God does not revoke His Covenants but they come with blessings and curses. We are only told about His Blessings to His once chosen people

Deut. 30 

 Great mercies are promised to the penitent: God's commandment is feasible. Life and death are set before them.

 1 Now when all these things shall be come upon thee, the blessing or the curse, which I have set forth before thee, and thou shalt be touched with repentance of thy heart among all the nations, into which the Lord thy God shall have scattered thee,  2 And shalt return to him, and obey his commandments, as I command thee this day, thou and thy children, with all thy heart, and with all thy soul:  3 The Lord thy God will bring back again thy captivity, and will have mercy on thee, and gather thee again out of all the nations, into which he scattered thee before.  4 If thou be driven as far as the poles of heaven, the Lord thy God will fetch thee back from thence,  5 And will take thee to himself, and bring thee into the land which thy fathers possessed, and thou shalt possess it: and blessing thee, he will make thee more numerous than were thy fathers.

 6 The Lord thy God will circumcise thy heart, and the heart of thy seed: that then mayst love the Lord thy God with all thy heart and with all thy soul, that thou mayst live.  7 And he will turn all these curses upon thy enemies, and upon them that hate and persecute thee.  8 But thou shalt return, and hear the voice of the Lord thy God, and shalt do all the commandments which I command thee this day:  9 And the Lord thy God will make thee abound in all the works of thy hands, in the fruit of thy womb, and in the fruit of thy cattle, in the fruitfulness of thy land, and in the plenty of all things. For the Lord will return to rejoice over thee in all good things, as he rejoiced in thy fathers: 10 Yet so if thou hear the voice of the Lord thy God, and keep his precepts and ceremonies, which are written in this law: and return to the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul.

 11 This commandment, that I command thee this day is not above thee, nor far off from thee:  12 Nor is it in heaven, that thou shouldst say: Which of us can go up to heaven to bring it unto us, and we may hear and fulfill it in work?  13 Nor is it beyond the sea: that thou mayst excuse thyself, and say: Which of us can cross the sea, and bring it unto us: that we may hear, and do that which is commanded?  14 But the word is very nigh unto thee, in thy mouth and in thy heart, that thou mayst do it.  15 Consider that I have set before thee this day life and good, and on the other hand death and evil:

 16 That thou mayst love the Lord thy God, and walk in his ways, and keep his commandments and ceremonies and judgments, and thou mayst live, and he may multiply thee, and bless thee in the land, which thou shalt go in to possess.  17 But if thy heart be turned away, so that thou wilt not hear, and being deceived with error thou adore strange gods, and serve them:  18 I foretell thee this day that thou shalt perish, and shalt remain but a short time in the land, to which thou shalt pass over the Jordan, and shalt go in to possess it.  19 I call heaven and earth to witness this day, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and cursing. Choose therefore life, that both thou and thy seed may live:  20 And that thou mayst love the Lord thy God, and obey his voice, and adhere to him (for he is thy life, and the length of thy days,) that thou mayst dwell in the land, for which the Lord swore to thy fathers Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob that he would give it them.

What elections should be about

 Ever since the Judicial Branch, in  Marbury v. Madison, the Judiciary has seized unconstitutional authority for itself over the other two branches of government.

We no longer have three separate but equal branches of government which can be most clearly seen in how the Judiciary can claim that any specific act of the Legislative Branch or the Executive Branch is Unconstitutional and voids that act.

Can the Legislative Branch declare a specific act of the Judiciary or the Executive Branch UnConstitutional and void that decision? No, but it could do so if there really were Three Separate but Equal branches of government.

Can the Executive Branch declare a specific act of the Judiciary or Legislative Branch Unconstitutional and void that act? No, but it could, and should, if there really were Three Separate but Equal branches of government and if those acts by one of the other two branches of government are Unconstitutional.

What would be the consequences of all branches of government acting as though they really were Separate but Equal?

Would their be chaos and confusion?

Likely, until We the People were taught that this is Our Constitution, not the possession of people appointed and approved for an office that has no term limits.

We the people must retake possession of the Constitution and if Trump had acted with courage we might have seized control of it back then.

Let’s say that Trump had declared an act of The SCOTUS Unconstitutional, who would it be that ultimately ruled on The Constitutionality of the action by Trump, would it be the SCOTUS itself or the Legislative Branch?

No, ideally (and even, eventually, practically) it would be We the people through the next political campaign following who would decide whether or not what was done was or was not Constitutional. Those campaigning for national office would have to argue either being in favor of or opposed to that action.

