RE: Strong and Weak Arguments
January 10, 2017 at 3:36 pm
(This post was last modified: January 10, 2017 at 3:56 pm by Neo-Scholastic.)
(January 10, 2017 at 9:10 am)ukatheist Wrote: Strongest theist argument: for me is first cause (but only in so far as you would name any non-natural cause 'god'), although, I consider a natural first cause most likely at this point in time. Weakest theist argument: Anything that assigns attributes to 'god', or implies that 'god' is anything other than the first cause.
A couple of points for clarification...
The First Cause demonstration as found in Question 2 or Aquinas's Summa refers to efficient causes. Efficient causes are objects and not events. For example, the efficient cause of a table would be a carpenter rather than the work performed by the carpenter.
Secondly, the demonstration applies only to an essentially ordered series of increasing dependence and not an accidental one, such as a sequence in time. He isn't saying there was temporal beginning, like the Big Bang. Any apologetic (or objection) that suggests the need for something 'before' the Big Bang is based on a misreading.
Finally, none of the Five Ways exists in isolation of one another. While each one ends with the statement "...and this everyone considers to be god," the type of god one gets is the summation of all Five Ways. On its own, the best the 2nd Way gets you is Pantheism. However in light of the 1st, 3rd, 4th, and 5th Ways, the physical universe is disqualified as the "god" in question.
Hopefully, you don't interpret this as a direct defense of the demonstration. I feel it speaks for itself. But it cannot do so, if the terms of the demonstration and its place in the whole of Article 3 are not properly understood.
