Heteronomy: Aquinas’ natural theology

Question 1

Question: What did Aquinas believe about human reason’s ability to know or understand God?

Answer 1

Answer: Aquinas believed that human reason could never fully know or understand God.

Question 2

Question: What type of theology did Aquinas support?

Answer 2

Answer: Aquinas was a proponent of natural theology through reason, which he claimed could support faith in God.

Question 3

Question: How did Aquinas believe human reason could demonstrate God’s existence?

Answer 3

Answer: Aquinas believed human reason could demonstrate God’s existence through the teleological (design) and cosmological arguments.

Question 4

Question: What moral knowledge did Aquinas think human reason could gain?

Answer 4

Answer: Aquinas thought human reason could know God’s natural moral law through the synderesis rule and primary precepts.

Question 5

Question: How did Aquinas believe humans could understand God’s nature?

Answer 5

Answer: Aquinas believed humans could understand God’s nature by analogy, through the analogies of attribution and proportion.

Question 6

Question: Why did Aquinas reject the deductive ontological argument?

Answer 6

Answer: Aquinas rejected the deductive ontological argument because he believed reason could not provide an absolute proof of God’s existence, making faith and revelation necessary.

Question 7

Question: Which arguments did Aquinas formulate to support faith in God?

Answer 7

Answer: Aquinas formulated the teleological and cosmological arguments to support faith in God.

Question 8

Question: Why did Aquinas accept teleological and cosmological arguments over the ontological argument?

Answer 8

Answer: Aquinas accepted teleological and cosmological arguments because they provide inductive evidence for the Christian God, not conclusive proofs, thereby supporting faith in God.

Question 9

Question: What did Aquinas believe about the role of faith and revelation?

Answer 9

Answer: Aquinas believed that faith and revelation are essential because reason alone cannot provide absolute proof of God’s existence.

Question 10

Question: What is natural theology?

Answer 10

Answer: Natural theology is the study of God and his attributes through reason and observation of the natural world.

Question 11

Question: What are the synderesis rule and primary precepts in Aquinas’s thought?

Answer 11

Answer: The synderesis rule is the innate human tendency to do good and avoid evil, while the primary precepts are the basic principles of natural law that guide moral behavior.

Question 12

Question: What are the analogies of attribution and proportion?

Answer 12

Answer: The analogy of attribution refers to attributing qualities to God in a way that is analogous to human qualities, and the analogy of proportion refers to understanding God’s qualities in a manner proportional to human understanding.

Question 13

Question: How do the teleological and cosmological arguments provide evidence for God?

Answer 13

Answer: The teleological argument suggests that the design and order in the universe indicate a designer (God), while the cosmological argument posits that the existence of the universe necessitates a first cause (God).

Question 14

Question: What did Karl Barth argue about Aquinas’ natural law theory?

Karl Barth argued that Aquinas’ natural law theory was a false natural theology

Answer 14

Answer: Karl Barth argued that Aquinas’ natural law theory was a false natural theology that placed a dangerous overreliance on human reason.

Question 15

Question: Why did Barth believe that revelation was necessary?

Karl Barth argued that Aquinas’ natural law theory was a false natural theology

Answer 15

Answer: Barth believed that revelation was necessary because if humans could know God or God’s morality through their own efforts, revelation would be unnecessary. God clearly thought revelation was necessary as he sent Jesus.

Question 16

Question: What did Barth mean by “the finite has no capacity for the infinite”?

Karl Barth argued that Aquinas’ natural law theory was a false natural theology

Answer 16

Answer: Barth meant that our finite minds cannot grasp God’s infinite being, so whatever humans discover through reason is not divine.

Question 17

Question: According to Barth, what does reliance on human reason lead to?

Karl Barth argued that Aquinas’ natural law theory was a false natural theology

Answer 17

Answer: Barth argued that reliance on human reason can lead to idolatry, the worship of earthly things, and ultimately to dangerous movements like Nazism.

Question 18

Question: What was Barth’s stance on human reason after the fall?

Karl Barth argued that Aquinas’ natural law theory was a false natural theology

Answer 18

Answer: Barth believed that after the corruption of the fall, human reason cannot reach God or figure out right and wrong by itself; only faith in God’s revelation in the Bible is valid.

Question 19

In defence of Aquinas

Answer 19

In defence of Aquinas, he is not suggesting that our finite minds can understand God’s nature or goodness (eternal law).

Aquinas is only suggesting that reason can understand the natural law God created within our nature and that some necessary being or uncaused cause exists. If reason only has this goal of supporting faith in such ways, then it cannot make revealed theology unnecessary.

Question 20

Question: How does Tillich partially defend Aquinas against Barth’s criticism?

Tillich defends Aquinas to a degree

Answer 20

Answer: Tillich argues that Barth was too negative in denying the possibility of reason discovering anything whatsoever of the natural law.

Question 21

Answer: Tillich argues that Barth was too negative in denying the possibility of reason discovering anything whatsoever of the natural law.

Tillich defends Aquinas to a degree

Answer 21

Answer: Tillich states that there is self-deception in every denial of the natural moral law and that even a weak or misled conscience is still a conscience, representing the silent voice of man’s own essential nature judging his actual being.

Question 22

Question: According to Tillich, what does the awareness of the gap between our current state and what we could be indicate?

Tillich defends Aquinas to a degree

Answer 22

Answer: According to Tillich, the awareness of this gap indicates a conscience that is aware of its fallen state, which contradicts the denial of natural law.

Question 23

Question: What is Tillich’s conclusion about a weakened conscience and the natural law?

Tillich defends Aquinas to a degree

Answer 23

Answer: Tillich concludes that even a weakened conscience still tells us something about the direction we have fallen in and the direction back towards righteousness, indicating that it can still discover aspects of the natural law.

Question 24

Question: Why does Tillich argue that a weak and misled conscience cannot discover God’s morality?

However, whatever a weak and misled conscience discovers is surely not God’s morality.

Answer 24

Answer: Tillich argues that whatever a weak and misled conscience discovers is surely not God’s morality, as humanity’s belief in its ability to know anything of God is the same arrogance that caused Adam and Eve to disobey God.

Question 25

Question: What does Tillich believe about humanity’s ability to determine right and wrong through natural theology?

However, whatever a weak and misled conscience discovers is surely not God’s morality.

Answer 25

Answer: Tillich believes that humanity’s belief in its power to figure out right and wrong through natural theology leads to arrogance, as seen in the Nazis’ certainty of their own superiority, and is evidence of an inability to be humble enough to simply have faith.