Imagine political campaigns focused on The Constitution of We the people rather than campaigns being about who said what 50 years ago, nicknames, doggerel, or who had their picture taken in a tank? Imagine those campaigning for national office being expected to know Our Constitution and being able to explain it in laymen’s terms?

This really is the only peaceful way for We the People to take back control of Our Constitution -  it was written by and for We the People, not tyrants wearing black robes.

The Jesus-Hating Messias-Deniers are forever cursed to accept false messiahs

 Who Was Jesus?

The Bible gave a warning about a dangerous, false prophet who would arise to test our faith in G-d. In Deuteronomy 13, G-d describes this false prophet as a member of the Jewish people (v. 2, 7) who would tell true prophecies and would have the power of miracles. G-d Himself would give this false prophet the power to perform miracles and reveal prophecy, but the false prophet would try to seduce the people away from G-d's Law and towards strange gods unknown to Judaism. The purpose would be to test whether we are truly committed to living under the Law, or whether we will be dazzled and fall for the temptation to join a false path to salvation (v. 3-6, 7-8, 11). In this Biblical passage, G-d repeatedly commands the Jews to kill this false prophet, lest the evil spread and destroy many souls.

To be accepted by the people, the false prophet would sometimes pretend to be a righteous Jew who fulfills the Law, but at key moments he would turn against certain details of the Law in order to make the breach (v. 6, 7). This is the reason that verse 1 commands us not to add or subtract any details from the Law, and verse 5 warns us to remain steadfast with all the traditions of the Law.

In Deuteronomy 17, this false prophet is also described as someone who would rebel against the authority of the judges of the Jewish people, and who should be put to death for his rebelliousness (v. 8-13, esp. v. 12). Who are the judges? The highest court in Israel was the Sanhedrin, which was established by Moses (Exodus 18:13-26; Numbers 11:16-29), and which lasted more than 15 centuries. The members of the Sanhedrin were the rabbis known as "Pharisees" (Pirushim, "those with the explanation"). G-d gave permanent authority to these judges to interpret the Law and G-d's Word, and it is a commandment to follow their decisions without turning even slightly to the right or the left (Deut. 17:11). But the false prophet would challenge the authority of the Sanhedrin, thus revealing himself to be an evil man.

In the book of the prophet Daniel, this false prophet is described as a king (the eleventh horn on a terrible beast) who would wage war against the Jews (the "holy ones"; see Deut. 14:2 on this term) and would change the Law including the calendar and the holidays (Daniel 7:8, 20-25). Elsewhere, this false prophet is described as a king who would disregard the G-d of his fathers, exalting himself as a god and giving honor to this new god-head (Daniel 11:36-39).

The man known today as "Jesus" fulfilled all these prophecies. He became a "king" (over the Christian church) who changed the original Law, doing away with the Hebrew calendar and the Biblical holidays (Rosh Hashanah, Yom Kippur, Sukkos the Festival of Tabernacles, Passover, etc.). He disregarded the one, infinite G-d of the Hebrew Bible in favor of a new "trinity" that included himself. And he repeatedly broke the Law by committing terrible sins, while openly challenging the G-d-given authority of the rabbis of the Sanhedrin.

Naturally, Jesus did sometimes pretend to respect the Law, but whenever he thought he could get away with it, he turned right around and broke that same Law. In Matthew 5:17-19, he declared that he came to fulfill the Law, and in Matthew 23:1-3 he defended the authority of the rabbis. But the rest of the time, he rebelled against the Law—thus showing that his occasional words of piety were meant only to hide his evil agenda. The following sins of Jesus are recorded in the "New Testament”:

Jesus repudiated the laws of kosher food (Mark 7:18-19). [Compare this to the prophet Daniel's strict adherence to kashrus, in Daniel chapter 1.]

He repudiated the laws of honoring one's parents, and called on his followers to hate their parents; he also dishonored his own mother (Matthew 10:34-36; Matthew 12:46-50; Luke 14:26).

He violated the Sabbath by picking grain, and incited his disciples to do the same (Matthew 12:1-8; Mark 2:23-26).

 He again violated the Sabbath by healing a man's arm, which was not a matter of saving a life, and he openly defied the rabbis in his total repudiation of the Sabbath (Matthew 12:9-13; Mark 3:1-5). [Compare this to G-d's view of violating the Sabbath, in Numbers 15:32-36, Nehemiah 10:30-32, and dozens of other places throughout the Bible.]

Jesus brazenly defied and disobeyed the rabbis of the Sanhedrin, repudiating their authority (This is recorded in many places throughout the New Testament, but look especially at Matthew 23:13-39 and John 8:44-45).

