/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.6837247]

Is he the greatest Christian theologian of all time?

[Anonymous No.6837252]

>>6837247
you bet

[Anonymous No.6837281]

>>6837247

I reckon so. I haven't read City of God but Confessions is fantastic. Also didn't he die trying to organize resistance to the Vandals?

[Anonymous No.6837290]

So that means we are calling him the least among theologians, right?

[Anonymous No.6837304]

You meant to post Calvin right?

[Anonymous No.6837319]

>>6837304
>supreme heretic
>greatest
shiggy diggy

[Anonymous No.6837355]

>>6837247

Tertullian tbqh la.

[Anonymous No.6837363]

How will he be remembered in 100 years lads?

[Anonymous No.6837384]

>>6837363
think about who was pope a hundred years ago
like that, except even less relevant

[Anonymous No.6837400]

>there are people on this board who take theology serious

[Anonymous No.6837402]

>>6837319
Nigga he solved Christianity.

[Anonymous No.6837407]

>>6837384
>1914-1922
>Benedict XV
>tried to meditate stop of WW1, unsuccessfully
>2013-??
>Franciscus
>Got USA and Cuba to open up relations again after 70 years of nothing

That is an achievement on a scale not many popes have managed in the last 100, 200 years

[Anonymous No.6837419]

>>6837402
Christianity was solved from the beginning
All that was left was looking for the method
And he fucked up big

[Anonymous No.6837425]

>>6837402
you can't start with a religion and make a philosophy around it. philosophy must start with making the least assumptions possible I assume

[Anonymous No.6837619]

>>6837247
He's up there but I would go with Aquinas, Athanasius of Alexandria, or the Cappadocian Fathers.

[Anonymous No.6837646]

>>6837247

>Not Thomas Aquinas

>Not Ramon Llull

>Not St John

>Not Scotus Eriugena or his faggot lookalike Duns Scotus

We know the "grandiosity" of St Augustine because he must have been the biggest mafia boss of his time to rise to such power.

There are hundreds to choose from. While undeniably talented, I have a very, very hard time to be so radical as to raise him through the roof as the greatest.

[Anonymous No.6837663]

>>6837425
Religions are philosophies with rituals, from the Buddhist middle way to Islam's emphasis on fighting. Hindu ideas on karma to Christianity's aversion to judging. Judaism's rejection of idolatry to Scientology's appreciation of celebrities.

[Anonymous No.6837665]

>>6837400
>>6837290
back to r/atheism you pseudos

>>6837247
No Ockham or Aquinas are better than him but he is number 3.

[Anonymous No.6837671]

>>6837619
Aquinas was logically irrational to the point of absurdity though. As in, the logic behind his arguments had blatant, objective holes all over the place. He's only liked by christians because his claims have a resemblance to logical arguments, so it looks more like a scientific proof of god than anything else looks like to them. So much irrationality though that it's a joke to anybody who's neutral and understands logic. Athanasius isn't really a theologian, but the cappadocian fathers did far better than Aquinas when it comes to rational argumentation, in that they didn't create ridiculous rube goldberg machine argumentative structures worked backwards from the idea that god must exist.

Not sure why the christposters on this board have an obsession with Aquinas, citing him in an argument is suicide. There are better alternatives, most of which involve not citing anybody and recognizing that there is no known proof of a divine benevolent conscious creator, and making hypotheses from that stance upwards instead of trying to cite someone who's reificating irrational proofs.

[Anonymous No.6837677]

>>6837671

I wouldnt be so quick to judge based on your (contextual and contingent) concception of validity. He may have had a different one.

[Anonymous No.6837680]

>>6837384
m8 with social media and all kinds of news outlets, he will be better remembered than benedict xv. my nigga frankie has even gotten some libtards to be like omg this new pope is so cool why can't christians follow their leader

[Anonymous No.6837715]

>>6837677
anything can be said to be valid if you change the overwhelmingly accepted definition of logical validity to suit your needs. changing definitions of logical concepts to make yourself correct basically removes the entire purpose of logical structure and makes your argument unfalsifiable, and absolutely pointless. Anybody can claim anything is proven on such grounds and be "valid".

[Anonymous No.6837754]

>>6837671

> This is what people who have never actually read Aquinas think.

[Anonymous No.6837781]

>>6837247

Augustine was pretty based. Scotus, Aquinas, and Ockham all were better Philosophers, but Augustine really set the whole tradition into motion. He is often more about the search than claiming to have answers, which isn't a bad thing.

[Anonymous No.6837784]

>>6837671
>As in, the logic behind his arguments had blatant, objective holes all over the place.
So you wouldn't mind pointing out a few examples?

It shouldn't be difficult since I'm sure you've actually read him.

[Anonymous No.6837837]

>>6837671
>most of which involve not citing anybody and recognizing that there is no known proof of a divine benevolent conscious creator, and making hypotheses from that stance
absence of evidence isn't evidence of absence. There is no proof that there isn't a God, why should the default "logical" stance be that there is?

[insertnamehere No.6838081]

>>6837837
wrong turn buddy, it's something comes from something. Even Krauss's idea of empty space actually had energy in it causing something to come from something. So honestly the idea of a higher power is validated by our own senses even in quantum mechanics. DOI!

[insertnamehere No.6838098]

>>6837837
mmmmmm

Don't feed the trolls. Most 'atheists' don't realize that there are no empty vacuums in space where something spontaneously appears from nothing. There was process and a thing that put it there that always was like God for instance.

[Anonymous No.6838103]

>>6837247
You're thinking of Muhammad

>Francisco making USA be less assholish to Cuba
Yeah I don't think so, but at least Franky's more welcoming of communism than the previous papas (a smart move; he knows the tide is turning red and the job of all popes is to get on board with whoever's about to win).

[insertnamehere No.6838126]

>>6837784
anon on a side note, famous high school drop outs like TJ have made fun of Thomas Aquinas because they do not understand the simple idea that something comes from something and nothing comes from nothing. Since our universe is something it had to come from something and not nothing and that something had to exist an infinite amount of time before now. They also don't understand the idea of the unmoved mover, the thing causing things to be isn't the thing being changed. tl;dr Atheist TJ high school drop out and friends do not understand the concept of cause and effect, they retarded and their shit stinks too. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U3yKxvW9yNA
see it for yourself THE AMAZING ATHEIST HATING ON WHAT HE DOESNT KNOW! lol.

[Anonymous No.6838146]

I was unimpressed by Confessions of a Sinner, felt like he copied and pasted Plato's Theory of Forms and writings on rationalism. How did I misread what is such a high work of philosophy, as described to me by the unbiased, non-reactionary minds of /lit/?

[Anonymous No.6838170]

>ugh! my greatest sin was stealing a fruit... because i did it for no reason, wahhh

[Anonymous No.6840223]

>>6837837
Absence of evidence when it should present itself is evidence of absence, read your Bayes.

[Anonymous No.6840764]

>>6840223
You mean Reverend Thomas Bayes?

[Anonymous No.6842119]

>>6837781

How is Aquinas a better philosopher than Augustinus? I mean if someone would say Eriugena or something I could respect that. But what's so original or philosophical about Aquinas? He basically just sums up Aristotle and Augustine and flips a coin between the two.