Debate Challenge

[I_am_not_mafia]

TruthIsGod, with all due respect, what do you hope to achieve. Do you think the whole forum will implode? I won a debate recently. My opponent was not able to defeat the 5 Ways of Aquinas. Some spectators claimed that he did a bad job and that they could have done better. They haven't. The Five Ways remain decisive.

You win a debate?

With the 5 ways of Aquinas??

<Goes off to google it.>

http://web.mnstate.edu/gracyk/courses/we...alysis.htm

I'll need to add that word salad to my thread on TTA where I take theist arguments and use them to 'prove' (by theist standards) that God does not exist.

http://www.thethinkingatheist.com/forum/...-not-exist

So a quick glance at each of the arguments to point out where each one asserts something that is wrong.

1st way

1) Our senses prove that some things are in motion.

Wrong. Google optical illusions to sense things moving when they do not. Our senses prove nothing. They are electrical signals in the brain. That's all.



2nd way

2) Nothing exists prior to itself.

Meaningless statement. Energy cannot be created nor destroyed. See next statement.


3rd way

3) For each contingent being, there is a time it does not exist.

Wrong. The atoms were just rearranged in a different form and may have been combined with different atoms. See previous statement.


Fourth way:

4) Therefore there must also be something which is to all beings the cause of their being, goodness, and every other perfection; and this we call God.

Wrong. Leap of logic not supported by previous assertions and relies on equivocation of definition of God.


5th way:

1) We see that natural bodies work toward some goal, and do not do so by chance.

Wrong. Take brownian motion as an example. If there is any goal then it is not minimise free energy and to settle into a stable state. That is all.