Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
Current time: July 27, 2025, 1:18 pm

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
☢The Theistic Response➼ to Atheists saying, "It Doesn't mean God Did it"
RE: ☢The Theistic Response➼ to Atheists saying, "It Doesn't mean God Did it"
(November 24, 2016 at 5:43 am)Mathilda Wrote: I collect so-called proofs put forward by theists and enjoy adapting them to show that God does not exist. In each and every case so far the 'proof' has made a far more convincing case than whatever the theist started off with. I try to keep as much of the original text as possible and do not alter it any more than I have to.


The First Way: Argument from Motion
  • Our senses prove that some things are in motion.
  • Things move when potential motion becomes actual motion.
    Only an actual motion can convert a potential motion into an actual motion.
  • Nothing can be at once in both actuality and potentiality in the same respect (i.e., if both actual and potential, it is actual in one respect and potential in another).
  • Therefore nothing can move itself.
  • Therefore each thing in motion is moved by something else.
  • The sequence of motion extends ad infinitum because things change over time, actual motion stops and can increase in potential motion. Motion is performed by energy and energy cannot be created nor destroyed.
  • Therefore there cannot be a first mover, put in motion by no other; and this everyone understands would be God.
  • Therefore God cannot exist.



The Second Way: Argument from Efficient Causes
  • We perceive a series of efficient causes of things in the world.
  • Nothing exists prior to itself.
  • Therefore nothing [in the world of things we perceive] is the efficient cause of itself.
  • If a previous efficient cause does not exist, neither does the thing that results (the effect).
  • Therefore if the first thing in a series does not exist, nothing in the series exists.
  • If the series of efficient causes extends ad infinitum into the past, for then there would be no things existing now.
  • That is plainly false (i.e., there are things existing now that came about through efficient causes)
  • This shows that the concept of efficient cause is flawed and relies on equivocation. Instead matter and energy has just been rearranged in different forms.(How does it know to rearrange itself, someone most have moved it.)
  • Therefore there cannot have been a first efficient cause, to which everyone gives the name of God.



The Third Way: Argument from Possibility and Necessity (Reductio argument)
  • We find in nature things that are possible to be and not to be, that come into being and go out of being i.e., contingent beings.
  • Assume that every being is a contingent being.
  • For each contingent being, there is a time it does not exist.
  • Therefore it is impossible for these always to exist.
  • Therefore there could have been a time when no things existed.
  • Therefore at that time there would have been nothing to bring the currently existing contingent beings(The argument is flawed a contigent being does not need a cause becasue it is existence itself) into existence.
  • Therefore, nothing would be in existence now.
  • We have reached an absurd result from assuming that every being is a contingent being.
  • Yet to argue that only one being is not contingent is special pleading.
  • Therefore there cannot have been an initial being caused by something else. This all men speak of as God, which cannot exist.



The Fourth Way: Argument from Gradation of Being
  • There is a gradation to be found in things: some are better or worse than others.
  • Predications of degree require reference to the “uttermost” case (e.g., a thing is said to be hotter according as it more nearly resembles that which is hottest).
  • The maximum in any genus is the cause of all in that genus.
  • A maximum is a limit of a particular value.
  • Therefore something which is to all beings the cause of their being, goodness, and every other perfection which we call God cannot exist because it would be limited by having a maximum.(How can God be limited by having a maximum? It makes no sense, arguement is flawed at fundamental aspects.)
The Fifth Way: Argument from Design
  • We see that natural bodies work toward some goal, and do not do so by chance.
  • Most natural things lack knowledge.  
  • But as an arrow reaches its target because it is directed by an archer, what lacks intelligence achieves goals by being directed by something intelligence.
  • But some natural bodies such as humans and animals, have intelligence and are directing other natural bodies that lack natural intelligence.
  • This means that there cannot exist a single intelligent being, which we call God, that directs everything.
  • Therefore if anything is directing natural bodies that lack intelligence, it is merely another being and not God.(Point is flawed because another "being" can be intelligent  and supperior to other beings e.g the angels but we call God the ultimate being so God is the best explanation.)
 
So Conclusion, St Thomas Aquinas Argument for God still remains Unrefuted.

