(August 6, 2015 at 2:53 pm)ChadWooters Wrote:(August 6, 2015 at 2:39 am)Neimenovic Wrote: Hey, Chad? Are you ever going to explain your line of reasoning from first cause to your god? ._.
You can find the rational steps by which you get from the Unmoved Mover/First Cause/Necessary in my opening statement in the debate area (ChadWooters versus Metis, “Resolved: Using the ‘Five Ways’ found in Article 1, Question 2 of the Summa Theological, Thomas Aquinas successfully demonstrates the existence of God.”)
http://atheistforums.org/thread-34889-po...pid1007461
These proofs sufficiently demonstrate the existence of the God of Classical Theism.
Heh, I'm writing a blog post about the huge, conspicuous leaps that arguments like the five ways use to get to god out of nowhere. I liken arguments like that to a tic or spasm: you hit the end of an argument that doesn't lead to god and then just go "and that there is god!"
As though an assertion like that means anything at all. As though you can just sweep all the specific doctrines and beliefs attached to christianity under the rug and pretend that a deistic cause is sufficient to demonstrate what you really believe.
"YOU take the hard look in the mirror. You are everything that is wrong with this world. The only thing important to you, is you." - ronedee
Want to see more of my writing? Check out my (safe for work!) site, Unprotected Sects!
Want to see more of my writing? Check out my (safe for work!) site, Unprotected Sects!