12. Scripture's Senses and God's Existence

Subscribe in Podcast App | Download Transcript

Lecture Notes

Scripture’s Senses Continued #

The Literal Sense and Metaphor #

• The literal sense (sensus literalis) is what the author intends, not merely the grammatical meaning
• Metaphorical language belongs to the literal sense, not to a separate spiritual sense
• Example: “The Lord is my rock” - the literal sense is that God is my support and foundation, not that God is literally a stone
• The literal sense can never be false in Scripture because it represents the author’s (ultimately God’s) actual intention
• When metaphors become commonly used, people may forget they are metaphors, but this does not change the word’s actual meaning
• Example: Calling someone “a pig” to mean glutton - the speaker’s meaning (glutton) is literal sense, not the word’s dictionary meaning (the animal)

Why This Matters for Sacred Doctrine #

• Scripture can have multiple literal senses because God as author can intend multiple meanings simultaneously
• The multiplicity of meanings in our knowledge of Scripture reflects the multiplicity of creatures from which we know God, not multiplicity in God himself
• God as author makes not only words signify realities, but also the things themselves can signify further spiritual realities

The Structure of the Prima Pars #

Overall Plan #

Thomas divides his treatment of God into three parts:

1. Divine Essence (Q2-13): What God is (or is not)
2. Divine Persons (Q27-43): The distinction of persons (Trinity)
3. Procession of Creatures (Q44+): God as maker/creator

Heraclitean Structure: “The Way Up and the Way Down” #

• Drawing from Heraclitus: the way up and the way down is the same
• God at center of circle, radii extending outward to creatures
• Procession from God: what is one in God becomes many in creatures
• In creatures: existence ≠ essence; essence ≠ operation (three distinct things)
• In God: all three are identical
• We must know God “upward” from creatures, so our knowledge necessarily has threefold structure even though God is simple
• The multiplicity is in our knowledge, not in God himself

Connection to Summa Contra Gentiles Structure #

• Unlike the Summa Contra Gentiles which clearly divides into: (1) God in himself, (2) God as beginning/maker, (3) God as end, (4) articles of faith
• The Summa Theologiae conflates these somewhat due to extensive treatment of moral theology
• Both the Second Part (return of rational creature to God) and Third Part (Christ as way to God, sacraments) deal with God as end
• This makes the First Part appear to contain both God in himself AND God as maker, blurring the neat structure
• However, Thomas still maintains the threefold division within the First Part: essence, persons, and causative operations

Question 2: The Existence of God #

Article 1: Is God’s Existence Self-Evident? #

The Distinction: In Itself vs. To Us #

• Something can be per se notum (self-evident) in two ways:
  • In itself alone (secundum se tantum): the predicate is included in the notion of the subject
  • Both in itself and to us (secundum se et quoad nos): self-evident to all who know the terms

God’s Existence is Self-Evident In Itself #

• In God, existence is included in essence (to be proved later)
• Therefore, “God is” is self-evident in itself, like “A whole is greater than its part”
• When one understands the name “God” as “that than which nothing greater can be thought,” it would follow that such a being exists
• What exists in reality and in understanding is greater than what exists only in understanding
• Therefore, once you understand the name, it follows that God exists in reality

God’s Existence is NOT Self-Evident To Us #

• We do not know God’s essence in this life
• Therefore, we cannot see that the predicate (existence) belongs to the subject (God’s essence)
• The fool can say “there is no God” (Psalm 52) because the statement is not self-evident to human knowledge
• Natural knowledge of God is confusedly implanted in us (per St. John Damascene)
• People naturally seek happiness but confusedly seek it in wealth, pleasure, or power rather than in God

Truth is Self-Evident #

• Truth itself is per se notum because one cannot deny truth without affirming it
• “If truth is not, it is true that truth is not” - contradiction
• God is truth itself (“I am the way, the truth, and the life”)
• Therefore, God’s existence follows from the self-evidence of truth

The Problem of Anselm’s Ontological Argument #

• Anselm: God is that than which nothing greater can be thought; what exists in reality is greater than what exists only in mind; therefore God must exist
• This argument is rejected because:
  • Not everyone understands “God” to mean “that than which nothing greater can be thought”
  • Even if they do, understanding the meaning of a word does not prove that what it signifies exists in reality
  • This assumes the very thing to be proved

Vatican I and Natural Knowledge #

• The Council teaches that God’s existence can be known by natural reason and proven
• Truth lies between two extremes:
  • One extreme: treating God’s existence as too obvious (Anselm)
  • Other extreme: God’s existence is unknowable and cannot be proven
• Middle ground: God’s existence is self-evident in itself but not to us; it is demonstrable through effects

The Role of Self-Evidence in Demonstration #

Common Principles #

• The first principles of demonstration (axioms) are self-evident to all who know the terms
• Examples: “being and non-being,” “whole and part”
• No one can live without experiencing whole and part (you cannot take a bite of steak or a sip without knowing the difference)
• If someone claims not to know these, reveal it to them practically and they will demonstrate that they do know

Key Terminology #

Definitions #

• Per se notum (self-evident): Known through itself; predicate contained in subject
• Sapientia (wisdom): From sapida scientia - “savory knowledge” (knowledge that is appreciated and relished)
• Insipiens (foolish): Literally “unsavory” or without taste; lacking discernment
• Sensus literalis (literal sense): What the author intends to communicate, including metaphorical meaning
• Principium: Beginning; source; here referring to God as creator/maker
• Substantia (substance): That which underlies; essence; what a thing is

The Word “Really” #

• English “reality” comes from Latin “res” (thing, being)
• Greek equivalent: “ἀληθές” (on) - “being”
• The lecture emphasizes that what exists in reality is what truly is

Examples and Illustrations #

Metaphor in Scripture #

• “The arm of God” does not signify a bodily part but God’s power of operating/acting
• “God is a rock” means God is my support, not that God has rocky properties
• These belong to the literal sense because they express the author’s actual meaning

The Fool’s Denial #

• Psalm 52: “The fool said in his heart, there is no God”
• This shows that denying God’s existence is psychologically possible for us
• It is not self-evident to human knowledge, even though it is self-evident in itself

Natural Knowledge of God #

• Children naturally desire happiness but may mistake it for candy or soda
• Adults may seek it in wealth, power, or pleasure
• This shows natural implanted knowledge is confused
• Clearer knowledge comes through philosophical demonstration

Shakespeare’s Use of Language #

• Romeo and Juliet: “Come, bitter conduct, come, unsavory guide” (the poison)
• Shakespeare uses “unsavory” (insipiens) to mean lacking in proper character/judgment
• Shows how Latin philosophical vocabulary pervades English literature

Connection to Next Questions #

Question 3 Preview #

• After establishing that God exists (Q2), the next question will ask “In what way is he? Or rather, in what way is he NOT?”
• This moves to consideration of God’s substance/essence
• Cannot understand Trinity before understanding God’s simplicity and identity of essence and existence

Pedagogical Method #

• Berquist emphasizes the importance of understanding terms before making judgments
• If someone claims not to understand “whole” and “part,” ask them to experience it practically
• Natural knowledge, though confused, is universally present and can be clarified through reason
• The progression from confused natural knowledge → philosophical demonstration → faith → beatific vision shows the graduated nature of human knowledge of God