Jay’s Analysis – Eastern Theology Versus Latin Theology

April 3, 2013 2 Comments

What are the central differences between Latin and Eastern theology? Is there are common thread of difference that gives rise to two different approaches to divinity, knowledge, revelation and eschatology? Yes, I argue. I discuss Augustine, Aquinas, absolute divine simplicity as borrowed from Aristotle and Plato, the Logos, the Greek triad, I Am as “pure being,” Anselm, the analogia entis/chain of being, apophatic theology, theosis, created grace, divine energies, divine ideas, and the supposed ‘beatific vision.’

For the WMA audio file, right click

and “save as”

“By accepting the teachings of Plato on unchangeable species and identifying these with the Divine Essence, Augustine established the analogy between created and Uncreated, based on which he and the Franco-latins would research the Divine Essence through the in-world created icons of the uncreated archetypal species in God.” -Fr John Romanides, Dogmatic and Symbolic Theology of the Orthodox Catholic Church I, p. 382

Filed under Audio/mp3, Bible, Esoteric/Speculation, Philosophy, Politics, Psychology/Sociology, The Jay Show, Theology, Video Tagged with , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Jay’s Analysis Audio Discussion: Platonism Destroys Materialism

March 23, 2013 Leave a comment

In this discussion, I detail what I argued in my recent article: Platonism as an esoteric tradition provides the complete refutation of rank materialism. From the archetypal forms of nature, to the necessity of their being a psyche, the mind of man is a mirror of all reality, and a mirror of the Divine Mind. For a written account, check out my article:

We the Platonists Shall Have the Victory Over the Materialists

 

For audio MP3, right click and “save as”

Filed under Apologetics, Audio/mp3, Conspiracy, Culture, Esoteric/Speculation, History, Philosophy, Religion, Theology, Video Tagged with , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

St. Tom Cat

August 16, 2010 Leave a comment

Analogia

Filed under Comedy, Philosophy, Religion, Theology Tagged with , , , , ,

Aquinas, Simplicity and the Convertibility of Being and Beauty

April 22, 2010 2 Comments

Critical Ruminations

By: Jay

Being a big fan of Eco, I like Eco’s critique of being. Not generic being, but the convertibility of being in Aquinas. I like being, too. In his The Aesthetics of Thomas Aquinas, Eco proposes that beauty cannot be convertible with being and that this is a defunct concept that fell the way of archaic ideas once Ockham’s nominalism showed up; this led to the idea that there is no magic chain binding the transcendentals in an object. And thus philosophy went introspective. And so Eco is an agnostic gnostic now.  I’ve always wondered why it didn’t occur to Eco that maybe Thomism isn’t the end all, be all of Christian theo-philosophy.

But Eco is right that strange problems arise when we say beauty is convertible with being and the good. For Thomas, beauty adds nothing substantial to the notion of being, but only conceptually, and is coextensive with it.  And they are only conceptually distinct. This article traverses land, sea and air analyzing the current scene as regards theology-as-aesthetic and it’s neat-o in that regard, but what no one really seems to mention is that it appears this whole idea is connected to Thomas’ idea that God’s essence is “beauty,” “true” and “good,” and that these predicates are also one in God, and only conceptually distinct.  Thomas says:

“Hence it is manifest that God alone has every kind of perfection by His own essence; therefore He Himself alone is good essentially.” -S.T. Ia Q. 6, Art. 3

“I answer that, As good has the nature of what is desirable, so truth is related to knowledge. Now everything, in as far as it has being, so far is it knowable. Wherefore it is said in De Anima iii that “the soul is in some manner all things,” through the senses and the intellect. And therefore, as good is convertible with being, so is the true. But as good adds to being the notion of desirable, so the true adds relation to the intellect.” -S.T. Ia Q. 16. Art 3 Read more of this post

Filed under Apologetics, Philosophy, Theology Tagged with , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Lengthy Response to a Thomist

April 7, 2010 Leave a comment

N. writes:

No offense Jay, but you are operating on multiple, severely flawed groundworks. For example:

1) Thomas never taught God was like a blob of jello such that ‘Father = Son’. That is a unfair cariacture of texts like ST 1-39. You are not accepting “Father is God” is what Thomas is saying, just as if I were to say “Jay is human.”

I didn’t take anything in Thomas out of context and it’s not just question 39 where he says this. Aquinas teaches his view clearly in numerous places in the Summa, and he’s only saying what Augustine and Anselm said before him. Thomas’ scheme is a system and it all stands together.

1. God is an absolutely simple essence where will, action, attribute, generation, procession and Person are all identical to the essence. Let’s see proof of this:

For Thomas, there can be no distinctions in God, for because of Aristotelian assumptions, ALL distinction implies composition. Hence, as the famous Thomistic dictum Goes He (person) is His essence: Read more of this post

Filed under Bible, Philosophy, Religion, Theology Tagged with , , , , , , , , , , ,

Critique of the Protestant & Thomist Views of Absolute Divine Simplicity

April 6, 2010 Leave a comment

By: Jay Dyer 

When Taylor Marshall and crew originally fussed about this, they were content to dismiss it as “Palamism” – some form of obscure medieval Byzantine mysticism. Now, after more reflection and realizing that the Eastern Fathers all teach a distinction between essence and energy in God, it’s now become an exercise in seeing if oil and water can be mixed. I tried to do this for a while as well. Is there some way to reconcile the two? As a good buddy of mine put it the other day, if the two communions have argued against one another on this issue for hundreds of years, is it really plausible that the Church needed Mike Liccione’s bad arguments to reconcile the two? Nope.

So let’s look at some recent arguments given in attempt to both prove Thomistic absolute simplicity or reconcile it. My friend Ben follows Taylor Marshall in trying to argue that because St. John of Damascus talks about the one energy in God, somehow this is to Thomism. This is false for two reasons. First, it’s false because Thomas explicity rejects any distinction between essence and energy, and second, St. John says both that the energy of God is both one and multiple. Ben argues that this “oneness” of energy means that “in God” all actions and attributes are one and identified. Calvinist blogger Steven Wedgeworth (who won’t allows my comments) argues this here. A reading of the entire Book I is necessary to get the complete meaning of what St. John is saying, as well as Book III where St. John applies the essence – energy distinction at length to Christology. Read more of this post

Filed under Apologetics, Bible, Philosophy, Religion, Theology Tagged with , , , , , , , , , ,

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 155 other followers