Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Arguments for the existence of god
Essay about 5 proofs that god exists
Arguments for the existence of god
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Thomas Aquinas uses five proofs to argue for God’s existence. A few follow the same basic logic: without a cause, there can be no effect. He calls the cause God and believes the effect is the world’s existence. The last two discuss what necessarily exists in the world, which we do not already know. These things he also calls God. Aquinas’ first proof says anything currently in motion was put in motion by another thing. This “mover,” as he calls it, cannot also be the “moved.” The mover transfers its own actuality of motion into the moved, which until then only has the potentiality of motion. Since nothing can have both actuality and potentiality at the same time, the mover and moved cannot be the same thing. Since the universe is motion, it could not have been something from the universe which put it into motion. Therefore, there is a God who first put the universe into motion. Similarly, Aquinas discusses efficient causes. An efficient cause is what we simply refer to as a cause, in other words that which causes an action or event. The first efficient cause leads to …show more content…
This is because it’s possible for everything both to exist and not to exist, therefore both possibilities must have been fulfilled at some point. He phrases it in those terms, but I believe his argument is better understood by saying everything which exists must have come into existence, and therefore didn’t exist before that. Since something cannot spontaneously come into existence, he believes, another being gave everything else existence. This is called a “necessary thing,” meaning its existence is necessary for the existence of other things. Aquinas believes a being bestowed its necessity onto itself and did “not [receive] it from another.” What was a paradox before, an object being both the cause and effect, is now the logic. This object is God, and gave existence to all other
In the first part, Aquinas states that the existence of god is not self-evident, meaning that reason alone without appealing to faith can give a good set of reasons to believe. To support this claim, Aquinas refers to “The Argument of Motion”, proposing that:
Aquinas has several premises that all his arguments rely on. The starting point is that dependent beings exist. Since they exist, they (including their essence or characteristics) must have a cause. It
Thomas Aquinas theorized five different logical arguments to prove the existence of God utilizing scientific hypotheses and basic assumptions of nature. In the fifth of his famous “Five Ways”, Aquinas sets forth the assumption that all natural bodies move toward an end. Since bodies are constantly moving in the best way possible to achieve that end, the path must be designed. God, of course, is the ultimate designer of the universe. The natural hypothesis that follows is that God created the universe, including the human race, for a purpose or to achieve an end, and thus the universe and all life moves toward that end constantly and in the best manner possible.
Aquinas sets up this argument in his discussion of whether or not God exists. His five proofs set up the framework for much of his later writings in the Summa Theologica. As with the five proofs in their entirety, most of Aquinas’ reasoning stems from the third proof concerning the existence of God. The first two proofs lead to the third’s conclusion that God is "esse a se", or to be of itself. From this conclusion of God as an infinite being, Aquinas moves to the third question, concerning the simplicity of God. In article four of question three, Aquinas determines that God is ultimately simple in that his essence does not differ from his being. He writes, "Therefore, since in God there is no potentiality, it follows that in Him essence does not differ from being. Therefore, His essence is His being." God is an unchanging, infinite being. There is no conceivable way in which he could have parts, such as a separate being and a separate essence. From these proofs and others, Aquinas determines that God is an all knowing, perfectly good, perfectly powerful being. Moving back to the third proof of the existence of God, Aquinas determines that God is the ultimate being and that his existence precludes the existence of contingent beings. The notion entails the idea that without infinity, finite beings would not exist.
Descartes second argument for proving God’s existence is very straightforward. He has four possibilities that created his existence. Through process of elimination he is left with God being his creator.
While I do agree with some of Aquinas’ claims. Such as the idea that nothing comes from nothing. I believe something has to happen to become. It could be the efficient cause, causing the world to start. Although still having the question what made such a cause to effect everything in the
He continues by saying that for any change to occur there must have been a previous cause that existed in reality and if one was to trace this line of causes and effects all the way back there must be a first cause that began the chain. But there cannot be anything worldly like that because anything natural must have an impetus already in reality to transform it from potentiality to reality. The only explanation, in Aquinas' e... ... middle of paper ... ... s a cause except God.
The conclusion of Aquinas’s argument is that there must exist a necessary being that is the reason for the existence of contingent beings. Aquinas argues for this conclusion by saying that all contingent beings can be traced back to other contingent beings. He says that because the progenitors are also contingent, they do not give a complete explanation. The existence of contingent beings can only be properly explained by tracing them back to a necessary being.
