Understanding Thomism

[Shadow Forge]

I have come to understand that Thomism has become a serious threat within reformed circles especially Reformed Baptist circles. Now I am far from being a scholar in Thomism yet it is shocking that luminaries living today fall prey to it. When I found out that R.C. Sproul had thomistic leanings, I suddenly push his work aside and haven't engaged with it since. So why now is Thomism becoming very prevalent? Please help me understand why such a corrupt ideology is seeping into and taking hold of so many people?

 

[RamistThomist]

I have come to understand that Thomism has become a serious threat within reformed circles especially Reformed Baptist circles. Now I am far from being a scholar in Thomism yet it is shocking that luminaries living today fall prey to it. When I found out that R.C. Sproul had thomistic leanings, I suddenly push his work aside and haven't engaged with it since. So why now is Thomism becoming very prevalent? Please help me understand why such a corrupt ideology is seeping into and taking hold of so many people?

For starters, no one is embracing Thomism as a whole system. Rather, the Thomist doctrine of God is very similar to what the Reformed held to. See the Westminster Confession, chapter 5, where it calls the foreknowledge of God the First Cause. Thomas himself couldn't have said it better. Rather than putting Sproul's works aside, you could read Thomist sources, or even Thomas himself, and find out exactly what he is saying. You can start here:

Five Arguments of the Existence of God (Feser)

Feser, Edward. Five Arguments of the Existence of God. San Francisco, Ignatius Press: 2017. For each chapter, at least the first five, Feser introduces the issues, summarizes the argument, pr…

tentsofshem.wordpress.com

Contemplating God with the Great Tradition (Carter)

Carter, Craig. Contemplating God with the Great Tradition: Recovering Trinitarian Classical Theism. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2021. Even though I fully endorse Craig Carter’s Great Traditio…

tentsofshem.wordpress.com

The Battle for God (Geisler and House)

Norman Geisler. H. Wayne House. Max Herrera. The Battle for God: Responding to the Challenge of Neotheism. Grand Rapids, MI: Kregel Publications, 2001. The battle for God, at least on the Ope…

tentsofshem.wordpress.com

https://tentsofshem.wordpress.com/2024/01/22/the-shorter-summa-Peter-kreeft/

 

[RamistThomist]

It gets worse.

 

[Shadow Forge]

It gets worse.
View attachment 10823

I am aware that Calvin and others quoted Thomas on occasion. However, I have a simple rule of thumb.. if it's Catholic it belongs in the trash.

 

[RamistThomist]

I am aware that Calvin and others quoted Thomas on occasion. However, I have a simple rule of thumb.. if it's Catholic it belongs in the trash.

Do you throw those parts of the Reformers, including section 5.2 of the confession, in the trash?

 

[Shadow Forge]

Do you throw those parts of the Reformers, including section 5.2 of the confession, in the trash?

Of course I am not throwing 5.2 in the trash. What I am saying that I stay away from Catholic rites, purely Catholic writings, etc.. It has been stated that Thomas Aquinas is an enemy of Reformed Theology. If you are interested, there was a new episode from Red Grace media discussing this very topic of Reformed Theology In Crisis:

 

[ZackF]

I am aware that Calvin and others quoted Thomas on occasion. However, I have a simple rule of thumb.. if it's Catholic it belongs in the trash.

 

[Shadow Forge]

View attachment 10824

The idea of "cage stage" nonsense is childish. There have been scholars throughout time that have stated the same thing. So are you saying they belong in a cage as well? And I wonder why the church body has become weak and bent the knee to the world....

 

[John The Baptist]

It gets worse.
View attachment 10823

If Owen is out, I'm out

 

[Laborer for the Lord]

I am aware that Calvin and others quoted Thomas on occasion. However, I have a simple rule of thumb.. if it's Catholic it belongs in the trash.

With all do respect, brother, I think that you are falling prey to the convert's zeal that can so easily turn young believers into quasi-legalists in their conduct. You've been part of this board little more than a month, correct? Yet in that time most of the threads that you've created have increasingly focused on matters of doctrinal controversy, complete with a McCarthy mentality.

