Thomas Aquinas commentary on Romans 8

  • Thread starter Thread starter E_CT
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
E

E_CT

Guest
I was wondering if anyone could help me figure out what Thomas Aquinas’ conclusion was on how to interpret Romans 8:18-22. Here is where I found his commentary Chapter 8 - Patristic Bible Commentary.
Could anyone tell which of the three possibilities he presents is the one he believes is the proper interpretation or does he leave it open for the reader to choose. This passage is one I struggled with for awhile on how to interpret.
 
I assume you are referring to paragraphs 658-674, where he talks about three possible interpretations of the word “creature,” namely, the just man, human nature itself, and visible creation. As far as I can tell, he accepts all three as proper interpretations, each in their own way.

In the last four sentences of paragraph 674, he mentions and rejects as unsuitable the interpretation that “creature” means “everything under God,” including the angels, because the angels “already have the glory.”
 
Last edited:
Yeah his wording confused me because I couldn’t tell if he meant he denied that it meant everything in creation or everything in creation including angels.
 
He found the expression “everything under God” too broad an interpretation of “creation” or “creature” in Romans 8 because that expression includes the angels already in glory. Instead, he found the expressions “visible creation” and “sensible creation” more suitable interpretations because those expressions refer to everything under God except the angels.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top