Posted by Stephen Charchuk on January 03, 1997 at 16:51:42:
In Reply to: Re: GOD...defined posted by Ray Briggs on January 03, 1997 at 16:13:23:
: 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.