You're just pushing the process back a step. We already have a word for existence, and that's the universe. Why can't I say that the universe brought itself into existence, removing your god from the equation with no logical consequence?
I'd love an answer from you for this point, or any of the other points I've made.
the universe bringing itself into existence? thats illogical and impossible. in order for it to bring itself into existence, it must have preceeded itself in order to put itself into existence. a thing that doesnt exist can not precede itself.
if Im wrong, and the universe DID cause itself for existence, then it must be God, because something causing itself into existence is impossible.
You apparently must not have read article 3 or didnt understand it...
an excerpt (which answers your question
):
"motion is nothing else than the reduction of something from potentiality to actuality. But nothing can be reduced from potentiality to actuality, except by something in a state of actuality. Thus that which is actually hot, as fire, makes wood, which is potentially hot, to be actually hot, and thereby moves and changes it. Now it is not possible that the same thing should be at once in actuality and potentiality in the same respect, but only in different respects. For what is actually hot cannot simultaneously be potentially hot; but it is simultaneously potentially cold. It is therefore impossible that in the same respect and in the same way a thing should be both mover and moved, i.e. that it should move itself. Therefore, whatever is in motion must be put in motion by another. If that by which it is put in motion be itself put in motion, then this also must needs be put in motion by another, and that by another again. But this cannot go on to infinity, because then there would be no first mover, and, consequently, no other mover; seeing that subsequent movers move only inasmuch as they are put in motion by the first mover; as the staff moves only because it is put in motion by the hand. Therefore it is necessary to arrive at a first mover, put in motion by no other; and this everyone understands to be God. "
The 'prime mover' argument rests on the idea that A always causes and precedes B. Until we actually understand causality and time and can either rule out or explain apparent exceptions then it's presumptuous to use it.
so youre saying that since we cant (or dont yet) understand time and causality, that we cant come to any conclusions about God? cant you say that about anything then?
It's impossible to argue against others' beliefs because that's their own beliefs which are true to them. If they are convinced they will simply change their own beliefs. There's no absolute truth.
theres no absolute truth? thats a self contradiction. if there is no truth then the statement "there is no truth" must be the truth... in other words "the truth is that there is no truth". youve contradicted yourself. "there is no truth" cannot be true, because if it is true, then that statement "there is no truth" must be false, because there is in fact truth, and the truth is "there is no truth."
You can't just assert things to be true just because make sense in your head.
thats how people work. thats ridiculous. we cant really be sure of anything then, can we? since if we are sure of something its because "its just making sense in our head." if you get what I mean... how can we be sure of the law of gravity? after all it only "makes sense in our head".
Him being a Catholic priest isn't the least bit significant.
I was simply making the point that apparently fine scientific minds do agree with St. Thomas Aquinas' "nonsensical arguments" as you call them... that doesnt make them true in any way, but it does give them more credibility.
I have to say, I like Thomas Aquinas because he makes you think... and I think my favorite pastime is thinking..
Lol, wow, this thread is still going? I got bored 10 pages ago...
haha, I know really? xD
I think Ive proved at least that not all theists take everything on blind faith, and do actually think. at least I certainly have.
happy thanksgiving!
man its gonna be busy here today... :|