The Talmud (Babylonian edition) records other sins of "Jesus the Nazarene”:

He and his disciples practiced sorcery and black magic, led Jews astray into idolatry, and were sponsored by foreign, gentile powers for the purpose of subverting Jewish worship (Sanhedrin 43a).

He was sexually immoral, worshipped statues of stone (a brick is mentioned), was cut off from the Jewish people for his wickedness, and refused to repent (Sanhedrin 107b; Sotah 47a).

He learned witchcraft in Egypt and, to perform miracles, used procedures that involved cutting his flesh—which is also explicitly banned in the Bible (Shabbos 104b).

The false, rebellious message of Jesus has been thoroughly rejected by the vast majority of the Jewish people, as G-d commanded. Unfortunately, however, this same message has brought a terrible darkness upon the world; today, over 1.5 billion gentiles believe in Jesus. These lost souls mistakenly think they have found salvation in Jesus; tragically, they are in for a rude awakening. Truth and eternal life are found directly from G-d, through performing His Law. Any "mediator" only separates man from G-d:

"G-d is not a man, who can lie, nor the son of man, who relents... He has not beheld iniquity in Jacob, nor has He seen perverseness in Israel" (Numbers 23:19).

Speaking prophetically of the Christian church, Moses declared, "For their 'rock' is not like our Rock... Where is their god, in whom they trusted?" (Deut. 32:31, 37).

"'See now that I, only I, am He, and there is no god with Me. I kill, and I bring to life; I wound, and I heal, and there is none who can rescue from My Hand...' Sing songs of joy, gentiles, with His people, for He will avenge the blood of His servants, and will take vengeance on His enemies, and will forgive His land and His people" (Deut. 32:39, 43).

"I, only I am Hashem (the L-rd), and besides Me there is no savior" (Isaiah 43:11).

"I am the First and I am the Last; besides me there is no god... Is there a god besides Me? There is no rock; I do not know any" (Isaiah 44:6).

"Israel is saved in Hashem with an eternal salvation... Assemble yourselves and come, come near together, you gentiles who have escaped [the judgment]. (They have no knowledge, those who carry wooden sculptures and who pray to a god that does not save.) Announce and bring near, even take counsel together: Who declared this from ancient times, and announced it from then? Is it not I, Hashem? And there are no other gods beside Me, nor any righteous and saving god other than Me. Turn to Me and be saved, all ends of the earth, for I am G-d and there is none else. By Myself I swore, a righteous word went out of my mouth and it will not be withdrawn, that to Me every knee will bow and every tongue will swear" (Isaiah 45:17, 20-23).

What is the true key to salvation? Those who return to the Law (the Seven Commandments for the Children of Noah, according to the eternal covenant made with Noah in Genesis 9) and who assist the Jewish people (Isaiah 60, 61, 66) will be saved and will participate in the miracles and revelations, including worshipping in the Third Temple, under the kingship of the Messiah. As described in many places, including Jeremiah 16:19-21 and Zechariah 8:20-23, all the old gentile religions of the world will disappear, and their followers will turn to the Jews for spiritual leadership. Until then, Christians are spiritually blinded, and cannot yet understand G-d's wisdom in the Bible.

Ours is the last generation of the era of sin and evil and the first of the Messianic Era. Indeed, for the first time in history, there is a growing consensus of leading rabbis willing to name the man most suited to be the Messiah, and they are agreeing that he is the Lubavitcher Rebbe, Rabbi Menachem Mendel Schneerson. The Rebbe is the spiritual leader of our generation, having boldly stirred up controversy over vital issues in which other leaders have remained tragically silent or have even caved in to the growing forces of darkness. He has upheld the Law perfectly and has worked mightily to strengthen the observance of the Law by Jews, as well as the observance of the Noachide Law by gentiles. Through his teaching of chasidus (Jewish mystical teachings, preserved from Moses and Mount Sinai), he has taught the world that G-d is One, the Infinite Who renews creation at every moment. The Rebbe is a direct descendant of King David and has received a true prophecy from G-d that we who are alive in this generation shall be the first in history to see the coming of the true messiah. Many Jews are eagerly anticipating the Rebbe's resurrection from the grave, ready to re-establish the Sanhedrin and anoint the king.

Our job is to finish preparing the way, by announcing the truth and bringing all of mankind back to the Law immediately. Through our divinely mandated efforts, we shall now clear the path for the return of the Garden of Eden and the establishment of the eternal sinless world promised by Isaiah and the other Biblical prophets.

