(August 13, 2020 at 3:12 pm)The Grand Nudger Wrote: His god conclusion does not follow from any of his premises, it's a non sequitur. A non seq is not a valid argument. Full stop. No theological objections required. No need to wonder whether the premises are sound. DOA.
I agree that as a conclusion, or even part of the argument, it was a non-sequitur.
But, to give him the benefit of the doubt, Aquinas had a belief in Jesus as God. He also believed that God is a prime-mover. He gives an argument for the existence of a prime-mover. He then tells the reader that he considers this prime-mover to be his God.
I doubt Aquinas had a pre-existing belief in Cats-as-God, though.