THE RESURRECTION OF THOMISM
Perceptions produce problems when that which is perceived as inaccurate or faulty is the basic prepositional assumption that is being advanced as a truth. Perceived truth is every bit as true to those who perceive it as true as truth is, regardless of how false it may be. The difficulty that surfaces in any examination of the value of natural theologies assumptions can be found in the improper starting point of natural theologies conjecture of deliberative queries surrounding the existence of God. The Bible itself makes no attempt to prove the existence of God. Why should a theory that nature proves God’s existence warrant a supercedant enactment above the Scriptural presentation?
Thomism’s greatest weakness is found in the overt confidence that this philosophical hypothesis places in the natural arena of man’s rationalistic abilities to construe truth objectively without outside aide being advanced on reasons foundations. Sin, indeed, has tainted the ability of man to perceive truth in the ultimate variations and shades truth suppositions. The very act of philosophic deliberation, refinement and potential change points to the fallacious nature of expecting humans to think in a purely rational fashion or attain sophisticated and complete pure reasoning abilities. Contingent thoughts advancement, and at times, retreat, from that which consumes veracity’s substance, is a stark testament to the lack of substantive stability concerning human ruminations about truth.
With this intransigent nature identified, it becomes important to clarify Natural theology’s value, as well as point out its inherent weaknesses. Although Thomism fails in the positing of extemporaneous proofs for the existence of God independent of divine revelation, Aquinistic arguments are still of value in pointing out natural starters for dialogues purpose apologetically. Moreover, that which is a demonstrable vantage may find its greatest place within the faith dialogue for believers, as opposed to convincing unbelievers of God’s verifying credentials. Thomistic arguments can be seen as fortifications for the Christian community’s ponderous existential reality: not the unbelieving persons. An understanding of this sort would cast the cosmological proofs into a system of fortificational doubt category, under girding already assumed assumptions that need further clarification.
Thus, Thomism strengthens dependency upon God by casting the believers’ acceptable patterns of conviction into the troupe of extensionism, allowing creative thought to then adapt itself to the intricacies that allow the verification of order to proceed intellectually, embracing motion, transition, and the transigent vagaries of intellect in flux. Law then, can be understood, not as a reflection of a Lawgiver specifically. However, the problematic difficulties of lawlessness reflect the need for viable social networks to be brought into the equation that accept sociologically proper accommodations that are advanced throughout Holy Writ. Fideists may not prove what they propose is provable, yet what they propose is acceptable, when what is postulated is agreeable as a contingency for faith’s concurrence nonetheless.