Aquinas argues that God explains the existence of simultaneous causation. An example of simultaneous causation is a hockey player shooting a puck. The act of the shooting the puck isn’t as simple as one act. The puck is moved by the hockey stick but the hockey stick is simultaneously moved by the swing of the shaft; which is moved from the top of the stick; and the top of the stick is simultaneously moved by the flexing of the player’s muscles which can’t flex without nerve signals from the player’s brain
According to Aquinas, the existence of God can be proven through observing that all things are designed, therefore there must be a designer. His initial premise states that every being is moving toward a goal of some sort, finding a specific purpose. This does not happen by chance, it is a premeditated path and every natural being has their own direction. The second premise explains that most beings lack knowledge of their goal. For example, plants lack knowledge of their “goal” which is to undergo the process of photosynthesis and help sustain the planet. It is what they’re designed to do. The Catholic Community Forums explanation of the Fifth Proof can support the forth premise, stating, “ the bird's wing, designed for the purpose of flight; the human ear, designed for the purpose of hearing; the natural environment, designed to support life; and on and on” (Catholic Community
The last argument is considered the teleological argument or what some modern theorist call argument of design. Which means that the thought of evolution can come into play in regards to how humans came about and how the universe could have been formed. This last argument was not necessarily Aquinas best nor strongest part of his main idea as to why God is existing and may have always been since many theorist have taken the challenge to prove his first four arguments to be false and lacking knowledge and understanding as of how the world was formed.
While Aquinas has some good arguments about the existence of God, there were a few flaws in his argument.
I agree with Aquinas belief that not everything can cause its own existence and is dependent on something else because I know that I was not able to create my own existence and decide that I wanted to live on earth. For example, if someone was to say that their existence was because of their parents than another question would arise which would be what caused your parents existence, it would be a never-ending cycle. No one would ever get the answer of how they really exist. This is how Aquinas was able to determine that we exist because of the existence of God. There was once a time when earth had no animals or humans living on it, so their had to be a higher being (God) that put life on earth. I do not believe that humans and animals just showed up on earth out of thin air without the help of a higher
Saint Thomas Aquinas was born in a family of nobility, but instead of embracing the life of a noble, he decided to the holy path and became a Saint. In the sixteenth century, he was described as an eminent Church Father in shaping the Christian faith, Aquinas’s hope was to bring together faith and reason which is why he developed the Cosmological argument. The Cosmological argument consists of three stages, the first stage in the argument is observation, the universe we live in exists. The second stage in making the argument an assumption of claim one, which is who created the universe. The third stage in the argument is an identity claim, god has to be the one who created the universe. The three stages develop a theory that everything created has a cause and as the chain of creation cannot regress infinity, there must be a creator that developed the first cause. Leading to the conclusion that all objects created in the universe are developed by God. Saint Aquinas’s argument stems from the basic understanding concept of God that the greatest entity is the creator of
One the characteristics of a body it fills up places, and when they are in that space, they prohibit other bodies to be in those places. When we talk about what it means for God to be in a place or somewhere we must realize that the underlying question has to do with the difference of matter and spirit, including their different ways of being present. Also, shown in the article before this, God is present in things as the efficient cause of their being. Aquinas is arguing that it is true that two bodies cannot be attending the same time and place, but he does not exclude two minds or spirits in the same place and time. So, that is what Aquinas concludes about God being everywhere in the world. Because God does not have a body , contributes that He can be in a place that already has bodies there; thus, His presence makes them what they are because of His essence being made up of life itself. Therefore, it is necessary to acknowledge that God is in every place because He is giving the place in itself its existence with actual or potential to be a place. God is in every place, in a way, that is parallel to the way in which bodies are in places. A more relevant analogy, that is similar to how God is everywhere, would be in the case of our souls and bodies being in the same space. Another way to look at it is a man cannot impregnate a women without touching her, and a women cannot give birth to her child without touching the child. Another point that Aquinas makes comes from the reply to the second objection in article two of the eighth question saying that is essential to understanding how immaterial things relate to the material universe which he calls indivisible things like God, the soul and angels. They are in contact because of causation in a continuous sequence that is space and time but are