Re: Religious Group Files a Lawsuit Against North Carolina's Gay Marriage Ban
Already explained. But here is some more to help you out.
http://www.vorpal.us/2007/10/the-five-ways-of-st-thomas-aquinas-are-all-dead-ends/
Plus, how can the FSM or Zeus or a cadre of little green men that do not have to conform to the laws of physics or nature not be just as valid of an explanation for what Aquinas opined as proof? Afterall, he nor you have any proof that any specific god exists, let alone the one you believe in. It is just as likely that any or all gods ever imagined really have a hand in the existence of the universe.
Already explained. But here is some more to help you out.
http://www.vorpal.us/2007/10/the-five-ways-of-st-thomas-aquinas-are-all-dead-ends/
Plus, how can the FSM or Zeus or a cadre of little green men that do not have to conform to the laws of physics or nature not be just as valid of an explanation for what Aquinas opined as proof? Afterall, he nor you have any proof that any specific god exists, let alone the one you believe in. It is just as likely that any or all gods ever imagined really have a hand in the existence of the universe.
1. When Aquinas and other classical philosophers used the word "motion", they mean change. Thus new discoveries regarding the nature of physical movement are not invalidating.
2. When particles and antiparticles are created, they do not come from nothing, rather they require energy to create them, and when they mutually annihilate, they produce energy. If the classical philosophers had known of modern physics regarding energy, they would termed it matter for philosophical purposes, since it is physical by nature, and is thrush of immaterial or spiritual.
Thus it remains that something cannot come from nothing. This also disproves the article's claim that things cannot be created by other things (the article makes a strawman implication, as classical philosophy agrees that matter cannot actually be created by other created beings, but can only be rearranged), as particles and antiparticles can create energy, and vice versa.
Only created things require a cause, thus something which existed forever would not need a cause. The five ways aren't it intended to prove Christianity specifically, but only classic monotheism. Thus it is sufficient to show an eternal unchanging being as the cause of everything else.
Regarding the suggestion that the universe could have existed forever, this is not possible as it would require infinite time. Infinite time is impossible since it would require a countable infinity, which cannot really exist. In other words, if there had been a moment that was infinitely long ago, now would not exist as it would never be possible to actually get from then to now.
3. The problem is that in the Demiurge the monster did have other created things, such as the cloud. Plus his memory was not eternal, thus he should have known that he was contingent, since he didn't exist at some point.
In any case, the reason why there must be a necessary being is because if they're weren't then it would be possible for nothing to exist at some point, in which case nothing would exist now, which is absurd.
4. The classical philosophers were aware of decay, they knew it was a necessary result of a thing being subject to time. However if there were a spiritual benign not subject to time, it would not be subject to decay.
5. As the article admitted, there are things, such as rocks, that clearly lack minds.
Zeus isn't eternal and unchangeable.