Dear Resident Theists

[Neo-Scholastic]

The only reason you keep asking the question is because you do not like the answer, which I provided for you here:

http://atheistforums.org/thread-34936-po...pid1016290

Also your first post makes an understandable and naive mistake. The five ways of Thomas Aquinas are just that, five demonstrations that refine the nature of the Divine. As such the first step is not simply ‘First cause’ but also Unmoved Mover, Necessary Being, Maximal Greatness, and Guiding Intelligence. You can educate yourself here:

http://atheistforums.org/thread-34889-po...pid1007461

[Longhorn]

I don't like it, because I don't see why the first cause possesses the qualities you've described. I've asked you to clarify. Can you explain why the first cause has to possess these qualities?

[Neo-Scholastic]

To what qualies do you refer that you feel have not been addressed? I truly do not know what your asking that hasn't already been addressed.

[Longhorn]

How do you figure it's conscious? Why did it need to be 'one and intelligible'?

[Neo-Scholastic]

How do you figure it's conscious? Why did it need to be 'one and intelligible'?

Divine Intellect is covered the the 4th Way.

[Longhorn]

Which you didn't cover in the debate.

Eta: I read up about it, and I still don't understand why these qualities must necessarily be true of the first cause. Why is it impossible for the universe to be created by something that does not poses these qualities?

[Cephus]

I don't like it, because I don't see why the first cause possesses the qualities you've described. I've asked you to clarify. Can you explain why the first cause has to possess these qualities?

Because he wants it to.  That's how religion works, the theist will tell you that God is completely undetectable and unmeasurable, yet will tell you in great detail all of the characteristics and wishes that deity has.  How do they know?  Magic, I guess.  Or, more likely, they just make it up and try to justify the results.

[Cephus]

How do you figure it's conscious? Why did it need to be 'one and intelligible'?

Divine Intellect is covered the the 4th Way.

Which is complete bullshit.  Aquinas chose to define God into existence with characteristics he could have no way of knowing or testing.  Just because you make up a god with those characteristics doesn't mean that any such god exists in reality with those characteristics.

[Neo-Scholastic]

How do they know?  Magic, I guess.  

No magic required...just reason and common sense. Apparently you have neither otherwise you would engage with Aquinas's demonstration instead of boring us with your bluster.

[Neo-Scholastic]

...I read up about it, and I still don't understand why these qualities must necessarily be true of the first cause.

Then you didn't really read it or you'd be asking better questions.