Aquinas vs Socrates

  • Thread starter Thread starter spockrates
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
spockrates
**
“Be perfect, as your Heavenly Father is perfect,” is not hyperbole, but is instead reality? **

This really bothers me. I think humility requires that we not say anyone is as perfect as our heavenly Father. That is certainly what we should aim for, but we should never allo that we have reached the Father’s heavenly perfection. 🤷

What do you think?
 
spockrates
**
“Be perfect, as your Heavenly Father is perfect,” is not hyperbole, but is instead reality? **

This really bothers me. I think humility requires that we not say anyone is as perfect as our heavenly Father. That is certainly what we should aim for, but we should never allo that we have reached the Father’s heavenly perfection. 🤷

What do you think?
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

I think there are different ways of perfection. I might be as perfect as I can possibly be in one way, yet certainly imperfect in others. For example, I might become perfectly sinless and never sin again. In that way, I would actually be as perfect as God, for God never sins. Yet, I would still not be as perfectly wise as God, for God alone is omniscient. Nor would I be as perfectly powerful as God, for God alone is omnipotent.

You see, the context of Jesus command to be as perfect as God is the Sermon on the Mount, in which he is explaining how we should do what is right and not do what is wrong.

43 “You have heard that it was said, ‘Love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ 44 But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, 45 that you may be children of your Father in heaven. He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous.

(Matthew 5)

And of course, right after this he commands us to be perfect as our Heavenly Father is perfect. The perfection that he is commanding, then is moral perfection, or sinlessness. This kind of perfection, as we have said, is indeed possible, with God’s help. At least it is possible according to Thomas Aquinas, if we are to believe some Thomists who interpret his writings to say sinless perfection is attainable.
 
spockrates

**And of course, right after this he commands us to be perfect as our Heavenly Father is perfect. The perfection that he is commanding, then is moral perfection, or sinlessness. This kind of perfection, as we have said, is indeed possible, with God’s help. At least it is possible according to Thomas Aquinas, if we are to believe some Thomists who interpret his writings to say sinless perfection is attainable. **

If by sinless you mean without mortal sin, I can imagine that state being achieved by the holy ones among us. Christ encourages that, and many probably seek it. A state of complete sinlessness (neither mortal nor venial sins) I find difficult to imagine. How would we know of such people unless they told us about themselves? In which case I would almost guarantee that an element of spiritual pride had set in. Most of the saints I’ve read about have talked a lot about their sinfulness and very little about their moral perfection. Even the popes have confessor priests to keep them in line.

P.S. I like your visuals. 👍
 
spockrates

**And of course, right after this he commands us to be perfect as our Heavenly Father is perfect. The perfection that he is commanding, then is moral perfection, or sinlessness. This kind of perfection, as we have said, is indeed possible, with God’s help. At least it is possible according to Thomas Aquinas, if we are to believe some Thomists who interpret his writings to say sinless perfection is attainable. **

If by sinless you mean without mortal sin, I can imagine that state being achieved by the holy ones among us. Christ encourages that, and many probably seek it. A state of complete sinlessness (neither mortal nor venial sins) I find difficult to imagine. How would we know of such people unless they told us about themselves? In which case I would almost guarantee that an element of spiritual pride had set in. Most of the saints I’ve read about have talked a lot about their sinfulness and very little about their moral perfection. Even the popes have confessor priests to keep them in line.

P.S. I like your visuals. 👍
Yes, Google image search makes it easy!



But would it be accurate to say a saint is sinless who ceases to commit mortal sins yet continues to practice venial sins? If not, then I think we have no choice but to disagree with those minority of Thomists who claim perfection is attainable this side of eternity. Why they believe such an unbelievable thing, we cannot fathom. Unlike other Thomists, they are on the fringe but are deaf to the incessant repeating of the theme from the *The Twilight Zone * in their ears!

:o

But we hear the melodic warning and wise enough to not be deceived.

👍
 
spockrates

If not, then I think we have no choice but to disagree with those minority of Thomists who claim perfection is attainable this side of eternity.

Perfection is attainable insofar as we are on the road to perfection. I don’t know how many people who, upon dying, enter directly into the presence of God. That would be the state of ultimate perfection. I don’t need to know how many when they die are in that state all at once without going through a purgation of sorts for past sins. This is knowledge only God and the dead have. Why is that very important to us? :confused:
 
spockrates

If not, then I think we have no choice but to disagree with those minority of Thomists who claim perfection is attainable this side of eternity.

