”  

However, the objection is not founded on the idea that, given two extremes, there is an infinite number of mean terms.  Rather, it is founded on the fact that to be in the present day means all days in the past have, well, passed.  And even though it is indeed true that for any given day in an infinite past there is only a finite amount of time between it and the present, it is also true that there yet remains an infinite amount of time prior to any given day in an infinite past that must have passed before that day.  This leads us to conclude that an infinite past is self-contradictory, because assuming the present day is here, and it is indeed here, means an infinite number of days have indeed passed, or rather an infinite amount of time has terminated.  But an infinite amount of time by definition cannot terminate.

Further, the first extreme (the present day being the second extreme) is missing, so there can be no passage to the present in the first place.  Why?  Because present conditions depend on past conditions for their existence, and an infinite past would necessitate an infinite regression in efficient cause which Aquinas has properly demonstrated as nonsensical (ironically, by using the exact same logic underlying the objection to his position on the possible infinite nature of the past).

Further, time is the measure of the motion of something moved relative to the motion of something else moved.  Thus, the speed of a car is measured relative to the rotation of the earth (miles per hour).  If there was an infinite past, it would require infinite regression in things moved since time is their measure of motion relative to one another.  Once again, this has been demonstrated by Aquinas to be nonsensical.  In order to attain the present state of motion, there must be a First Mover which is unmoved.  Therefore, time must not have an infinite past duration.

Reply to Objection 1:  I really like him too, but he’s wrong sometimes.  More often than you would think, actually.

Reply to Objection 2:  But now you’ve read even further, and found him to be wrong on occasion.

Reply to Objection 3:  Yes, but he’s not infallible, and his philosophy needs to be revised and excised of its mistakes.

For more on my argument, see this post.

© 2012 Another Theology Blog | Entries (RSS) and Comments (RSS)

Design by Catholic Library - Powered By StBlogs Catholic Blogs and Catholic News