Shocking information about the Supremacism and self-worship of the Rabbis in the false religion of Judaism

 

In his book, Judaism Discovered, Michael Hoffman produces a photograph of this demonic evidence printed in The Steinsaltz Talmud having to do with what Judaism itself teaches about the Bible

There are three levels of study in Judaism 

The Bible is the lowest form

The Mishnah is the second best

The Talmud is the best

Of course, that assertion is insane, but it reaches the level of demonic when the Rabbis believe and teach that God Himself is bound by the Talmud.

Moses, in a putative quote (It is pure evil crap) says to God,  Sovereign of the Universe, Thus dost hold in thy power the creatures of heaven and earth, yet Thoud dost sit and cite a Halakah in the name of a Human being (Peseta de-R. Khan, Para. ed. Mandlebaum, p.73)

Yes, the devilish rabbis in Judaism do not tell you, they keep it from you, goy, that they believe that God quotes Rabbi Eliezer and we are told to respect his wickedness and evil.

Lord have mercy

The new Raiders regime

As a fan of the Raiders since 1960, I think I speak for all of us when I say I am sick of the suckage.

The successful fortunes of the team, we are always being promised, will be restored now that so and so has been hired.

Do we really have to remember what happened when Lord Al's son, Mark, spent a King's ransom for the wildly overrated runt, Jon Gruden?

This is the mental midget who refused to accept Tom Brady who wanted to be traded to the Raiders.

By far, the best moment for me during his retarded reign is when that chubby bastid was chasing the QB around in, his belly flopping up and down, as he yelled orange and jail beak.

See "Tuby Runt ranting and running"

https://twitter.com/VermontCrank1

https://www.sbnation.com/nfl/2019/8/6/20750145/jon-gruden-hard-knocks-hbo-oakland-raiders

Can anyone imagine Don Shula doing that shit? 

What a waste of money. 

Remember when he drafted Alex Leatherwood (Leatherbrain) claiming he was the best lineman ever to come out of college?

Look, Gruden was paid ten million dollars per year. 

Why, on that ridiculous salary, couldn't he have afforded to buy an "h" for his first name?

OK, enough with that gut grinder.

How about the new regime? 

We were assured by the experts that Coach Josh McDaniel and GM Dave Ziegler would bring the Patriot Way to The Raiders.

And what is The Patriot Way?  Well, in the simplest of terms, it is Cheating and Brady (CAB) and that is the CAB ride to the HOF that regime was on.

Belly Chick had a losing record with the Browns and he had a losing record with The Patriots and he was about to be fired before Mo Lewis almost killed Drew Bleedslow

https://www.boston.com/sports/new-england-patriots/2022/09/12/bill-belichick-record-without-tom-brady/

Because Bleedslow was almost killed, Belly Chick had to play Tom Brady. Had Bleedslow not almost have been killed, the world would not have known about Tom for some time and not known about him until Belly Chick had been fired and a new Coach named Tom Brady starting QB.

In any event, the Patriot Coaches were in a luxury CAB on the way to the HOF - even behemoths like Charlie Weis (Powdered Donut Breath) who was labeled an offensive genius - like it was really hard to call plays for Brady - and one of those coaches was Gosh JOSH (Justa Old Shit Head) McDaniels who was also labeled a genius because he called plays for Tom Brady. 

McDaniels had already brought part of The Patriot Way (The cheating part) to a previous team, Denver

https://ftw.usatoday.com/2022/01/broncos-dj-williams-josh-mcdaniels-filming-cheating-video-patriots-nfl

but instead of Tom Brady, Gosh Josh had traded up to take Tim Tebow in the draft.

Nice pick, Cowa...

[Note by JasonB, 12/06/10 9:32 PM EST ] This is only a small capsule of the disaster he's  (McDaniels) been for Denver My favorite is making his little brother, whose experience was as a high school QB for 3 years, QB coach of the Broncos.

Gosh JOSH was shit-canned after he compiled this splendid record;

https://www.bleedinggreennation.com/2010/12/6/1860117/denver-broncos-fire-head-coach-josh-mcdaniels#53768247

Gosh Josh brought his buddy to Vegas with him. His name if Dave Ziegler and he used to work as a High School Guidance counselor.

Nice pick Cowa..

Josh and Ziggy are the two geniuses who will turn the Raiders Franchise around?  No, I don't think so.

Josh and Ziggy are more like Lenny and Squiggy;

The Raiders are doomed until someone convinces Lord Al's demented descendant, Mark Davis, to sell the team.

Saint Simon and Saint William.

 Butler's Lives of The Saints

March 24.--ST. SIMON, Infant Martyr.