Perfection is attainable insofar as we are on the road to perfection.
http://contrarianedge.com/wp-content/uploads/Are-We-There-Yet.jpg

If one is still on the road to a destination, has she reached that destination, yet? If not, then if one is still on the road to perfection, how can we say she has reached perfection, yet?
I don’t know how many people who, upon dying, enter directly into the presence of God. That would be the state of Did Socrates really believe it is impossible for a wise person to sin?
Is it actually possible for a wise person to sin?
ultimate perfection. I don’t need to know how many when they die are in that state all at once without going through a purgation of sorts for past sins. This is knowledge only God and the dead have. Why is that very important to us? :confused:
It is important to us in finding an answer to the second question of the opening post:

Is it actually possible for a wise person to sin?

Do you see why it is important?
 
For anybody who’s interested, there’s a two hour documentary on St. Peter tonight on EWTN.
 
spockrates
**
Is it actually possible for a wise person to sin?

Do you see why it is important? **

Yes, it is important. I thought we had gotten past that long ago. Solomon was wise and sinful.
 
spockrates
**
Is it actually possible for a wise person to sin?

Do you see why it is important? **

Yes, it is important. I thought we had gotten past that long ago. Solomon was wise and sinful.
We did accept that premise, yes. But did we ever answer the question, “Did Solomon ever fall from wisdom?” You see, I think you agree with me that Calvinists and Baptists are incorrect when they say it is impossible to fall from God’s grace. So should we also say it is not impossible to fall from God’s wisdom? If it is not impossible, then perhaps this scenario occurred:


  1. *]God gave Solomon wisdom
    *]Solomon was wise
    *]Solomon later chose a life devoted to sin
    *]Solomon then became foolish and so was no longer wise

    If this is the truth, then is it correct to say Solomon was still wise when he lived for sin? Or is it correct to say that when he was foolish enough to begin to live for sin, he ceased to be wise?
 
spockrates
**
And Saint Peter’s life makes me wonder: Was he wise when he denied Christ? **

No, but he had the wisdom to repent! 👍
 
spockrates
**
And Saint Peter’s life makes me wonder: Was he wise when he denied Christ? **

No, but he had the wisdom to repent! 👍
True! To repent of being unwise is wise indeed!

👍

And what about *before *Peter denied Christ? Did he receive wisdom from God to know something wise that others did not know?

13 When Jesus came to the region of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, “Who do people say the Son of Man is?”

14 They replied, “Some say John the Baptist; others say Elijah; and still others, Jeremiah or one of the prophets.”

15 “But what about you?” he asked. “Who do you say I am?”

16 Simon Peter answered, “You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God.”

17 Jesus replied, “Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah, *for this was not revealed to you by flesh and blood, but by my Father in heaven. *18 And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it.

(Matthew 16)
 
spockrates
**
And what about before Peter denied Christ? Did he receive wisdom from God to know something wise that others did not know?**

You aren’t supposed to answer your own question. 😃 Socrates would not approve. 😉
 
spockrates
**
And what about before Peter denied Christ? Did he receive wisdom from God to know something wise that others did not know?**

You aren’t supposed to answer your own question. 😃 Socrates would not approve. 😉
I think, rather we both inferred the answer from Saint Matthew’s gospel.

👍
 
http://www.workingclassheroes.me/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/ragsriches.jpg

8 When Simon Peter saw this, he fell at Jesus’ knees and said, “Go away from me, Lord; I am a sinful man!” 9 For he and all his companions were astonished at the catch of fish they had taken, 10 and so were James and John, the sons of Zebedee, Simon’s partners.

Then Jesus said to Simon, “Don’t be afraid; from now on you will fish for people.”

(Luke 5)

And no need to ask: When Simon Peter first met Jesus, he was, at first not wise, but a sinful fool who doubted him. Do you think, then, as I do, that Peter’s is a story of rags, to riches, to rags to riches? That is, at times he possessed the riches of God’s wisdom, and at other times he acted foolishly, and so lost God’s wisdom?
 
spockrates

**Do you think, then, as I do, that Peter’s is a story of rags, to riches, to rags to riches? That is, at times he possessed the riches of God’s wisdom, and at other times he acted foolishly, and so lost God’s wisdom? **

He vacillated, it’s true. I’m fairly sure he went out a winner wearing a martyr’s crown! 👍
 
spockrates

**Do you think, then, as I do, that Peter’s is a story of rags, to riches, to rags to riches? That is, at times he possessed the riches of God’s wisdom, and at other times he acted foolishly, and so lost God’s wisdom? **

He vacillated, it’s true. I’m fairly sure he went out a winner wearing a martyr’s crown! 👍
Agreed!

