Refutation of the Sects (1959) - Page 5


3. God, not in matter: neither in matter in its entirety, nor in any of the parts of matter 10	16	19
Consequences of I: God in matter 11	16	19
II. Matter in God 12	16	20
original: $β'$ B. Origin of evils 13—27	16	20
I. God, creator of natures 14—16
1. God is not only the creator of forms, but also of the natures that he created from nothing 14	16	20
2. Making something from nothing is possible: example of men who derive art from nothing 15	17	20
— A fortiori for God 16 A Latin term meaning "with even stronger reason." If humans can create art from nothing, God certainly has a greater power to create existence from nothing.	17	21
II. Origin of evils here below 17—19
1. Evils are the works of persons 17 Meaning that "evil" is not a physical substance but an act committed by a free agent.	17	21
2. Evils are accidental denominations 18 An "accidental" property is something that is not part of the essential nature of a thing; evil is thus seen as a lack or a choice, not a created thing.	17	21
3. Men are creators of evils since they are the causes of creating or not creating these evils 19	18	22
III. God did not only organize matter 20—27
1. If God organized matter, and that matter produced evils, then God is the cause of evils 20	18	22
— Adjacent reflections loosely linked to each other, and not to the rest 21	18	22
2. God cannot be called "creator" simply because he organized matter; he would then be only an arranger 22	18	22
3. Absurd consequences of the organization of matter as they imagine it 23—27
A. The origin of evils remains unexplained, or else it is God who is the cause of evils 23	18	22
— Objection of the adversaries 24	19	22
Response 25	19	23
B. In their theory, the state of matter, after its organization, is worse than its state before this organization 26	19	23
C. Or else this hypothesis introduces weakness into God 27	19	23
original: $γ'$ C. Nature of matter 28—32	19	23
I. Matter cannot be a simple nature 29	19	23
II. Matter cannot be a composite 30—32
1. Because then it would no longer be uncreated, as they claim 30	19	23
2. Or else there would be five uncreated principles 31	20	24
3. The natures that we see being contrary to one [another]