Reply to thread

No; they are based on the understanding that an infinite regress (in the sense of a regress that has no beginning, rather than one that has no end) is impossible.




As I've said before (several times now), the Unmoved Mover argument is not a temporal argument: Aquinas specifically rejected the notion that it was even knowable whether or not the universe had a beginning. It is an ontological argument: A proof that God's will is all that sustains the universe in each and every moment.


As far as people asking why God decided to destroy their house with a tornado, that is a Protestant superstition borne of their general ignorance and the terrible-to-non-existent efforts their churches make to catechize them. Most of Apathy's vapid stereotypes actually do apply to the way they see God. And they stem from an explicitly modern, irrational rejection of the classical Aristotelian-Thomist philosophical tradition, rooted, ultimately, in the conceptualist voluntarism and fideism of Ockham.


Back
Top