“HAIL, flowers of the martyrs!” the Church sings in her Office of the Holy Innocents, who were the first to die for Christ; and in every age mere children and infants have gloriously confessed His name. In 1472 the Jews in the city of Trent determined to vent their hate against the Crucified by slaying a Christian child at the coming Passover; and Tobias, one of their number, was deputed to entrap a victim. He found a bright, smiling boy named Simon playing outside his home, with no one guarding him. Tobias patted the little fellow’s cheek, and coaxed him to take his hand. The boy, who was not two years old, did so; but he began to call and cry for his mother when he found himself being led from home. Then Tobias gave him a bright coin to look at, and with many kind caresses silenced his grief, and conducted him securely to his house. At midnight on Holy Thursday the work of butchery began. Having gagged his mouth, they held his arms in the form of a cross, while they pierced his tender body with awls and bodkins in blasphemous mockery of the sufferings of Jesus Christ. After an hour’s torture the little martyr lifted his eyes to heaven and gave up his innocent soul. The Jews cast his body into the river; but their crime was discovered and punished, while the holy relics were enshrined in St. Peter’s Church at Trent, where they have worked many miracles.

WILLIAM OF NORWICH is another of these children martyrs. His parents were simple country folk, but his mother was taught by a vision to expect a Saint in her son. As a boy be fasted thrice a week and prayed constantly, and he was only an apprentice twelve years of age, at a tanner’s in Norwich, when he won his crown. A little before Easter, 1137, he was enticed into a Jew’s house, and was there gagged, bound, and crucified in hatred of Christ. Five years passed before the body was found, when it was buried as a saintly relic in the cathedral churchyard. A rose-tree planted hard by flowered miraculously in midwinter, and many sick persons were healed at his shrine. [*1]

Reflection.--Learn from the infant martyrs that, however weak you may be, you still can suffer for Christ’s sake.

Footnotes

^123:1 It must not be thought that these singular and extraordinary instances establish the charge that the slaying of Christian children is part of the Jewish ritual. This accusation against the Jews has been proved to be false.

Gee,  For the life of me I can't understand why these Saints received the modern sacramental of defenestration 

Putative Trans Rights in evil clown world is the mocking of God

Deut 22 A woman shall not be clothed with man's apparel, neither shall a man use woman's apparel: for he that doeth these things is abominable before God.

Psalm 81;2  How long will you judge unjustly: and accept the persons of the wicked? 

Isaias 3:4  And I will give children to be their princes, and the effeminate shall rule over them.

1st Corinth 6:9 Know you not that the unjust shall not possess the kingdom of God? Do not err: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, Nor the effeminate, nor liers with mankind, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor railers, nor extortioners, shall possess the kingdom of God.

Have there been many religions or only one religion ever?

As Saint Augustine teaches Religion is the bond which unites man and God and because it is God who created man it is God who established that Bond with man and because God is one,  He only ever established one religion. the religion of Jesus Christ.

God is He who established religion- the bond with Him – and, because He is one God, He established only one religion and there has only ever been one religion established by God and if we don’t get that right we will forever wander around taking false religions seriously.

The Religion of Jesus Christ is as old as time itself but it has not always been as fully taught as it is now since God became man.

The Religion of Jesus Christ in the old testament taught His chosen people about the need for a savior and redeemer and the Old Testament prophets identified His coming over 300 times - who He would be and what He would do - and so the truth was revealed  slowly and sequentially owing to the arrogant and ignorance of those He liberated from Egypt and gave them water, food and shelter and even preserved for forty years the original sandals and clothes they wore when they were liberated from  their slavery to Pharaoh in Egypt.

His Chosen people had a rough idea of Our Lord and Saviour and they were taught enough so the faithful could be saved whereas some of them had a much more complete idea of the Messias.

So, when you hear of this religion or that religion know that you are hearing about a man created religion and not the bond God established with man, the Religion of Jesus Christ.

List of Old Testament prophecies fulfilled by Jesus Christ

https://tinyurl.com/57tffmrj

Does Aquinas teach that Darwin in a dog-faced pony soldier, I mean, not worthy of belief because his science opposes Divine Revelation?

YES!!! 

Article 1: Whether, besides philosophy, any further doctrine is required?

  Objection 1: It seems that, besides philosophical science, we have no need of any further knowledge. For man should not seek to know what is above reason: "Seek not the things that are too high for thee" (Ecclus. 3:22). But whatever is not above reason is fully treated of in philosophical science. Therefore any other knowledge besides philosophical science is superfluous.

