TL;DR: Aquinas and Aristotle as mentioned in this paper discussed the relation of reason to faith and the importance of reason in the writing of AQUINAS's poems. But they focused on the five ways of reason: faith, faithfulness, goodness, immassibility, immutability, will, and infinity.
Abstract: INTRODUCTION (A) AQUINAS AND ARISTOTLE (B) AUGUSTINE TO AQUINAS (LATIN-CHRISTIAN AUTHORS) (C) AQUINAS, PLATO, AND NEO-PLATONISM (D) AQUINAS AND JEWISH AND ISLAMIC AUTHORS (A) BEING (B) MATTER, FORM, AND INDIVIDUATION (C) CAUSATION (D) THE FIVE WAYS (E) THE LIMITS OF LANGUAGE AND THE NOTION OF ANALOGY (A) GOD'S SIMPLICITY (B) GOD'S GOODNESS (C) GOD'S KNOWLEDGE AND WILL (D) GOD'S IMPASSIBILITY, IMMUTABILITY, AND ETERNALITY (E) GOD'S OMNIPOTENCE (A) HUMAN FREEDOM AND AGENCY (B) EMOTIONS (C) HAPPINESS (D) LAW AND NATURAL LAW (E) CONSCIENCE AND SYNDERESIS (F) VIRTUES AND VICES (G) PRACTICAL REASONING (A) HUMAN KNOWLEDGE (B) INTELLECTUAL VIRTUES (C) THE RELATION OF REASON TO FAITH (A) TRINITY (B) INCARNATION (C) THE SAVING WORK OF CHRIST (D) SACRAMENTS (E) RESURRECTION AND THE SEPARATED SOUL (F) PRAYER (G) THE GIFTS AND FRUITS OF THE HOLY SPIRIT CHRONOLOGICAL LIST OF AQUINAS'S WRITINGS EDITIONS AND TRANSLATIONS
TL;DR: In this paper, the fall into Hellenistic philosophy theory and the function of divine impassibility in patristic theology are discussed. But the focus is on Christ's suffering in the struggle with Docetism.
Abstract: Introduction 1. Testing the fall into Hellenistic philosophy theory 2. The function of divine impassibility in patristic theology 3. The reality of Christ's suffering defended in the struggle with Docetism 4. Patripassian controversy: the Son, not God the Father, is the subject of the Incarnation 5. The orthodox response to Arianism: involvement in suffering does not diminish Christ's divinity 6. The case of Cyril against Nestorius: a theology of divine self-emptying Conclusion
TL;DR: O'Keeffe as mentioned in this paper argues that the primar theological concern of the debated was the impassibility of God, and that the Alexandrians, rather than the Antiochenes, are shown to have defended more faithfully the humanity of the Son of God.
Abstract: Most textbook accounts of the fith-century christological debated suggest that the humanity of Jesus was the primary concern of the Antiochene theologians. From this perspective, Alexandrian christology, represented by Cyril, appears to have fundamentally misunderstood the meaning of the Incarnation. Dr. O'Keefe argues that the primar theological concern of the debated was the impassibility of God. Thus, the Alexandrians, rather than the Antiochenes, are shown to have defended more faithfully the humanity of the Son of God