Well said. I think the distinction you stated between Sola and Solo is helpful. The opposite rings true as well. That is, there are some that lean heavily on Thomistic metaphysics and demand that it's absolutely required. These tend to label the opposite view as biblicist. Either way, we must begin with defining our terms in which you did very well. I thank you for that. To be sure, I've had no personal experience with these types of conversations. Only commenting on what I hear and see in Reformed circles on the internet. I'm open to correction if this is not the case. Again, I thank God for your hard work putting this together. God bless.
@Back2theWord
6 ай бұрын
Thanks for the encouragement and reply. Do you by any chance know a good article or book that would share about the Thomistic Metaphysics part? I have been very curious about that myself and some of the conversations around it… but have yet to find something solid that contrasts what is being talked about (I.e., retrieving Aquinas) and how it differs from historical Christian Protestantism (showing where they differ or complement). If you don’t know of something, just online chatter that is cool, but thought I would ask.
@servingseniorsandshut-ins6209
11 ай бұрын
I've been reading a lot about the Bible of late - in part out of interest piqued in part from how Catholics view it differently than my Baptist background and in part to help with research for someone teaching a class. This fits in well with that, and I think is something important to remember/balance our view on! Thanks for sharing!
Пікірлер: 3