Thursday, November 09, 2006

Apologetics: Catholic and General Christian (Index Page for Dave Armstrong)


Raphael, detail of School of Athens, 1511 (Plato and Aristotle)

http://www.biblechristiansociety.com




Approval From the Church





 



--- "general Christian reading" -- no distinctively Catholic material ---
[PAPERBACK: List: $20.95 / 20% Lulu Discount: $16.76] [E-PUB: 6.99] [PDF: 2.99] [KINDLE: 6.99] [NOOK: 6.99] [iTUNES: 6.99]


 
 General



Theological and Apologetics Links From Wikipedia

Lowly Apologists and "Parachurch" Groups (vs. Kevin Johnson) 

On a Confident Catholic Faith and Apologetics [Facebook, 31 January 2014]

Thoughts on How Much Money Apologists Should Make and Our Society's Low Estimate of the Worth of Spiritual / Theological Work 

My Apologetics Apostolate and its Relation to Journalism and the Internet [Facebook, 6 March 2014]

Reply to an Academic's Insults to My Work and Supposed Profound Intellectual Shortcomings / History of Non-Academic Lay Apologetics 

Why We Catholic Apologists Do What We Do (Guest Comment by Ted Jenczewski) 



"Young Guns" in Catholic Online Apologetics: How Different Are They from the "Old Guard"? / Apologetics is Always a Difficult Spiritual Battle

Does Anyone Do Apologetics and/or Theology Anymore?

Christianity, Humor, and Satire


What Catholics Really Believe: Series on EWTN With Dr. Ray Guarendi and Fr. Kevin Fete


I Certainly Waited (To Do Apologetics After My Conversion to Catholicism)


I Never Define the Word Christian? Huh?!?! (More of "Turretinfan's" Ceaseless Nonsense)


Yet Another Reply to Bum Raps Against Apologetics

 
 
 




EXTERNAL LINKS



Methodology


Socrates





 






 
Science and Christianity: Close Partners or Mortal Enemies?




Discussion and Dialogue Disputes and Issues







Thoughts on Amiable and Constructive Dialogue (introductory instructive post describing my philosophy and goals for my blog)

War-Free and Garbage-Free Facebook Zone (Your Search is Over) [Facebook, 5 March 2014]

[Habitual, Inveterate] Revilers on Facebook May Very Well End Up in Hell. Separate from Them, Sez the Apostle Paul! [Facebook, 30 Jan. 2014; relevant biblical passages] 

Did Paul and Peter Disobey Jesus and Risk Hellfire (Calling Folks "Fools")? Did Jesus Contradict Himself? Or Do Proverbs and Hyperbolic Utterances Allow Exceptions? [Facebook, 5 Feb. 2014] 

"Free Speech": Am I Obligated to "Debate" and Seriously Engage Fringe, Kooky Positions Like Holocaust Denial? / Shunning Unrepentant Sinners and Contentious Folks: Is it Biblical? 

Ethics of Internet Discourse: A Pointed Observation [Facebook]













Sociology of Religion



 
Presuppositions and Patterns of Thought Common to Both Protestantism and Secularism (A Sociological and Philosophical Analysis of the Success and Popularity of Evangelical Protestantism, by an Anonymous Observer)

Facing Facebook: One Skeptical Baby Boomer's Odyssey (article for Catholic Exchange) 




Anti-Apologetics (Protestant and Catholic)














 
Last updated on 12 March 2014.



***




2 comments:

Chris M said...

Dave, I have a question that I'd like your take on since you're such a great resource for Christians.

I've been reading a lot of the Summa Theologica, particularly about the Fall of Man/Original Justice. If Aquinas is right and the first humans were created in a state where all passions were completely subject to reason, and there was no evil concupiscence in man, how was he "tempted" and, more importantly, how did he consent to sin? If he could not even experience any desire to sin, why would he have eaten the fruit?

I think I remember reading somewhere in a Catholic Encyclopedia the Church making a distinction between man being tempted from "within" and from "without". The first man was not tempted from "within" with inherent, evil passions, but was rather allowed to be tempted from without so he could prove his obedience. I'm just wondering if you know more or could better explain how, exactly, this temptation took place, seeing as Man originally had no evil desires and was not tricked or duped into sinning.

It seems to me the first sin would have had to be one of the will and not involving the intellect at all. It may have been the first truly undesired sin, in the sense of not being desired from within by any part of man's nature. Since man could control all of his nature, and since it was completely subject to him, the first sin seems must to have been one in which man chose (bc his will was free to do so) to desire the tree, by eating it.

But I sort of seem to be going in circles. Any light on this question would be greatly appreciated. Thanks again Dave for all you do. Btw, due partly to your site, I'm being confirmed in the Church this Easter. Praise God for men like you.

Dave Armstrong said...

Hi Chris,

Thanks for your very kind words.

I took a shot at this very question in my paper,

Is God Malevolent, Weak, or Non-Existent Because of the Existence of Evil and Suffering?

http://socrates58.blogspot.com/2005/03/christian-replies-to-argument-from-evil.html

I cited St. Augustine and Lutheran philosopher Leibniz at length.