👍

And I think at this point we would be wise to pause for a moment and consider Socrates’ advice to his good friend:

All good counsel begins in the same way: A man should know what he is advising about, or his counsel will all come to nought. But people imagine they know about the nature of things, when they don’t really know about them. And not having come to an understanding at first, because they think that they know, they end up, as might be expected, in contradicting one another and even themselves! Now you and I must not be guilty of this fundamental error, which we condemn in others.

(Phaedrus)

What he seems to be saying is we ought to define our terms before we come to any conclusion, or we are likely to succumb to self-contradiction and confusion. In our current case, before we decide whether or not it is impossible for a wise man to sin, we should decide what a wise man is. Don’t you agree? If you do, you may let me know what a wise man is, or I have a definition in mind, if you’d like to consider it.

🙂
 
spockrates
**
Don’t you agree? If you do, you may let me know what a wise man is, or I have a definition in mind, if you’d like to consider it.**

A wise man knows the prudent thing to think, say, or do when prudence is required.

But wisdom should not be confused with courage. A wise man might know what to think, say, or do, in a certain circumstance, but may not have the courage to do it. Wisdom and courage are different virtues. Solomon had wisdom, but seemed to lack the courage to act as a wise man should act.

What’s your definition?
 
spockrates
**
Don’t you agree? If you do, you may let me know what a wise man is, or I have a definition in mind, if you’d like to consider it.**

A wise man knows the prudent thing to think, say, or do when prudence is required.

But wisdom should not be confused with courage. A wise man might know what to think, say, or do, in a certain circumstance, but may not have the courage to do it. Wisdom and courage are different virtues. Solomon had wisdom, but seemed to lack the courage to act as a wise man should act.

What’s your definition?
Yes, I think you are right that wisdom is not courage any more than foolishness is cowardice. A missionary to China, whose name I do not recall, was putting his life in danger but said, “Without risk, there is no need for faith.” It seems to me, then bravery is a product of faith. And the proof that courage is not wisdom is seen in those who are foolhardy. For they have great courage, yet take foolish risks that are not prudent.

Peter showed such foolish bravery when he drew a knife and attacked those who came to arrest Jesus. Later he showed cowardice when he refused to admit he even knew Jesus. In the former case, I believe he had faith that God would give him victory in the battle against the enemies of Christ. In the later case he feared that he would suffer crucifixion.

Peter was foolish to attack the authorities who arrested Jesus, since Jesus previously told him he would be arrested, crucified and rise from the dead. He showed great bravery, yet he was still unwise. I think also he knew the truth, since Jesus told him how it was going to go down:

31 He then began to teach them that the Son of Man must suffer many things and be rejected by the elders, the chief priests and the teachers of the law, and that he must be killed and after three days rise again. 32 He spoke plainly about this, and Peter took him aside and began to rebuke him.

33 But when Jesus turned and looked at his disciples, he rebuked Peter. “Get behind me, Satan!” he said. “You do not have in mind the concerns of God, but merely human concerns.”

(Mark 8)

So here is my definition: Wisdom is knowing what to say, think and do. A wise man is one who not only has wisdom, but who also says, thinks and does what the wisdom he has tells him to say think and do. The paradox is that a man who has a great deal of wisdom can still play the fool! It sounds odd to say one with extraordinary wisdom can be unwise, but I think this is exactly what happened in the case if Solomon.

4 I undertook great projects: I built houses for myself and planted vineyards. 5 I made gardens and parks and planted all kinds of fruit trees in them. 6 I made reservoirs to water groves of flourishing trees. 7 I bought male and female slaves and had other slaves who were born in my house. I also owned more herds and flocks than anyone in Jerusalem before me. 8 I amassed silver and gold for myself, and the treasure of kings and provinces. I acquired male and female singers, and a harem as well—the delights of a man’s heart. 9 I became greater by far than anyone in Jerusalem before me. In all this my wisdom stayed with me.

10 I denied myself nothing my eyes desired;
I refused my heart no pleasure.
My heart took delight in all my labor,
and this was the reward for all my toil.
11 Yet when I surveyed all that my hands had done
and what I had toiled to achieve,
everything was meaningless, a chasing after the wind;
nothing was gained under the sun.

(Ecclesiastes 2)

What do you think of this definition? Are we getting closer to the full truth about what a wise person is?
 
spockrates

**What do you think of this definition? Are we getting closer to the full truth about what a wise person is? **

Absotively! 👍😉
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top