The fact of the matter is that there are some issues that the Scriptures are silent on, or else leave to the conscience of the believer. Romans 14 was expressly written to address our relationship with other believers in matters such as these; that is, matters of personal conviction. Metaphysics, at least as understood in a systematic and formal way, is just one such issue. I understand that many in the contemporary church are suspicious of any hint of what sounds like "worldy philosophy", but dogmatic insistence on limiting discussion of Christian truth to the strictly literal language of Scripture is not only reactionary, but absurd. Such a mentality erases centuries of fruitful theological discourse and calls into question the very language of confessional documents that we still rely upon.

I guess what I'm intimating is that not everything can be weighed on a balance as wholly good or wholly evil; it is possible to learn from Thomas and the later medieval scholastics without necessarily committing oneself to the ontological or theological conclusions reached by card-carrying Thomists. Take this thread just for example (https://www.puritanboard.com/threads/the-great-tradition-and-post-reformation-orthodoxy.112819/), which features a great deal of interaction among a diverse range of viewpoints on the degree of influence that medieval Scholasticism exercised on the Reformed orthodox of the 16th and 17th centuries.

Now I don't consider myself exceptionally clever, but I know that not all Thomists are autonomous intellect-worshipping devils. Please be mindful of that when interacting with other board members and insodoing manifest the charity that befits the name of Christ.

 

[dsanch1120]

All truth is God’s truth

 

[Shadow Forge]

With all do respect, brother, I think that you are falling prey to the convert's zeal that can so easily turn young believers into quasi-legalists in their conduct. You've been part of this board little more than a month, correct? Yet in that time most of the threads that you've created have increasingly focused on matters of doctrinal controversy, complete with a McCarthy mentality.

The fact of the matter is that there are some issues that the Scriptures are silent on, or else leave to the conscience of the believer. Romans 14 was expressly written to address our relationship with other believers in matters such as these; that is, matters of personal conviction. Metaphysics, at least as understood in a systematic and formal way, is just one such issue. I understand that many in the contemporary church are suspicious of any hint of what sounds like "worldy philosophy", but dogmatic insistence on limiting discussion of Christian truth to the strictly literal language of Scripture is not only reactionary, but absurd. Such a mentality erases centuries of fruitful theological discourse and calls into question the very language of confessional documents that we still rely upon.

I guess what I'm intimating is that not everything can be weighed on a balance as wholly good or wholly evil; it is possible to learn from Thomas and the later medieval scholastics without necessarily committing oneself to the ontological or theological conclusions reached by card-carrying Thomists. Take this thread just for example (https://www.puritanboard.com/threads/the-great-tradition-and-post-reformation-orthodoxy.112819/), which features a great deal of interaction among a diverse range of viewpoints on the degree of influence that medieval Scholasticism exercised on the Reformed orthodox of the 16th and 17th centuries.

Now I don't consider myself exceptionally clever, but I know that not all Thomists are autonomous intellect-worshipping devils. Please be mindful of that when interacting with other board members and insodoing manifest the charity that befits the name of Christ.

I appreciate your thorough reply brother. I do not lump all those who study Thomas into one heap. My initial question was the same as many scholars both living and who have gone to the Lord have presented. Now, I am sure there are valid points that Thomas makes yet when you have luminaries of the faith warning against it, one cannot shove that to the side either.

 

[Knight]

I've not heard of Red Grace media (which is not a shot - I'm unaware of many things), but I did pick up on the reference to Tipton et al. I have been waiting for the follow-up to this episode that was posted several months ago. It appears Tipton might be ready to finally roll out his understanding of the "deeper Protestant conception" (so-called)?

 

[Laborer for the Lord]

I've not heard of Red Grace media (which is not a shot - I'm unaware of many things), but I did pick up on the reference to Tipton et al. I have been waiting for the follow-up to this episode that was posted several months ago. It appears Tipton might be ready to finally roll out his understanding of the "deeper Protestant conception" (so-called)?