  Objection 2: Further, knowledge can be concerned only with being, for nothing can be known, save what is true; and all that is, is true. But everything that is, is treated of in philosophical science---even God Himself; so that there is a part of philosophy called theology, or the divine science, as Aristotle has proved (Metaph. vi). Therefore, besides philosophical science, there is no need of any further knowledge.

  On the contrary, It is written (2 Tim. 3:16): "All Scripture, inspired of God is profitable to teach, to reprove, to correct, to instruct in justice." Now Scripture, inspired of God, is no part of philosophical science, which has been built up by human reason. Therefore it is useful that besides philosophical science, there should be other knowledge, i.e. inspired of God.

  I answer that, It was necessary for man's salvation that there should be a knowledge revealed by God besides philosophical science built up by human reason. Firstly, indeed, because man is directed to God, as to an end that surpasses the grasp of his reason: "The eye hath not seen, O God, besides Thee, what things Thou hast prepared for them that wait for Thee" (Is. 66:4). But the end must first be known by men who are to direct their thoughts and actions to the end. Hence it was necessary for the salvation of man that certain truths which exceed human reason should be made known to him by divine revelation. Even as regards those truths about God which human reason could have discovered, it was necessary that man should be taught by a divine revelation; because the truth about God such as reason could discover, would only be known by a few, and that after a long time, and with the admixture of many errors. Whereas man's whole salvation, which is in God, depends upon the knowledge of this truth. Therefore, in order that the salvation of men might be brought about more fitly and more surely, it was necessary that they should be taught divine truths by divine revelation. It was therefore necessary that besides philosophical science built up by reason, there should be a sacred science learned through revelation.

  Reply to Objection 1: Although those things which are beyond man's knowledge may not be sought for by man through his reason, nevertheless, once they are revealed by God, they must be accepted by faith. Hence the sacred text continues, "For many things are shown to thee above the understanding of man" (Ecclus. 3:25). And in this, the sacred science consists.

  Reply to Objection 2: Sciences are differentiated according to the various means through which knowledge is obtained. For the astronomer and the physicist both may prove the same conclusion: that the earth, for instance, is round: the astronomer by means of mathematics (i.e. abstracting from matter), but the physicist by means of matter itself. Hence there is no reason why those things which may be learned from philosophical science, so far as they can be known by natural reason, may not also be taught us by another science so far as they fall within revelation. Hence theology included in sacred doctrine differs in kind from that theology which is part of philosophy.

---

 

Article 2: Whether sacred doctrine is a science?

  Objection 1: It seems that sacred doctrine is not a science. For every science proceeds from self-evident principles. But sacred doctrine proceeds from articles of faith which are not self-evident, since their truth is not admitted by all: "For all men have not faith" (2 Thess. 3:2). Therefore sacred doctrine is not a science.

  Objection 2: Further, no science deals with individual facts. But this sacred science treats of individual facts, such as the deeds of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob and such like. Therefore sacred doctrine is not a science.

  On the contrary, Augustine says (De Trin. xiv, 1) "to this science alone belongs that whereby saving faith is begotten, nourished, protected and strengthened." But this can be said of no science except sacred doctrine. Therefore sacred doctrine is a science.

  I answer that, Sacred doctrine is a science. We must bear in mind that there are two kinds of sciences. There are some which proceed from a principle known by the natural light of intelligence, such as arithmetic and geometry and the like. There are some which proceed from principles known by the light of a higher science: thus the science of perspective proceeds from principles established by geometry, and music from principles established by arithmetic. So it is that sacred doctrine is a science because it proceeds from principles established by the light of a higher science, namely, the science of God and the blessed. Hence, just as the musician accepts on authority the principles taught him by the mathematician, so sacred science is established on principles revealed by God.

  Reply to Objection 1: The principles of any science are either in themselves self-evident, or reducible to the conclusions of a higher science; and such, as we have said, are the principles of sacred doctrine.

  Reply to Objection 2: Individual facts are treated of in sacred doctrine, not because it is concerned with them principally, but they are introduced rather both as examples to be followed in our lives (as in moral sciences) and in order to establish the authority of those men through whom the divine revelation, on which this sacred scripture or doctrine is based, has come down to us.

---

 

Article 3: Whether sacred doctrine is one science?

  Objection 1: It seems that sacred doctrine is not one science; for according to the Philosopher (Poster. i) "that science is one which treats only of one class of subjects." But the creator and the creature, both of whom are treated of in sacred doctrine, cannot be grouped together under one class of subjects. Therefore sacred doctrine is not one science.

