جستجوی مقالات مرتبط با کلیدواژه "aquinas" در نشریات گروه "ادیان و عرفان"

Salvation is a fundamental issue in Christianity. Due to original sin, man has lost his relationship with God and has descended from Heaven. Restoring this relationship leads to saving man from a state of descent. The way of salvation in Christianity is explained in different ways. In Paul's writings, free grace by Christ saves man. In the theology of the fathers, including Augustine, grace replaces the human will, which by his descent has lost the power of right bias, and calls him to salvation. Martin Luther, as the Augustinian theologian, sees man as essentially a corrupt and sinful being who is saved only by grace and faith, not by doing good deeds. Therefore, he can enjoy the righteousness of Christ in faith only by trusting in divine promises. Aquinas, on the other hand, sees man as a rational and good-natured being who progresses towards faith with an innate tendency to virtue. Faith is a rational trust in which man has an active presence by believing in propositions and participating in grace. This article examines Luther and Aquinas' views on salvation and the role of man in it through a descriptive-analytical method and concludes that different understandings of human ontological status are directly related to their approach to the issue of salvation and faith. Luther considers man to be in a passive state whose salvation is communion with Christ. Aquinas, in contrast, gives man an active role that his good deeds along with grace can be effective in the process of salvation.

EbneRoshd bin famous growth to the growth of one of the most famous works of Aristotle commentators in Andalusia of the Middle Ages. Unlike some Muslim scholars that ÎÑÏæÑÒی wrong in religious texts, for reasons of verses and attention narratives that not only reason in religion is wrong, but it is necessary. On the other hand, Thomas aquinas in the field of Christianity by providing various bases, reason in their religious texts and religious scholar who knows the argument in it and thought.
This paper descriptive approach - rigorous analytical perspective in each of the Ibn aquinas about reason and growth in religious texts, and after that, this aquinas due to his mentor to Albert Great of Ibn Muslim growth.

The issue of religious language can be investigated from various aspects, including the semantic. The fundamental issue on the semantics of the language of religion is this: “Can-and how can-the language and concepts used about creatures, be significantly and positively and truly used about God? How can attributes abstracted from finite creatures refer to God Who must be simple and infinite?” Aquinas uses the analogy of internal attribution, and such attributes -abstracted from finite creatures- apply to God. Of course, he uses other types of analogy, including metaphorical attribution, to explain some religious texts about God. But Avicenna also uses the general ambiguous idea which is not different from the analogy of internal attribution. Also, he explains the language of religion with using a metaphor that it is not other than metaphorical attribution. It seems that in explaining his own claims, Avicenna has more accuracy and precedence.

The question of the relationship between faith and rationality and marking the boundaries between them has long been the subject of inquiry in Christianity; an important subject which is concerned with individual's religious beliefs and which has been a matter of serious dispute among great Christian scholars. Since Thomas Aquinas is among the greatest theologians of Catholic Church and Martin Luther is one of the most effective figures of the Protestant Church, and because they have exerted great influence on the thoughts of the followers of these two schools, it is necessary to make a comparison between the thoughts of each of them on this issue. Using an analytical approach and citing documentary proofs, this paper seeks to make a comparative study of the question of faith and rationality according to the views of each of these two distinguished Christian figures. Undoubtedly, understanding their approaches can contribute enormously to forming a very accurate picture of these eminent and important Christian Churches. The findings of this paper suggest that Aquinas is a non-extremist rationalist and Luther is a non-extremist fideist. Although in general they accept the two elements of faith and rationality, they have serious differences over the intellectual principles.

Though, the relationship between faith and good deed seems definite, but this relationship is a kind of easy yet impossible one. The necessity of righteousness of action to achieve goodly life raises the question whether righteousness is something inherent in action or based on some other thing. If it is inherent is it valuable? In case of the absence of the other thing, is a mere action rendered valuable if righteousness is based on some other thing? If the mere action is regarded valuable, what makes it valuable? These questions are raised here with the aim of demonstrating the difference between the value of action and its righteousness on the one hand. A positive or negative answer to each of these questions provides us with different explanations about the relationship between faith and good deed. On the other hand, this paper compares the view of Islam and that of Christianity and addresses the alternative view in the light of through Allamah Tabatabaii's view and then compares it with the views of Aquinas and John Hick, two catholic and Protestant thinkers.

Anthropology is one of the most important issues in educational-hilosophical schools. The aim of this research is to find similarities and differences of body and soul from the viewpoints of Imam Mohammad Ghazzali and Thomas Aquinas. Analytical-comparative and library research methods have been used. These two scholars have similarities and differences on body and soul that their similarities are more than their differences. From the both of two scholar's viewpoints human nature is not merely material and is combined from body and soul. Body and soul are indispensable. The soul is immortal, immaterial and rational. Soul is finally returned to body in the Day of Judgment. Body is material and soul is immaterial. Soul has originality. Wisdom, anger, and lust are the most important faculties of the soul. There is a direct relation between body and soul. But Ghazzali contrary to Thomas believes to gradual creation. The division of the soul is different from the viewpoints of these two scholars. Contrary to the viewpoint of Thomas, from the viewpoint of Ghazzali soul is angelic and animal. Ghazzali believes that one's cognition of the soul is necessary for transcendence. However, the common viewpoints of these two scholars can be an introduction for designing a shared model of Islamic and Christian philosophical-educational schools.

In his detailed discussion of prophecy, Aquinas talks about the way the prophetic knowledge is acquired, and takes the most appropriate supernatural cognition of the prophet to be an imaginational one. In this paper I will talk about the characteristics of this special cognition. I will first talk about the faculty of imagination in Aquinas, then discuss about his position against Ibn Sina which takes the prophetic knowledge to be a perfection of the faculty of imagination. Aquinas takes the prophet as a normal human individual and takes his prophecy to be a divine intervention without there being any capacity inside the prophet which distinguishes him from other human beings. In order to reject the interference of the prophetic imaginations with the images of the perception, Aquinas upholds the isolation of the prophet's perceptions at the time of receiving the prophecy. This is against the account given by some Muslim philosophers such as Fārābī.

Crusades are among the longest wars throughout the history which has given historians opportunities to use them as pretext to write about them for two centuries. The reason for these wars, what justification their initiators and wagers had to legitimate these violent wars and what were the nature and principles of Muslim's Jihad against these Christian aggressors in thoughts and views of contemporary jurists are topics which require discussion and reflection.The main hypothesis of the present paper is that Crusades have been the perfect example of holy wars which the new doctrines proposed by Christian clerics on "just war" have not been able to change their nature, because the historical reports about these wars do not allow for their conformity with just war doctrine. Muslim's Jihads against crusaders – whether as preemptive Jihad or as defensive and preventive Jihads–were defensive in nature which contemporary Sunni and Shi’ī jurist consider them as legitimate.