Ryan, a quick search on Google yields quite a few results for the "deeper Protestant conception", but I don't think that's what you have in mind. Is there some specific topic or aspect of Thomas's thought that Tipton said he would address in a future manner?

 

[Knight]

Ryan, a quick search on Google yields quite a few results for the "deeper Protestant conception", but I don't think that's what you have in mind. Is there some specific topic or aspect of Thomas's thought that Tipton said he would address in a future manner?

If you listen to the podcast I linked to, you'll understand what I mean. It's a trigger phrase that show Tipton's fingerprints in the video that Shadow Forge posted. See here as well.

I believe the phrase is applied by Tipton in particular as a part of a larger project to promote the ideas of Van Til and Vos in various contexts - in this case, theology proper. Given what I listened to in Shadow Forge's video, I would not be the least surprised to see outlets begin to push Tipton's Trinitarianism as "the" Reformed alternative to Thomism.

This is just a hunch, and I am not intending any additional evaluative commentary in making said prediction.

EDIT: see another example of what I mean here.

 

[Charles Johnson]

I have come to understand that Thomism has become a serious threat within reformed circles especially Reformed Baptist circles. Now I am far from being a scholar in Thomism yet it is shocking that luminaries living today fall prey to it. When I found out that R.C. Sproul had thomistic leanings, I suddenly push his work aside and haven't engaged with it since. So why now is Thomism becoming very prevalent? Please help me understand why such a corrupt ideology is seeping into and taking hold of so many people?

Is there anything "Thomist" that you can clearly show to be present in RC Sproul, but not in Turretin, Walaeus, Heidegger, John Owen, etc?
I strongly disagree with the idea that R.C. Sproul was compromising in any way with Roman Catholicism.
He was actually known during his life for his opposition to "Evangelicals and Catholics together" because of his stand for the doctrine of justification by faith alone.

 

[Shadow Forge]

Is there anything "Thomist" that you can clearly show to be present in RC Sproul, but not in Turretin, Walaeus, Heidegger, John Owen, etc?
I strongly disagree with the idea that R.C. Sproul was compromising in any way with Roman Catholicism.
He was actually known during his life for his opposition to "Evangelicals and Catholics together" because of his stand for the doctrine of justification by faith alone.

Don't get me wrong brother.. I love RC and learned so much from him. Here is a quote from RC: "“I respect Saint Thomas Aquinas as much or more than any other theologian that’s ever lived. I think Saint Thomas was astonishing in his brilliance and in his consistent understanding of the things of God.”
Another: https://reformed.org/webfiles/antithesis/v2n3/ant_v2n3_thomism.html

 

[Knight]

Don't get me wrong brother.. I love RC and learned so much from him. Here is a quote from RC: "“I respect Saint Thomas Aquinas as much or more than any other theologian that’s ever lived. I think Saint Thomas was astonishing in his brilliance and in his consistent understanding of the things of God.”
Another: https://reformed.org/webfiles/antithesis/v2n3/ant_v2n3_thomism.html

Honestly, this is little different than what Tipton says in the podcast I linked to earlier. Insofar as the people you recommend listening to in turn draw on Tipton, I dont understand the fuss.

 

[Charles Johnson]

Don't get me wrong brother.. I love RC and learned so much from him. Here is a quote from RC: "“I respect Saint Thomas Aquinas as much or more than any other theologian that’s ever lived. I think Saint Thomas was astonishing in his brilliance and in his consistent understanding of the things of God.”
Another: https://reformed.org/webfiles/antithesis/v2n3/ant_v2n3_thomism.html

While I wouldn't say that about Thomas myself, RC saying he "respects" Aquinas isn't the same as him adopting unbiblical ideas from Thomas.
The only point where I disagree with RC and think he resembles Thomas too much is in his views of the second commandment, since he was fine with images of Christ, but the same problem is found in the vast majority of american evangelicals.

