Therefore.. the philosopher considers what attaches to them in their proper nature: the faithful Christian considers about creatures only what attaches to them in their relation to God, as that they are created by God, subject to God, and the like. Hence it is not to be put down as an imperfection in the doctrine of faith, if it passes unnoticed many properties of things, as the configuration of the heavens, or the laws of motion. And again such points as are considered by philosopher and faithful Christian alike, are treated on different principles: for the philosopher takes his stand on the proper and immediate causes of things; but the faithful Christian argues from the First Cause,... Further, the two systems do not observe the same order of procedure. In the system of philosophy, which considers creatures in themselves and from them leads on to the knowledge of God, the first study is of creatures and the last of God; but in the system of faith, which studies creatures only in their relation to God, the study is first of God and afterwards of creatures.."
That the Philosopher and the Theologian view Creatures from Different Standpoints, St. Thomas
In a choice between First Things, Touchstone and St.Thomas, I'll take St. Thomas every time. Thanks for the discussion.
I know you think you've successfully argued that Catholic doctrine defends atheistic scientists above Scripture, but it's pretty laughable.
If you want to believe that the atheists, whose goal was to deny God's part in creation, are telling you the truth, feel free.
But don't defend it with St. Thomas. Your scientists have a philosophical agenda, and you've fallen for it. That's fine. Many have.........obviously.
Thanks for the discussion. But as I said........don't waste my time with your circuitous baiting, OK? I can deal with honest discussion right up front.
Have a nice life. I'll see you in Heaven, where we'll both find out who's right about this.