Posted by Amanda on January 03, 1997 at 21:52:13:
In Reply to: Re: GOD...defined posted by Stephen Charchuk on January 03, 1997 at 16:51:42:
: : Before I join this business I would like to make it clear that I doubt the existence of anything that is considered outside nature (as in supernatural).But if you want to read what I think are still the best "proofs" for the existence of God, read St. Thomas Aquinas (Summa Theologiae). He does not try to start with a definition of God but attempts to prove that there must be an "unmoved mover", an "uncaused cause", a "necessary being", a "most being being", and a source for order in the universe. He then says that these qualities are what people believe a God to be. He then uses the qualities he has "proven" to exist to derive what God must be: there can only be one, must be unlimited, etc. His proofs are very interesting and I think most skeptics would be surprised at how logically a 13th century monk can think. The problem is that it the arguments are based on scholastic philosophy and might not make much sense unless you are familiar with the jargon.
: As well as it not being based on real hard evidence. He is still only using his opinion. A logical arguement is still not proof.
Great thing is though - they're not even logical! Hoorah for us!!!!