Kreeft’s Case for God – Part 17: Analysis of Argument #4
MOVING ON TO KREEFT’S VERSION In Peter Kreeft’s case for God, in Chapter 3 of Handbook of Christian Apologetics (hereafter: HCA), his fourth argument is based on the fourth way of Aquinas. Kreeft’s Argument #4 is the Argument from Degrees of Perfection. Because Aquinas’s version of this argument is clearer and more straightforward than Kreeft’s … Kreeft’s Case for God – Part 17: Analysis of Argument #4
Kreeft’s Case for God – Part 15: Three More Thomist Arguments
EVALUATION OF KREEFT’S CASE SO FAR In Part 1 through Part 8, I reviewed the last ten arguments in Peter Kreeft’s case for God in Chapter 3 his Handbook of Christian Apologetics (hereafter: HCA), and I concluded in Part 9 that they provided ZERO evidence for the existence of God: Of the last ten arguments in Kreeft’s … Kreeft’s Case for God – Part 15: Three More Thomist Arguments
Geisler’s Five Ways
Norman Geisler is a Thomist. His case for the existence of God is basically a simplified, clarified, and somewhat modified version of the case for God made by Thomas Aqinas in Summa Theologica. Geisler borrows the basic logical structure of the case for God made by Aquinas, as well as some of the specific sub-arguments … Geisler’s Five Ways
Aquinas’ Argument for the Existence of God – Part 6
A key part of Aquinas’ argument for the existence of God in Summa Theologica is found in Question 14, Article 1: “Whether There Is Knowledge in God?”. In that article, Aquinas argues for the conclusion that “In God there exists the most perfect knowledge.” The word “God” here is a misleading translation, and I take … Aquinas’ Argument for the Existence of God – Part 6
Aquinas’ Argument for the Existence of God – Part 5
In order to prove that God exists, Aquinas must prove that there exists a being that has ALL of the following divine attributes: I don’t believe that Aquinas actually proves that there is a being with even just ONE of these key divine attributes, so I certainly don’t believe that Aquinas proves that there is a being that possesses … Aquinas’ Argument for the Existence of God – Part 5
Aquinas’ Argument for the Existence of God – Part 4
NOTE: I began to reconstruct Aquinas’ argument for the existence of God in the post I Don’t Care – Part 4, and continued that effort in I Don’t Care – Part 5, and I Don’t Care – Part 6. I am changing the title of this series to better reflect the content, so I … Aquinas’ Argument for the Existence of God – Part 4
I Don’t Care – Part 6
Aquinas is often thought of as a rigourously logical and systematic thinker. This is only half-true. There is a good deal of vaguness, ambiguity, and illogical thinking in his book Summa Theologica, as far as I can see. Here is a cautionary note from a philosopher who is an expert on Aquinas: From the concept of … I Don’t Care – Part 6
I Don’t Care – Part 5
The famous Five Ways passage by Aquinas in Summa Theologica does not contain five arguments for the existence of God. Rather, it contains ZERO arguments for the existence of God. There is actually only one argument for the existence of God in the Summa Theologica, and the reasoning in the Five Ways passage only represents a … I Don’t Care – Part 5
I Don’t Care – Part 4
I have previously argued that, contrary to popular opinion, there are ZERO arguments for the existence of God in the famous Five Ways passage by Aquinas in Summa Theologica (Part I, Question 2, Article 3: Whether God Exists?). Now I’m getting into what I do care about, namely the ACTUAL argument(s) that Aquinas gives to prove the … I Don’t Care – Part 4
I Don’t Care – Part 3
According to the Christian philosopher Peter Kreeft, and many others, Aquinas gives five different arguments for the existence of God. In the Handbook of Christian Apologetics (IVP, 1994; hereafter: HCA) by Peter Kreeft and Ronald Tacelli, there is a chapter that lays out twenty different arguments for the existence of God, and the first five arguments … I Don’t Care – Part 3