The first principle: a thing cannot be and not be at the same time.
"Those who deny the first principle should be flogged or burned until they admit that it is not the same thing to be burned and not burned, or whipped and not whipped."
Avicenna
Ancient Muslim philosopher
Actually, I've heard present-day religious deny this. Makes things interesting, I bet.
In the words of a former US President, "That depends on what your meaning of is is." I admit befuddlement about the meaning of the word is and denial of this first principle are not the same, one is the ugly, bilaterally unsymmetrical cousin of the other. So ugly yet somehow so appealing to the Reformers who denied the Real Prescence of Christ in the Eucharist. Christ said, "This is my body." And from the time of Luther the argument of the meaning of the word is is with us to this day.
Sal,
That is an unfair and untrue characterization of Luther, and even of Calvin.
Luther and the Lutherans believe "hoc est" they just don't believe that a particular school of Greek philosophy should be made dogma.
Was Avicenna a Muslim, or was he one of the many Syriac Christian scholars that the early Caliphs cultivated. I don't think Islam has ever produced new culture or new science.
Puzzled -
Can you clarify? You're saying Luther disagreed with Aquinas on the idea of substance with respect to the Eucharist?
As a former Lutheran, I can testify that Luther's eucharistic theology was hererodox. He believed in "consubstantiation," that the Body and Blood coexisted alongside the bread and wine. He also thought that it was the faith of the believer, not the actions of an ordained priest, makes the Eucharist.
Luther *did*, therefore, take "Hoc est corpus" literally, unlike the vast majority of the Reformers, who were against the idea of sacraments because they deprecated the idea of the priesthood. On this point, as on many others, Luther's theology split the difference between the fulness of Catholic truth and the radical rebellion against the authority of the Church.
Of course, almost all protestants today take Zwingli's understanding - that the 'is' means simply 'is a symbol of, no, really - I wan't talking literally.'
Eric -
When Jesus says "This is my body" Luther takes him to mean "Here (in this bread) is my body" or "This (bread) is my bread." I don't think that is taking the words words literally. Am I incorrect?
Sal
Avicenna was certainly a Muslim, although he had a few ideas that seem a little out there to us know and his co-religious (universal intellect, etc) and tends toward the pantheistic, which obviously makes him suspect to Muslims.
Ack, my English is failing me. When I say "co-religious" I do mean his fellow muslims, not some sort of community.
Dismas,
I think the word you were looking for was, "coreligionists".