☢The Theistic Response➼ to Atheists saying, "It Doesn't mean God Did it"

[Pat Mustard]

Why would I read a book that is a restatement of Aquinas' fourth way with a bit of modern science thrown in to fool the gullible?

We know Aquinas has long been shown to be not even wrong.

Of course Aquinas arguments cannot be refuted.

I refuted them a couple of days ago. The first three go 1) everything must have property X, 2) there must therefore be a thing without property X, all three arguments refuting themselves. The fourth way is refuted by pointing out that Aquinas' "degrees of perfection" are a subjevtive value judgement, and that they don't need to lead to an ultimate perfection except through his assertion. And Darwin destroyed the argument from design over 150 years ago, through natural selection.

There all five ways refuted.

PS you should google not even wrong some day and see what it actually means.