> Aquinas had a proof of the existence of God in five ways.
> I can't recall the five ways, but one of them had to do with
> the need for a prime mover, and God was that prime mover.
> My question to those of you who know the five ways is whether
> it is really fair to call them a proof.
> A proof should be quite definitive, and it seems impossible to
> do so with concepts of the existence or non existence of God.
"God" is just a name for "All That Is", or the "Source". If you re-phrase the question by substituting "Higher Power", then many people, including myself, have ample proof of this from their own experience. And that experience is not transferable, except by a true mystic.
|Aquinas proof of God in Five Ways||141||Citizen Attorney||22-Feb-07 01:41|
|Re: Aquinas proof of God in Five Ways||112||Ghia||22-Feb-07 02:14|
|Here are the Five Ways||100||Citizen Attorney||22-Feb-07 02:52|
|Re: Here are the Five Ways||96||Raja||22-Feb-07 21:14|
|Re: Here are the Five Ways||88||Avatar||13-Jul-07 20:46|
|Re: Here are the Five Ways||95||Raja||13-Jul-07 22:16|
|Re: Here are the Five Ways||89||Joyeuse||05-Mar-08 08:23|
|Physics proof of God in one way :)))))))||94||Astikapati||22-Feb-07 03:39|
|Re: Physics proof of God in one way :)))))))||64||Ghia||22-Feb-07 14:55|
|Re: Physics proof of God in one way :)))))))||112||Farseeker||22-Feb-07 22:27|
|Is the Universe digital? I'm not buying that.||85||come on pilgrim||23-Feb-07 01:17|
|Re: Aquinas proof of God in Five Ways||106||David L||22-Feb-07 21:34|
|Re: Aquinas proof of God in Five Ways||93||Farseeker||22-Feb-07 22:23|
|All Things Desire||85||Raja||04-Mar-08 21:30|