The God of the Bible and the God of the Philosophers

by Eleonore Stump

The author revisits the classical discussion comparing the biblical God with the philosophers God, particularly using the works of Thomas Aquinas and focusing on the three divine attributes of immutability, eternity, and simplicity. Attention is paid to the idea of the Holy Spirit as related to the simplicity of God and how humans, made in Gods image, are similar to God.

Genres: Philosophy, Theology, Christianity, Religion, Nonfiction

116 pages, Hardcover

Published February 22, 2016

About the author

Eleonore Stump is the Robert J. Henle Professor of Philosophy at Saint Louis University, where she has taught since 1992. She has published extensively in philosophy of religion, contemporary metaphysics, and medieval philosophy. Her books include her major study Aquinas (Routledge, 2003) and her extensive treatment of the problem of evil, Wandering in Darkness: Narrative and the Problem of Suffering (Oxford, 2010). She has given the Gifford Lectures (Aberdeen, 2003), the Wilde lectures (Oxford, 2006), and the Stewart lectures (Princeton, 2009). She is past president of the Society of Christian Philosophers, the American Catholic Philosophical Association, and the American Philosophical Association, Central Division.

Reviews

[Samuel Kassing · Rating 5 out of 5]

These lectures were intellectually stimulating and stretching.

Stump provides a compelling case for Classical Theism. In my opinion, she aptly shows that God is personal and present with humanity whiles still being the transcendent and holy God the scriptures.

She shows this by demonstrating how all of the classical attributes of God are consistent with the story of Jonah.

This book also gave me a greater appreciation and itch to read Aquinas himself.

[Matt Pitts · Rating 5 out of 5]

Concise and clear though definitely deep water.

I’m grateful she tackled head-on the objection that the God of classical theism cannot be the God of the Bible and showed why this claim is not only false but fundamentally misunderstands the work of Aquinas.

A superb work of philosophical theology.

[Foreign Grid · Rating 4 out of 5]

Felt she overstated the fact that aquinas did believe in a God like we find in the bible as well as one derived from the metaphysics of the greek philosophers.

Also I would have liked if she focused the book more on the direct response to the assertions of her opponents instead of tangenting a bit in the middle. I also felt she could have made the response section meatier and more cohesive.

Otherwise easy to understand and succinctly written.

[Aid · Rating 3 out of 5]

A short book explaining how the God proven by Aquinas' five ways is the same God we read about in Sacred Scripture.

[Vagabond of Letters, DLitt · Rating 3 out of 5]

5/10

Rarely has a single-author book gotten so much wrong and so much right.

[Isaiah · Rating 5 out of 5]

I’ve got biggish hands, the kind more suited to that of brutes, have I the fat to back it up. This book is about the same size as one of my hands, and in it is a good wealth of knowledge. Dr. Eleanore Stump elucidates the way by which the God of Classical Theism, arrived at through natural theology, is the very same personal, intimate God of the Christian Bible, arrived at through divine theology. She does this by first outlining three common tension points between the two, namely immutability (unchangability), eternality (atemporality), and simplicity (non-compositeness), and then how Thomas Aquinas’s Biblical theology and philosophical theology intersect on these points. Of course, they do not contradict, but rather find a deep, explanatorily powerful harmony. It is utterly fascinating how these three attributes show that in fact, the God of the Bible, is the God of the Philosophers. The same incomprehensible, sublime fountainhead of all Being (esse) is an entity (id quo est) who (is both, yet utterly beyond both…and) acts intimately with His creation, who acts out of love.

Another gift from my darling wife

[Joseph Yue · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is a succinct essay summarising a resolution of the apparent discrepancies between the personal God portrayed in the Bible and the impassible God upheld by classical theism. With outstanding intellectual prowess and argumentative vigour, Stump lays out the best case against the identity between these two conceptions of God, and then artfully dissolves them. The resulting depiction of God is elegant, coherent, and faithful to the Scriptures. For a more elaborate discussion on some of the metaphysical details involved, one can also go to her compendium Aquinas, a monumental work in contemporary Thomistic theology.

[Ryan Garrett · Rating 5 out of 5]

4.5 stars. Eleonore Stump, a world-renowned expert on Thomas Aquinas and philosopher, makes a tight and well argued cased for the philosophical vision of God in Aquinas’s writings being consistent with the biblical picture of God. Her explanation of Aquinas’s view on the Holy Spirit was very helpful, and her defense of divine simplicity, eternality, and immutability were impressive in such a short space. Though it seems there remains some holes in these positions philosophically (for me in particular, regarding simplicity), Stump provides wonderful food for thought. I find her arguments for God’s atemporality to be very appealing and compelling; and her brief descriptions of the Incarnation’s impact on God’s emotional descriptions were insightful and comforting. Again, some of her conclusions feel a little fast and questions remain, but I really appreciate this work to reconcile the oft misunderstood or misrepresented Thomist view of God with that of Scripture. A small book but packed with solid and meaningful philosophical and theological arguments.

[Ryan · Rating 4 out of 5]

In this succinct volume, Thomist philosopher Eleonore Stump makes a compelling case that it is mistaken to see the God of the philosophers as irreconcilable with the God of the Bible. The God of classical theist philosophy need not be thought of just as disengaged, static, or remote esse. And this is not in spite of, but precisely because of the traditional divine attributes of immutability, eternity, impassivity, and simplicity. If I had to say anything negative, it would be that some of her readings of Aquinas have been contested by other Thomists.

[Ian Jarrells · Rating 5 out of 5]

Stump’s book is a short introduction to the way that Classical Theism, through the lens of Thomas Aquinas, understood the doctrines of immutability, eternity, and simplicity. Stump argues well that the traditional doctrines of God’s nature are not contradictory to how the Bible portrays God, but rather provides the necessary basis for how God can be both personal and transcendent, and even how he can answer prayers and respond to people’s needs.

This was the first book that I have read by Stump, but it will not be the last. Excellent book!

[Thomas Zwilling · Rating 4 out of 5]

A little short for five stars (give us half-stars, dammit), but really excellent. A little less apophatic than good ol' Herbert, but equally focused on the harmony between the simplicity of God and the love of God, and with the same gift for economy and clarity.

[Mark Birmingham · Rating 5 out of 5]

great talk (with extended notes) on reconciling do one simplicity with an active responsive God

[Evan · Rating 5 out of 5]

"The God of Abraham and Isaac, not the God of the Philosophers", wrote Pascal after a religious experience of divine love.

St. Thomas Aquinas however believed God is indeed both the God of the Philosophers and the God of Abraham and Isaac. Both responsive, dynamic, personal, immanent, love and faithfulness as well as the ground of and identical to being himself, absolutely simple, timeless, and impassible.

The Thomistic philosopher Eleanore Stump has written a small lecture walking through all of the attributes implied by God's simplicity, a classic and traditional understanding of God, and how they are entirely consistent with God's dynamic presence interacting with Humans.

I personally think that this enhances the intellectual case for Christian theism, because it allows for arguments from contingency to point directly to the need for such a being, rather than needing to then provide reasons why God is in time, made of parts, and so on.