The First Way: Argument from Motion
  • Our senses prove that some things are in motion.
  • Things move when potential motion becomes actual motion.
  • Only an actual motion can convert a potential motion into an actual motion.
  • Nothing can be at once in both actuality and potentiality in the same respect (i.e., if both actual and potential, it is actual in one respect and potential in another).
  • Therefore nothing can move itself.
  • Therefore each thing in motion is moved by something else.
  • The sequence of motion cannot extend ad infinitum.
  • One of most basic laws of science is the Law of the Conservation of Energy. Energy cannot be created or destroyed; it can only be changed from one form to another.
  • Something beyond nature must have created all the energy and matter that is observed today. Present measures of energy are immeasurably enormous, indicating a power source so great that "infinite" is the best word we have to describe it.
  • The logical conclusion is that our supernatural Creator with infinite power created the universe. There is no energy source capable to originate what we observe today.
  • Therefore it is necessary to arrive at a first mover, put in motion by no other; and this everyone understands to be God who is existence itself.

The Second Way: Argument from Efficient Causes
  • We perceive a series of efficient causes of things in the world.
  • Nothing exists prior to itself.
  • Therefore nothing [in the world of things we perceive] is the efficient cause of itself.
  • If a previous efficient cause does not exist, neither does the thing that results (the effect).
  • Therefore if the first thing in a series does not exist, nothing in the series exists.
  • If the series of efficient causes extends ad infinitum into the past, for then there would be no things existing now.
  • That is plainly false (i.e., there are things existing now that came about through efficient causes).
  • Therefore efficient causes do not extend ad infinitum into the past.
  • Therefore it is necessary to admit a first efficient cause, to which everyone gives the name of God.
The Third Way: Argument from Possibility and Necessity (Reductio argument)
  • We find in nature things that are possible to be and not to be, that come into being and go out of being i.e., contingent beings.
  • Assume that every being is a contingent being.
  • For each contingent being, there is a time it does not exist.
  • Therefore it is impossible for these always to exist.
  • Therefore there could have been a time when no things existed.
  • Therefore at that time there would have been nothing to bring the currently existing contingent beings into existence.
  • Therefore, nothing would be in existence now.
  • We have reached an absurd result from assuming that every being is a contingent being.
  • Therefore not every being is a contingent being.
  • Therefore some being exists of its own necessity, and does not receive its existence from another being, but rather causes them. This all men speak of as God.
The Fourth Way: Argument from Gradation of Being
  • There is a gradation to be found in things: some are better or worse than others.
  • Predications of degree require reference to the “uttermost” case (e.g., a thing is said to be hotter according as it more nearly resembles that which is hottest).
  • The maximum in any genus is the cause of all in that genus.
  • 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.
The Fifth Way: Argument from Design
  • We see that natural bodies work toward some goal, and do not do so by chance.
  • Most natural things lack knowledge.  
  • But as an arrow reaches its target because it is directed by an archer, what lacks intelligence achieves goals by being directed by something intelligence.
  • Therefore some intelligent being exists by whom all natural things are directed to their end; and this being we call God.
http://www.icr.org
Reply



Messages In This Thread
RE: ☢The Theistic Response➼ to Atheists saying, "It Doesn't mean God Did it" - by The Joker - November 24, 2016 at 8:43 am

Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Science and Theism Doesn't Work out right? Hellomate1234 28 3600 November 7, 2024 at 8:12 am
Last Post: syntheticadrenaline
  Are Atheists Afraid to Join Atheists? Asmodeus 10 2008 October 26, 2024 at 9:09 am
Last Post: Asmodeus
  What does Sam Harris mean by saying that religions are failed sciences? FlatAssembler 21 3890 June 12, 2024 at 10:54 pm
Last Post: arewethereyet
  Are god and religion ways of saying "screw you" to nature? ShinyCrystals 18 2713 January 8, 2024 at 12:27 pm
Last Post: Angrboda
  Would this spark a theistic curiousity? Won2blv 7 1192 September 9, 2023 at 4:56 pm
Last Post: Astreja
  Why did God get such a makeover in the New Testament? Hi600 10 2377 April 1, 2023 at 4:48 am
Last Post: Goosebump
  Why God doesn't stop satan? purplepurpose 225 27134 June 28, 2021 at 1:52 pm
Last Post: The Grand Nudger
  Atheists: Why did female with fat butts and short legs exist? Lambe7 14 3213 July 30, 2020 at 7:17 am
Last Post: Gwaithmir
  Why did I (an atheist) legally change my name to "God"? GodBennett 33 5108 July 17, 2020 at 5:49 am
Last Post: Porcupine
  Why did I (an atheist) change my name legally to "God"? GodBennett 0 3376 July 4, 2020 at 10:13 am
Last Post: GodBennett



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)