  Objection 2: Further, in sacred doctrine we treat of angels, corporeal creatures and human morality. But these belong to separate philosophical sciences. Therefore sacred doctrine cannot be one science.

  On the contrary, Holy Scripture speaks of it as one science: "Wisdom gave him the knowledge [scientiam] of holy things" (Wis. 10:10).

  I answer that, Sacred doctrine is one science. The unity of a faculty or habit is to be gauged by its object, not indeed, in its material aspect, but as regards the precise formality under which it is an object. For example, man, ass, stone agree in the one precise formality of being colored; and color is the formal object of sight. Therefore, because Sacred Scripture considers things precisely under the formality of being divinely revealed, whatever has been divinely revealed possesses the one precise formality of the object of this science; and therefore is included under sacred doctrine as under one science.

  Reply to Objection 1: Sacred doctrine does not treat of God and creatures equally, but of God primarily, and of creatures only so far as they are referable to God as their beginning or end. Hence the unity of this science is not impaired.

  Reply to Objection 2: Nothing prevents inferior faculties or habits from being differentiated by something which falls under a higher faculty or habit as well; because the higher faculty or habit regards the object in its more universal formality, as the object of the "common sense" is whatever affects the senses, including, therefore, whatever is visible or audible. Hence the "common sense," although one faculty, extends to all the objects of the five senses. Similarly, objects which are the subject-matter of different philosophical sciences can yet be treated of by this one single sacred science under one aspect precisely so far as they can be included in revelation. So that in this way, sacred doctrine bears, as it were, the stamp of the divine science which is one and simple, yet extends to everything.

---

 

Article 4: Whether sacred doctrine is a practical science?

  Objection 1: It seems that sacred doctrine is a practical science; for a practical science is that which ends in action according to the Philosopher (Metaph. ii). But sacred doctrine is ordained to action: "Be ye doers of the word, and not hearers only" (James 1:22). Therefore sacred doctrine is a practical science.

  Objection 2: Further, sacred doctrine is divided into the Old and the New Law. But law implies a moral science which is a practical science. Therefore sacred doctrine is a practical science.

  On the contrary, Every practical science is concerned with human operations; as moral science is concerned with human acts, and architecture with buildings. But sacred doctrine is chiefly concerned with God, whose handiwork is especially man. Therefore it is not a practical but a speculative science.

  I answer that, Sacred doctrine, being one, extends to things which belong to different philosophical sciences because it considers in each the same formal aspect, namely, so far as they can be known through divine revelation. Hence, although among the philosophical sciences one is speculative and another practical, nevertheless sacred doctrine includes both; as God, by one and the same science, knows both Himself and His works. Still, it is speculative rather than practical because it is more concerned with divine things than with human acts; though it does treat even of these latter, inasmuch as man is ordained by them to the perfect knowledge of God in which consists eternal bliss. This is a sufficient answer to the Objections.

---

 

Article 5: Whether sacred doctrine is nobler than other sciences?

  Objection 1: It seems that sacred doctrine is not nobler than other sciences; for the nobility of a science depends on the certitude it establishes. But other sciences, the principles of which cannot be doubted, seem to be more certain than sacred doctrine; for its principles---namely, articles of faith---can be doubted. Therefore other sciences seem to be nobler.

  Objection 2: Further, it is the sign of a lower science to depend upon a higher; as music depends on arithmetic. But sacred doctrine does in a sense depend upon philosophical sciences; for Jerome observes, in his Epistle to Magnus, that "the ancient doctors so enriched their books with the ideas and phrases of the philosophers, that thou knowest not what more to admire in them, their profane erudition or their scriptural learning." Therefore sacred doctrine is inferior to other sciences.

  On the contrary, Other sciences are called the handmaidens of this one: "Wisdom sent her maids to invite to the tower" (Prov. 9:3).

  I answer that, Since this science is partly speculative and partly practical, it transcends all others speculative and practical. Now one speculative science is said to be nobler than another, either by reason of its greater certitude, or by reason of the higher worth of its subject-matter. In both these respects this science surpasses other speculative sciences; in point of greater certitude, because other sciences derive their certitude from the natural light of human reason, which can err; whereas this derives its certitude from the light of divine knowledge, which cannot be misled: in point of the higher worth of its subject-matter because this science treats chiefly of those things which by their sublimity transcend human reason; while other sciences consider only those things which are within reason's grasp. Of the practical sciences, that one is nobler which is ordained to a further purpose, as political science is nobler than military science; for the good of the army is directed to the good of the State. But the purpose of this science, in so far as it is practical, is eternal bliss; to which as to an ultimate end the purposes of every practical science are directed. Hence it is clear that from every standpoint, it is nobler than other sciences.

