Oh, the same Thomas Aquinas who refers to women as "defective and misbegotten" in Summa Theologica.
The "primer mover" argument......ho hum. We are still left with the question- "Why is there something rather than nothing?" So why invoke a potentially nonexistent God to explain a universe which we know exists?
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Verk
Every intelligent person must ask this question, and the only answer to be come up with is God. This is the only explination, whether you consider it good or not.
|
Well, if you say the "god" was always there (that is he is uncaused) then one could hold that Aquinas' argument succeeds without believing that God exists. There could be multiple uncaused causes--multiple gods, say--or the uncaused cause could be an unintelligent, impersonal force. So no, god is not the "only explaination".
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by JcP
Strikes me as a roundabout way of saying that God has to exist because God is defined as the unknown source.
|
By defining "god" as mearly the "unknown source" you basically define most people's idea of god out of existence. "God" to most theists means an omniscient, omnipresent, omnibelevolent being, not just the "unknown source" or "nature".
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Verk
As for the big bang, who set that bang in motion? And for evolution, who created this process of life?
|
Honestly, we don't know WHAT set the big bang in motion or how the process of life started, although I find the theory of abiogenisis very plausible. But it's very easy just to say "god did it" and be done with the questions.....it's the easy way out if you ask me.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by The Rev
Of course there is a God. You are reading His post right now.
|
You're the Yahooka God for sure! (or is it Lunaria?)
