are there any arguments against aquinas proof of god??

Question

when i say god, i mean a deity and NOT a christian religeous god

Answer 1

One of the most widely known proofs of Aquinas is the following
1) There exists things that are caused (created) by other things.
2) Nothing can be the cause of itself (nothing can create itself.)
3) There can not be an endless string of objects causing other objects to exist.
4) Therefore, there must be an uncaused first cause called God.
So Aquinas believed that ultimately there must have been an UNCAUSED FIRST CAUSE (GOD) who began the chain of existence for all things.
Aquinas does not prove that this uncaused first cause is UNIQUE. Meaning that there could be other causes that are uncaused.
Also it does not prove that it is UNIVERSAL. Meaning that it is the cause for the existence of every other thing.
Only Avicena, persian philosopher, medical doctor, mathematician, astronomer and genius of the 11th century demonstrated *mathematically* that :
"There exists a cause which is uncaused , unique and universal."

Answer 2

Of course; indeed, the "proof" has been regarded as silly for centuries. It is trivially obvious that Aquinas' thing does not come close to even alleging a god of either the old testament or new testament sort. More importantly, it is simply irrelevant: if you care to postulate a "first cause", you can do so, but that neither tells you any characteristics of such a thing nor permits you to predict any consequences as a result. Thus, the belief is useless. For specifics, see:

Answer 3

I presume you are referring to the "Prime Mover" idea. The only argument against that would be that it springs from the human notion of time, which is a measure of change. We perceive cause and effect and try to imagine the original cause - or push - and Aquinas calls that the Prime Mover, which perhaps seems logical, but it does not comfort us because we are still as finite as ever in spite of being clever enough to have thought that up. Furthermore, we are incapable of imagining either nothingness or infinity, so the acceptance of a Prime Mover is still a matter of faith.

Answer 4

But you have to mean a Christian deity, cuz that's what Aquinas was concerned with.

Answer 5

It leans more towards deism than Christianity. And there's no logical explanation for God's human emotion. An infinite being doesn't stop there. One can believe in a higher power but it's not necessary to call it God. It could be a force of nature like nothing we've seen.