St. Thomas Aquinas On The Existence Of God

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

Than there has to be something that already existed to make everything exist and for that to happen that had to be someone, so that is God. Aquinas also pointed one in one of his earlier proofs of the First Mover. Aquinas says that anything moved is moved by another, so there must be a first mover (a mover that is not itself moved by another) and that first mover is God. Both of the philosophers used great methods to come to their conclusion about how god came into existence. They both used different thinking methods to get to their well respected arguments but did come to the conclusion that God does “exist”. I believe the key difference about the two philosophers was the time difference between the philosophers, Thomas Aquinas wrote his proofs in the medieval ages around the 1200’s while ( with no disrespect) Rene Descartes wrote his meditation in the 1600’s. There is a big 400 year gap between ideas are compared but that came down to the same conclusion

An age-old debate that has existed in religious studies concerns which argument for the existence of God is the strongest. The existence of God is pervasive throughout the world, although the means with which people attempt to prove His existence varying in significant (and sometimes contrasting) ways. Although there have been myriad methods for proving God's existence, a central dispute concerns whether or not to use a rational approach or a more Biblically-grounded approach. This paper examines three theories that are germane to the rational approach the Five Proofs issued by Thomas Aquinas in his Summa Theologica, the central premise of St. Anselm's Proslogion, and Augustine's premise from his canonical text City of God. After discussing these three arguments, two Christological arguments are discussed, namely Richard Bauckham's thesis from God Crucified: Monotheism and Christology in the New Testament (1999) and William Lane Craig's argument from "The Resurrection of Jesus" (Date Unknown). Following a description of these theories, this paper argues in favor of the rational approach because it is more systematic in its justification for God's existence.

Sir Thomas Aquinas and William Paley present two arguments for the existence of God. Aquinas defines God as omnibenevolent (all good) for his argument, and he continues in “The Five Ways” to present arguments to prove God’s existence (Rosen et al. 11). Paley, on the other hand, primarily defines God as a designer worthy of our admiration for his work (Rosen et al. 27). During class discussion, defining God involved three major qualities: omnipotence, omniscience, and omnibenevolence. Both Aquinas and Paley are attempting to prove the existence of the (Christian) God associated with these qualities. Although Aquinas’s “Cosmological Argument” and Paley’s “Argument from Design” have different premises, both have a similar logical gap in their

As a theologian and philosopher, Saint Anselm strove to prove the existence of God in reality. The bulk of his argument is found in Chapter II of Proslogium.

B. Many Christians regard reason as an enemy of the faith, as opposed to an instrument in its cultivation.

St. Anselm begins his argument by saying that God is the one that grant the ability of understanding to faith, in which an understanding insofar that has been very beneficial to him. He added that an understanding which he believes God is in fact what he believes to be. Thus, with that understanding leads to the rationale of the notion of something greater to be thought exist is an unconscionable. Anselm’s argument stresses the perspectives which to purport by presenting to those who deny the existence of God as the greatest being is self-contradictory. Therefore, the point of his argument, it is essentially crucial to realized that such a being exist. The “ontological argument by St. Anselm “is the most compelling and fascinating argument

     Anslem and Descartes’ theories both prove that there is a God and they both use some similar ideas in their premises’. For instance, they both rely on the faith that there is an idea of God; he is perfect and self evident. God could not have been conceived if there wasn’t a God. Though, Descartes says that the less perfect can not create something more perfect or better than itself, and that we are less perfect than God therefore we could not have created God. So, this proves the existence of God and an external world. On the other hand, Anslem says Existence is greater than conception and nothing greater can be conceived then God.

The debate of the existence of God had been active since before the first philosopher has pondered the question. Anselm’s Ontological Argument was introduced during the 11th century and had stood deductively valid until the 18th century. Then there are the arguments to aim disprove God, such as the Argument from Evil.

singularity there is no time and all of the laws of physics as we know

Does God exist? That question has been asked by people for centuries. Christians, Jews, and Muslims would all say that God exists. They would claim that He is the creator of all things and is of a higher being than man is. Others would claim either that God does not exist or that God is not what the Christians, Jews, and Muslims say He is. Both Anselm and Aquinas address this question: Anselm in his "Proslogion" and Aquinas in his "Summa Theologica." The opinions of Anselm and Aquinas as to the nature of God are the same, although Anselm lacks the proof to back up his claims.

Aquinas' second proof is similar to his first in that it relates to cause and effect. St. Thomas reasoned that in a world of order there is an order to all cause and effect. And , since there is a cause for the existence of all things there must be a cause that caused all things and had no cause itself. He points out that nothing in creation existed prior to itself and the causality cannot be traced back infinitely. If the efficient or first cause did not exist then nothing would exist. That first or efficient cause is God.

In the book, The Proslogion, written by Saint Anselm, we find the Ontological Argument. This argument made by Saint Anselm gives us proofs that he believes helps prove the existence of God. Anselm gives many reasons as to why the simple understanding of God can help prove that God himself exists, as well as mentioning how the idea of God cannot be thought not to exist. Though this argument has been looked at by people such as Guanilo, a monk, whose response to Anselm 's proofs was trying to say that there were flaws, there are more reasons as to why Anselm 's proofs work well with his argument. From the understanding of God existing, and the idea behind greatness Anselm 's argument is one that is strong and can work as a proof when trying

In A Discourse on the Method, Descartes attempted to prove the existence of God in a priori manner. He did not trust his own senses when trying to prove the existence of God and therefore he relied on the ontological argument. By making the same assumption made by Anselm, which was that an ontological argument assumes that existence is a predicate of God, Descartes is able to conclude that ‘God exists’ is true by definition because the subject ‘God’, who already contains all perfections, already contains the predicate – exists, which is a perfection. Although this may be perceived as a strong claim to believers, many such as Gaunilo would have disagreed. Descartes postulates his argument in the fourth part of his Discourse in order to try and prove the existence of God. One must discuss why one feels Descartes attempted to do so and exactly how convincing his claim is. However, before one can understand his claim, it is important to grasp an idea of the background that Descartes was writing from when he wrote the Discourse and the meaning of proof.

1.) Thomas Aquinas believes that humans are born with a clean slate in a state of potency and acquire knowledge through sense experiences by abstraction of the phantasms. His view on how man acquires knowledge rejects Plato’s theory that humans are born with innate species. Along with Plato’s theory of humans understanding corporeal things through innate species, Aquinas also rejects Plato’s theory that in being born with innate species, humans spend their lives recollecting their knowledge.