3 ms·

So theology need not make any rational sense whatsoever? It is more an affirmation/fiction/opinion that represents the authors’ own intuitions about divine matt

So theology need not make any rational sense whatsoever? It is more an affirmation/fiction/opinion that represents the authors’ own intuitions about divine matters, or perhaps proceeds from a survey/study of previous hierology/sacred texts? Is an experience of personal revelation therefore necessary to study the subject? You believe a man must believe in a (presumably exclusively Christian?) God, as defined in canonical scriptures, as interpreted by the Catholic church, to study or rationalise about theology? Augustine defined ‘theologia’ as: "…reasoning or discussion concerning the Deity..." - but he got the ‘rationem’ bit wrong? Aristotle must also have been a misguided old fuddy-duddy when he stated that there were three aspects of theoretical philosophy: mathematics, physics and theology - or rather he didn’t mean theology as you define it, but instead something more akin to metaphysics? Thomas Aquinas defines theology as: ‘…what is taught by God, teaches of God and leads to God’ - this seems much closer to what you suggest? A person must first believe, and then an understanding, or more knowledge, of the nature of a god, that you already believe in, will more likely accrue to the initiate after appropriate study, but only given that prior belief? Would you agree with Thomas Paine: “The study of theology, as it stands in Christian churches, is the study of nothing; it is founded on nothing; it rests on no principles; it proceeds by no authorities; it has no data; it can demonstrate nothing; and it admits of no conclusion. Not anything can be studied as a science, without our being in possession of the principles upon which it is founded; and as this is the case with Christian theology, it is therefore the study of nothing.” …or Protagoras: "Concerning the gods I cannot know either that they exist or that they do not exist, or what form they might have, for there is much to prevent one's knowing: the obscurity of the subject and the shortness of man's life." …understand that might be a bit heavy duty/tough ask for a HN comment - but I am genuinely interested if you can point me to useful passages/sources/help me understand Aquinas’/your ideas better…

Cybotron5000 5y ago
“…Hence nothing prevents those things which may be learned from the philosophical disciplines, so far as they can be known by the light of natural reason, from being considered by another science according as they are known by the light of divine revelation. Hence theology included in sacred doctrine differs in kind from that theology which is part of philosophy…”

Cybotron5000 5y ago

“…Hence nothing prevents those things which may be learned from the philosophical disciplines, so far as they can be known by the light of natural reason, from being considered by another science according as they are known by the light of divine revelation. Hence theology included in sacred doctrine differs in kind from that theology which is part of philosophy…”