 

[Alexander Suarez]

I have come to understand that Thomism has become a serious threat within reformed circles especially Reformed Baptist circles. Now I am far from being a scholar in Thomism yet it is shocking that luminaries living today fall prey to it. When I found out that R.C. Sproul had thomistic leanings, I suddenly push his work aside and haven't engaged with it since. So why now is Thomism becoming very prevalent? Please help me understand why such a corrupt ideology is seeping into and taking hold of so many people?

Good day Talib,

I think it might help the conversation if you defined what "Thomism" and a "Thomist" is.

Kind regards,

 

[RamistThomist]

It has been stated that Thomas Aquinas is an enemy of Reformed Theology

Meaning, you don’t know for certain. You are just taking other people’s words.

 

[Knight]

Shadow Forge, Red Grace media says around the 1:13:00 mark:

"...Lane Tipton bringing together a comprehensive understanding of a authentically reformed response to things like Thomism, right, the deeper Catholic conception, a true, reformed, covenantal-biblical theology and the tradition of Vos..."

You can read the rest of the transcript to see how indebted these speakers are to Tipton and how often he is mentioned. With that in mind, listen to around minute mark 37 here. Speaking of Aquinas, Tipton says:

"This is part of his genius. And I don't think I've said this here - I say this in the class. Let me say, my admiration for Thomas knows few boundaries. I believe he is one of the top 3 to top 5 - 3 to 5 - most ingenious, systematic minds in the history of western thought. I'm talking philosophy and theology. I have the highest admiration for him. And just because of that, he is also one of the most systematically coherent thinkers."

Again, my only goal here is to put things into proper perspective. Is anything Sproul said that far off from what Tipton says here? Surely we can speak of qualifiers to these strong commendations.

 

[RamistThomist]

I am aware that Calvin and others quoted Thomas on occasion. However, I have a simple rule of thumb.. if it's Catholic it belongs in the trash.

Contrast this with Petrus van Mastricht

“For example, in the eight books of Clement of Alexandria’s Stromata, the four books of Origen’s On First Principles, the seven books of Lactantius’s Divine Institutes, the five books of Gregory of Nazianzus’s On Theology, the books of Augustine’s On Christian Doctrine and his Enchiridion, Rufinus’s Commentary on the Apostles’ Creed, Theodoret’s Epitome of Divine Dogma, Prosper of Aquitaine’s little book of Sentences, the four books of John of Damascus’s On the Orthodox Faith, the four books of Peter Lombard’s Sentences, and what commentators on those books have written, such as Albert the Great, Thomas Aquinas, Scotus, Bonaventure, and others; see especially Thomas Aquinas’s Summa Theologiae. And, finally, see the work of those theologians who escaped from the papacy: Zwingli, Luther, Melanchthon, Calvin, Bullinger, Musculus, Aretius, Vermigli, Ursinus, Zanchi, and a thousand others who were occupied to the utmost with rendering the heads of theology into systems” (68).

 

[Rom]

Sadly, Rome has better theology proper than many of today's "Reformed" Christians. Of course, just about anyone can slap the label Reformed on themselves. You see that all the time in those who discover TULIP and soon they become "Reformed" but reject most of Reformed theology. But that is another discussion.

All that said, is it not a bit alarming that though the aim of the gospel is to bring us to God (1 Peter 3:18), many evangelicals and Reformed Christians cannot even properly identify God? (see EFS and a whole host of other Trinitarian problems) Nor do they understand the metaphysical tools that were used to take the Scriptural data to give us clarity on Who God is. But to just say - put it all into the trash... seems to be a contributing factor to our lack of clarity on Who God is and the weakness of Christianity today which seems to be about just about anything and everything BUT God.

As far as Rome is concerned - let us never forget that the Roman Catholics departed from us with their innovations. We must not throw out all that is good in Church history and pretend that 1517 marked the beginning of the Church. Whatever good there is in patristic and medieval theology is OURS.

 

[Solparvus]

As far as Rome is concerned - let us never forget that the Roman Catholics departed from us with their innovations. We must not throw out all that is good in Church history and pretend that 1517 marked the beginning of the Church. Whatever good there is in patristic and medieval theology is OURS.