  Reply to Objection 1: It may well happen that what is in itself the more certain may seem to us the less certain on account of the weakness of our intelligence, "which is dazzled by the clearest objects of nature; as the owl is dazzled by the light of the sun" (Metaph. ii, lect. i). Hence the fact that some happen to doubt about articles of faith is not due to the uncertain nature of the truths, but to the weakness of human intelligence; yet the slenderest knowledge that may be obtained of the highest things is more desirable than the most certain knowledge obtained of lesser things, as is said in de Animalibus xi.

  Reply to Objection 2: This science can in a sense depend upon the philosophical sciences, not as though it stood in need of them, but only in order to make its teaching clearer. For it accepts its principles not from other sciences, but immediately from God, by revelation. Therefore it does not depend upon other sciences as upon the higher, but makes use of them as of the lesser, and as handmaidens: even so the master sciences make use of the sciences that supply their materials, as political of military science. That it thus uses them is not due to its own defect or insufficiency, but to the defect of our intelligence, which is more easily led by what is known through natural reason (from which proceed the other sciences) to that which is above reason, such as are the teachings of this science.

---

 

Article 6: Whether this doctrine is the same as wisdom?

  Objection 1: It seems that this doctrine is not the same as wisdom. For no doctrine which borrows its principles is worthy of the name of wisdom; seeing that the wise man directs, and is not directed (Metaph. i). But this doctrine borrows its principles. Therefore this science is not wisdom.

  Objection 2: Further, it is a part of wisdom to prove the principles of other sciences. Hence it is called the chief of sciences, as is clear in Ethic. vi. But this doctrine does not prove the principles of other sciences. Therefore it is not the same as wisdom.

  Objection 3: Further, this doctrine is acquired by study, whereas wisdom is acquired by God's inspiration; so that it is numbered among the gifts of the Holy Spirit (Is. 11:2). Therefore this doctrine is not the same as wisdom.

  On the contrary, It is written (Dt. 4:6): "This is your wisdom and understanding in the sight of nations."

  I answer that, This doctrine is wisdom above all human wisdom; not merely in any one order, but absolutely. For since it is the part of a wise man to arrange and to judge, and since lesser matters should be judged in the light of some higher principle, he is said to be wise in any one order who considers the highest principle in that order: thus in the order of building, he who plans the form of the house is called wise and architect, in opposition to the inferior laborers who trim the wood and make ready the stones: "As a wise architect, I have laid the foundation" (1 Cor. 3:10). Again, in the order of all human life, the prudent man is called wise, inasmuch as he directs his acts to a fitting end: "Wisdom is prudence to a man" (Prov. 10: 23). Therefore he who considers absolutely the highest cause of the whole universe, namely God, is most of all called wise. Hence wisdom is said to be the knowledge of divine things, as Augustine says (De Trin. xii, 14). But sacred doctrine essentially treats of God viewed as the highest cause---not only so far as He can be known through creatures just as philosophers knew Him---"That which is known of God is manifest in them" (Rm. 1:19)---but also as far as He is known to Himself alone and revealed to others. Hence sacred doctrine is especially called wisdom.

  Reply to Objection 1: Sacred doctrine derives its principles not from any human knowledge, but from the divine knowledge, through which, as through the highest wisdom, all our knowledge is set in order.

  Reply to Objection 2: The principles of other sciences either are evident and cannot be proved, or are proved by natural reason through some other science. But the knowledge proper to this science comes through revelation and not through natural reason. Therefore it has no concern to prove the principles of other sciences, but only to judge of them. Whatsoever is found in other sciences contrary to any truth of this science must be condemned as false: "Destroying counsels and every height that exalteth itself against the knowledge of God" (2 Cor. 10:4,5).

  Reply to Objection 3: Since judgment appertains to wisdom, the twofold manner of judging produces a twofold wisdom. A man may judge in one way by inclination, as whoever has the habit of a virtue judges rightly of what concerns that virtue by his very inclination towards it. Hence it is the virtuous man, as we read, who is the measure and rule of human acts. In another way, by knowledge, just as a man learned in moral science might be able to judge rightly about virtuous acts, though he had not the virtue. The first manner of judging divine things belongs to that wisdom which is set down among the gifts of the Holy Ghost: "The spiritual man judgeth all things" (1 Cor. 2:15). And Dionysius says (Div. Nom. ii): "Hierotheus is taught not by mere learning, but by experience of divine things." The second manner of judging belongs to this doctrine which is acquired by study, though its principles are obtained by revelation.

---