They are still important despite the overlapping with the other truths because it is vital that aside from philosophical science developed by human reason, there must be “theology” learned through divine revelation (Pojman & Vaughn 52-54). There are no justifications why such knowledge that could be learned through philosophical science, so long as it can be learned through natural reason, could not be learned through sacred science or theology either.
Aquinas then explained that there are two forms of science, natural science and higher science. Sacred Doctrine is a science because it progresses from norms coming from higher science, specifically the science of God. He used the example of a musician who trusts in the teachings of a mathematician by reason of authority. the same can be said of sacred science, which is founded on knowledge from God’s revelation. He further argues that Sacred Doctrine is the noblest of sciences because it focuses on the noblest subject matter, which is God, and it offers the most graciously gratifying certainty because it expresses God’s authority. Also, Sacred Doctrine directs us to the noblest objective, which is toward eternal happiness with God. Sacred Doctrine is knowledge, which offers us the most profound and meaningful wisdom of our unending worth and guides us toward its attainment.
These premises lead to a single conclusion– therefore, an unmoved First Mover is real and existent. Whether these premises are valid, invalid, or sound require further examination. Validity is the value of being accurately, empirically, and concretely logical or justifiable. invalidity refers to a lack of factual reliability. soundness refers to the validity of the premises and conclusion.
Through the Argument from Change, Aquinas illustrates that human reason has a role in Sacred doctrine not to verify or attest to the knowledge based on faith, but to shed light on “other things that are put forward in this doctrine”