1) Thomas Aquinas does not require that each individual have good reasons for what they believe. He explains that there is human reason (God is Trinitarian) and natural reason (God exists) which considers a certain truth of God. He discusses the limits of the human intellect. He explains that truth is open to reasoning. He believes that humans have the best knowledge of God when they cannot understand. He explains that many people are not capable of reaching the highest level of knowledge, namely understanding God. When truths are explained, they are mixed with false statements. Aquinas' reasoning makes sense, it is vague and confusing to understand, but the underlying elements are logical. This is a good reason, because it allows the individual to decide what they want to believe and what they believe to be theirs.2) According to Thomas Aquinas, there are certain "truths of faith" that we should accept even if we are unable to do so. by human reason, to see that they are true. He affirms that divine Wisdom knows everything and that it is destined to reveal its teachings to men. He explains that the truths of reason cannot be opposed to divine truth, that they cannot be considered false, and that it is not permissible to consider the truths of faith as false. He states that "...only the false is opposed to the true..." This reasoning seemed confusing to me, the statement makes sense, but the explanation alone is difficult to follow. 3) Fideism takes a neutral stance on claims of religious truth, put all your commitments aside and turn to the neutral side. Evans' objections to fideism are whether or not a neutral position is desirable, because once a person becomes neutral they will even be able to understand religion. Evans explains that we cannot... middle of document...... but we should be able to listen to others and perhaps reach common ground, but the process will deepen faith.7 ) Of the two, I preferred Evans, they were easy to read and plenty of evidence was provided. Evans' position seemed the most logical to me. I agree that each individual has their own beliefs, but should also consider the views of others. Aquinas' opinions and reasoning were difficult to follow and vague. 8) I agree that religious truths and natural truths are both true, but I disagree that they do not. have nothing to do with each other. And even though they operate on different planes of human consciousness, I think they influence each other enormously. All our thoughts come from somewhere and are influenced by various factors. So I think religious and natural truths influence each other in different ways and help us both explain what we stand for..