Do you believe Aquinas "proofs" that God exists really PROVE anything or just come to a dead end?

Question

This is an Italian monk from the medieval period.

Answer 1

Faith is not about reason. Reason is only one of several faculties. Philosophers who tried finding God in reason were looking in the wrong place. It can provide argumentation for a belief that already exists, but it is not a source of belief. I am yet to meet a single person who bases their belief or disbelief in God on logic alone.
Reason if for playing chess, figuring out physics problems and doing math. It teaches us nothing about the metaphysical nature of the world we live in.

Answer 2

Let's go through all 5:
First 3 proofs are really the same Cosmological argument[1] in different guises(first mover, first cause, first contingency).
Cosmological proof is quite weak.Non believer can just bite the bullet and concede that there IS NO first mover(cause, etc). He can claim that universe "always existed" so there is no need for "first move", "first cause" or whatever. Aquinas has still to show why having God is logically preferable to infinite regress.

4th proof is also weak. I disagree that great things can only come from greater things. This denies progress. There is clear counter evidence. Great societies who build skyscrapers came not from even GREATER society, but from WORTH society who lived in caves. Thus the logic of this proof is suspect.

5th proof is a so called Teleological proof[2] or Intelligent design proof . This is quite weak as modern theories explain well perceived "purpose" of beings as adoption to environment.

Answer 3

Of course they prove anything. What they prove may be called into question, but Aquinas, basing many of his arguments on past geniuses like Aristotle, understood, long before scientific theorems proved him correct, that something cannot come from nothing and that an orderly world demanded one who designed it.

One cannot, through Aquinas's arguments prove completely the Judeo-Christian God or from the Christian perspective, the divine Trinity, as C. S. Lewis argues in "Mere Christianity." None the less, it provides a foundation for argumentation that, in spite of Hume's best attempts, remains irrefutable. Only by beginning with a basic presupposition that God does not exist, then attempting to prove it, can one denigrate the work of Aquinas, Anselm, Augustine and other theists.

Answer 4

Aquinas wrote in Latin. The translation "proofs" is probably a little misleading; at least they are not proofs in the rigorous mathematical sense. They might be more correctly called pieces of evidence.

Answer 5

How about this...

Let's see anyone create life and consciousness from matter or from nothing, can't be done.

Even if you were to say that DNA creates life (which it can't, it is just code), how would chemicals mix accidently to create such a wonder? It is ridiculous to believe in other then intelligent design. Even Einstein, arguably the greatest scientist said so.

It is like standing in front of the Mona Lisa and saying 'I wonder if there was a painter?'.

Answer 6

Damned good question dude. I have to say this: In my opinion, any higher power, being a "creator" more specifically, is open to subjective analysis. One persons view of a "god", is bound to be different than that another person, say... someone who doesn't believe in creationism. So, a god, a higher power, an entity that controls our destiny... Hmmmmm

Answer 7

I think they come as close as possible to proving the existence of God as we humans possibly can.

Answer 8

Please read my words carefully:
If you see footmark in the sand, you'll say that someone passed from here...
If you see a piece of dog sh*t on the ground, you'll say that a dog passed from here...
So what about the enormous universe, the sky, stars, planets, earth and all the beauty in it, doesn't it lead to that someone made it?!!!

Some people say that everything is created by itself after the big-bang... I won't ask you about what caused the big-bang, but I'll ask you a simple question:
If you take all the letters of the alphabet, multiples of them, and you threw them randomly on the floor. Do you expect (by a chance of one in infinity) to get a poem like shakespear's??!!

Can't you see how organized our universe is, the planets, the eco-system on earth, look even in your own body... Can you control your heart-beat? Can you control your breath while you're sleeping? Who stopped your eye-lashes from growing after reaching a certain length? Who told the baby turtles to move towards the sea and not to the earth after they come out of their eggs? Who taught the bird how to make nests?

My friend, think with your heart and brain. If you're still lost, think about the following:

Do you know how to play safe?
Your point:
If there's no God and you do all what you want in life, then nothing will happen to you after life. But if there was God and you were mistaken, then you'll blame yourself FOREVER...

Believer's point:
If there's God and I followed His commands in life, then I'll be in Heaven after life FOREVER. But if there was no God and we're mistaken, then nothing bad will happen to us after life...

Now you know how to play-safe, in case you're not convinced?

Answer 9

if he proved god's existence, you wouldnt be asking this question, because it would already be proven.

there can be no concrete proof of his existence, unless he decides to show us.

Answer 10

Haven't read them yet, but I intend to sometime this winter.