Question

Consider the following questions in your post: In Summa Theologiae, Question 2, Article 3 Aquinas has five arguments (five ways) for the existence of God. Which one of Aquinas' arguments seems to be the most reasonable? What are the flaws to this type (empirical) of reasoning?

Answer 1

St. Thomas Aquinas was a Philosopher and theologian born circa 1225 in Roccasecca, Italy. He was the most influential thinkers of medieval Scholasticism. Scholasticism is the theory that says that both faith (theology) and reason (philosophy) can coexist. According to him faith and knowledge come from God thus both can co-exist as God is the supreme power.

He believed that the existence of God can be proved. He believed that God is the most powerful, and he has gifted man with intelligence to understand the cause and effect. The revelation comes from God that can guide a man to see reasons and avoid making mistakes. When one has a clear vision he can develop faith, the faith makes one understand the reason to believe in religion, and the existence of God because the intelligence comes from God.

To prove the existence of God he developed five theories, 1. His first theory is based on motion, he said as we all know that some things are in motion, the things that are in motion, did not act without the existence of something that put that thing in motion, that force that put the first things in motion is God,

2. The second theory is cause and effect if we take away the cause automatically effect cease to exist. The equation says that if there is no first cause there is no ultimate effect. The causes are all happening in order the first cause, then intermediately cause, the intermediately cause is the reason for the ultimate cause, if we take away the cause there will be no ultimate effect, and cause and effect do exist one cannot deny its existence, therefore the first efficient cause is by the powerful God.

3. The third theory is the possibility and necessity, the existence of the things is the necessity. If there is no necessity there will be no existence. If everything is possible not to exist than there will be nothing in existence. Thus if one believes that at one time there was nothing in existence, then there has to be some force to give rise to the first existence, this force is God. Nothing may have come into existence without the help of God, thus God exists.

4. The fourth reason he gave is gradation in things, it can be good or bad, less or more, for example, something will be hot, then the next will be hotter and the next will be the hottest. In the same way, one is good and the other thing can be bad. The maximum is possible in a genus, to have that maximum, there has to be a cause, like fire to make things hot, then who created fire, it did not come in existence by itself it is the necessity, thus the God does exist.

5. The fifth is the governess of the world, we see that the things that lack intelligence or power come to an end, the human life ends after a certain number of years, and no one knows where it goes, and what comes out of the body that ends the human life. The natural body also has an end, the end comes as per his theory due to lack of intelligence, if people/nature lack intelligence then how they move to the end that is a powerful force of God.

All the arguments are true because the existence of the world is the cause and effect, nature is the necessity, the creation of human with intelligence is to explore the power that created man and nature, and this intelligence is given by someone more powerful that is God.

But the intelligence does not remain forever the things, human life and nature comes to an end and never revive if something from the body has gone, that unknown force that makes an unintelligent person move is God, the ultimate power, unseen but the creation of the universe.