Once again gentlemen, I'd like to remind you that Theology is the Queen of Sciences, and also called Divine Science.

The three most important steps of polemical theology (besides personal piety) are (1) defining the relevant terms, (2) identifying the state of the question, and (3) evaluating arguments syllogistically. These three steps correspond to the three operations of the intellect.

The Impassibly Passionate God: An Apology for an Emotional God; an Apologetic for Suffering and Evil

The Problem of Suffering and Evil causes believer and unbeliever alike to question whether God (if there even is a God) is all-loving. This theodicy prompts a twofold question pertaining to God’s ontology: can we properly predicate 1) emotions and 2) suffering to the ontology of God? This thesis offers not only an apology of an Impassibly Emotional God but, in turn, provides an apologetic that speaks powerfully to The Problem of Suffering and Evil.

The love of bodily pleasures leads man to have a distaste for spiritual things, and not to hope for them as arduous goods. In this way, lust causes despair (Aquinas, ST 2-2.20.4).

Saying “You think some people are in hell; therefore, you want people to go to hell!” is as idiotic as saying “You think some people die of cancer; therefore, you want people to die of cancer!”

–Edward Feser

The reason you didn't get "Happy Easter" from me is because I follow the Julian Calendar. Perhaps next time when the tomb has a dead Body in it. But now it doesn't, unfortunately.

–Admin

Nietzsche is way better than Aristotle.

Edit:
#April1st

Faith as a virtue illuminates the intelligence, but faith as a fruit of the Holy Ghost understands, so far as God permits, the intrinsic reason of what it believes. St. Anselm explains his whole method in these words: ‘As the right order demands that we should first believe the deep things of the Christian faith before we venture to discuss them by reasoning, so it appears to me to be negligence, if, after we are confirmed in faith, we should not endeavour to understand what we believe.’ Here we have his method in direct contradiction to the rationalism of these later days, which makes reason the test, the measure, and the criterion of faith, destroying thereby the essence of faith, as well as the matter proposed to its belief. As St. Augustine says, ‘If you ask of me, or of any other Doctor, not unreasonably, that you may understand what you believe, correct your definition, not so as to reject faith, but so as to perceive by the light of reason the things which by the firmness of faith you already hold. . . . Therefore it was reasonably said by the Prophet, "Unless you believe, you will not understand,”’ so St. Anselm begin where he prefers.

–The Complete Works of St. Anselm