Farsight one Posted June 4, 2008 Share Posted June 4, 2008 Question: Many atheists criticize believers for explaining something they don't understand with basically "God did it". How is that any different from an atheist basically saying "science doesn't understand it yet" when presented with such inexplicable phenomena as eucharistic miracles, Marian apparitions, possesion, levitation, etc? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
puellapaschalis Posted June 4, 2008 Share Posted June 4, 2008 [quote name='StColette' post='1556331' date='Jun 4 2008, 12:28 AM']"Could you please give an answer/explanation disproving the Five Proofs of St. Thomas Aquinas?"[/quote] All of them? I read an account once that refuted the first cause and first mover arguments by saying that there's nothing stopping the chain of causes/movers going back endlessly into time. Not sure how someone would square this with the Big Bang though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Farsight one Posted June 4, 2008 Share Posted June 4, 2008 [quote name='puellapaschalis' post='1557087' date='Jun 4 2008, 05:03 AM']All of them? I read an account once that refuted the first cause and first mover arguments by saying that there's nothing stopping the chain of causes/movers going back endlessly into time. Not sure how someone would square this with the Big Bang though.[/quote]I've heard people say that before, but it's not a refutation of those arguments, but rather simply ignoring important tenents of them. Aquinas explains quite well why there MUST be a beginning. Ofhanded dismissal of his explanation is not a refutation. Simply stating that there doesn't have to be a beginning is not an argument. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ziggamafu Posted June 4, 2008 Share Posted June 4, 2008 wikipedia presents some fairly standard atheistic complaints against the five proofs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StColette Posted June 4, 2008 Share Posted June 4, 2008 [quote name='Farsight one' post='1557088' date='Jun 4 2008, 05:10 AM']I've heard people say that before, but it's not a refutation of those arguments, but rather simply ignoring important tenents of them. Aquinas explains quite well why there MUST be a beginning. Ofhanded dismissal of his explanation is not a refutation. Simply stating that there doesn't have to be a beginning is not an argument.[/quote] Correct! Someone I worked with was an athiest. I discussed the 5 Proofs with him and he couldn't refute them. After working with him for 2 yrs he started coming to the conclusion that there had to be a Creator, that had no beginning or end. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
puellapaschalis Posted June 4, 2008 Share Posted June 4, 2008 [quote name='StColette' post='1557181' date='Jun 4 2008, 04:35 PM']Correct! Someone I worked with was an athiest. I discussed the 5 Proofs with him and he couldn't refute them. After working with him for 2 yrs he started coming to the conclusion that there had to be a Creator, that had no beginning or end.[/quote] Right, time to dig out my Summa of the Summa.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StColette Posted June 4, 2008 Share Posted June 4, 2008 [quote name='puellapaschalis' post='1557529' date='Jun 4 2008, 01:22 PM']Right, time to dig out my Summa of the Summa....[/quote] lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
puellapaschalis Posted June 4, 2008 Share Posted June 4, 2008 [quote name='StColette' post='1557530' date='Jun 4 2008, 08:24 PM']lol[/quote] Yes, just sit and laugh! I've an awful feeling it's in another country. Drat it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Madtown Sem. Posted June 4, 2008 Share Posted June 4, 2008 Why is there something instead of nothing? Why is there existence at all? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StColette Posted June 4, 2008 Share Posted June 4, 2008 [quote name='puellapaschalis' post='1557574' date='Jun 4 2008, 01:58 PM']Yes, just sit and laugh! I've an awful feeling it's in another country. Drat it.[/quote] You can always just read the online version of the Summa Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jkaands Posted June 5, 2008 Share Posted June 5, 2008 For serious discussions on theological and philosophical issues related to belief, including atheism, go to the [b] Internet Infidels Discussion board,[/b] the IIDB, at: [url="http://iidb.infidels.org/vbb/index.php"]http://iidb.infidels.org/vbb/index.php[/url] --be warned. These are smart folks and a lot of serious discussion goes on here. There are also formal, go-by-the-rules debates. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ardillacid Posted June 6, 2008 Share Posted June 6, 2008 [quote name='Farsight one' post='1556730' date='Jun 3 2008, 09:58 PM']Question: Many atheists criticize believers for explaining something they don't understand with basically "God did it". How is that any different from an atheist basically saying "science doesn't understand it yet" when presented with such inexplicable phenomena as eucharistic miracles, Marian apparitions, possesion, levitation, etc?[/quote] I would think that they would say that there is in fact a scientific explanation, that we just don't know it yet. [quote name='puellapaschalis' post='1557087' date='Jun 4 2008, 05:03 AM']All of them? I read an account once that refuted the first cause and first mover arguments by saying that there's nothing stopping the chain of causes/movers going back endlessly into time. Not sure how someone would square this with the Big Bang though.[/quote] Just a series of big bangs and big crunches in both directions i s'pose Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Galloglasses Posted June 16, 2008 Share Posted June 16, 2008 (edited) Here's one question I'd ask. "You are an athiest. Ergo you do not believe in God without evidence. You demand evidence for our belief in God, we put forward miracles, you develop long winded and increasingly irrational string of events to explain away such miracles. Yet an independent scientific research lab stationed at Lourdes France, has been creating plethora of such excuses for the thousands of cures claimed there every year. Yet there are 67 cases were the cures are completely unexplainable by science. I put forward these cases as evidence. Now explain." Edited June 16, 2008 by Galloglasses Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rckllnknny Posted June 18, 2008 Share Posted June 18, 2008 (edited) i would presumptuously inquire, with reference to the awaiting awakenings..... 'bet you cant wait, huh???' Edited June 18, 2008 by rckllnknny Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rckllnknny Posted June 18, 2008 Share Posted June 18, 2008 [quote name='Galloglasses' post='1572796' date='Jun 16 2008, 01:26 PM']Here's one question I'd ask. "You are an athiest. Ergo you do not believe in God without evidence. You demand evidence for our belief in God, we put forward miracles, you develop long winded and increasingly irrational string of events to explain away such miracles. Yet an independent scientific research lab stationed at Lourdes France, has been creating plethora of such excuses for the thousands of cures claimed there every year. Yet there are 67 cases were the cures are completely unexplainable by science. I put forward these cases as evidence. Now explain."[/quote] not to debate...but before i knew God was real. i couldnt believe. i dint have anyone to teach me.. to show me. i always said i wish i could believe. but i couldnt until it was my place in time... but it might depend on your definition of atheist.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now