I might add, there is a reason they are called "Reformers"--their goal was to reform what they believed to be a true church of Christ, although it was in wretched condition. Far as they were concerned, it was their church producing these works. From my narrow look into things, the Reformers didn't seem have the same mind as those who said it was just time to ditch the established church as lost and irredeemable. But indeed, that is the pre-Trent times.

 

[PapaGottlieb]

As far as Rome is concerned - let us never forget that the Roman Catholics departed from us with their innovations.

Good point... Whether a Reformed Christian conceives of the Reformation as a departure from Rome or a return to original Christianity informs quite a bit of the thinking that follows for that Christian. It would be anachronistic to suggest the Apostles were Reformed, as far as labels go, but it is essential to me to know that I am, by the grace of God, walking in the old (that is, the oldest possible) paths.

 

[arapahoepark]

Sadly, Rome has better theology proper than many of today's "Reformed" Christians. Of course, just about anyone can slap the label Reformed on themselves. You see that all the time in those who discover TULIP and soon they become "Reformed" but reject most of Reformed theology. But that is another discussion.

All that said, is it not a bit alarming that though the aim of the gospel is to bring us to God (1 Peter 3:18), many evangelicals and Reformed Christians cannot even properly identify God? (see EFS and a whole host of other Trinitarian problems) Nor do they understand the metaphysical tools that were used to take the Scriptural data to give us clarity on Who God is. But to just say - put it all into the trash... seems to be a contributing factor to our lack of clarity on Who God is and the weakness of Christianity today which seems to be about just about anything and everything BUT God.

As far as Rome is concerned - let us never forget that the Roman Catholics departed from us with their innovations. We must not throw out all that is good in Church history and pretend that 1517 marked the beginning of the Church. Whatever good there is in patristic and medieval theology is OURS.

While I am no Thomist I definitely agree that Catholic works on the Trinity have been stellar and more indepth than the vast majority of what you'd find even in evangelical systematics.

 

[Shadow Forge]

While I am no Thomist I definitely agree that Catholic works on the Trinity have been stellar and more indepth than the vast majority of what you'd find even in evangelical systematics.

I am the opposite in this position. I feel that certain areas of discussion need not to happen. Whether that be verbally or in writing. When it comes to the Trinity, it is simple. Father, Son, and Holy Spirit and these 3 are distinct and are one. Very simple and mankind needs not to delve further as it is God's business to how the Trinity operates. Same thing with lapsarianism.. people should simply leave it alone as it is God's business. Aquinas delved into many of these areas that are God's business and the problems it caused him for doing so.

 

[Rom]

I am the opposite in this position. I feel that certain areas of discussion need not to happen. Whether that be verbally or in writing. When it comes to the Trinity, it is simple. Father, Son, and Holy Spirit and these 3 are distinct and are one. Very simple and mankind needs not to delve further as it is God's business to how the Trinity operates. Same thing with lapsarianism.. people should simply leave it alone as it is God's business. Aquinas delved into many of these areas that are God's business and the problems it caused him for doing so.

If you think that is all that God has revealed about Himself, then you have not paid much attention to the Bible. Take, for instance, John's gospel - and so, to say that little, we would be guilty of ignoring what God has revealed of Himself through all of Scripture. In addition, your statement that "these three are distinct and are one" is incomplete and will cause all kinds of theological problems if not carefully clarified. Do you not think there are reasons that the Church creeds (such as Nicea) say more than that?

 

[Shadow Forge]

If you think that is all that God has revealed about Himself, then you have not paid much attention to the Bible. Take, for instance, John's gospel - so, we would be guilty of ignoring what God has revealed of Himself through all of Scripture. In addition, your statement that "these three are distinct and are one" is incomplete and will cause all kinds of theological problems if not carefully clarified. Do you not think there are reasons that the Church creeds (such as Nicea) say more than that?

The point I was trying to make is that there are things that is ONLY known to God and that we should not delve into trying to understand them i.e. how the Trinity operates. This is where people get into trouble. With regards to the Three Forms of Unity, WCF, Apostle's/Nicene/Athansian etc.. I fully support.