Excert from 'Summa Thealogica'

Moderators: Adder, Desolous

Excert from 'Summa Thealogica' 11 Sep 2007 21:24 #6927

  • Twsoundsoff
  • Twsoundsoff's Avatar
Excert from Summa Theologica, by St. Thomas Aquinas


THE EXISTENCE OF GOD (THREE ARTICLES)

Because the chief aim of sacred doctrine is to teach the knowledge of God, not only as He is in Himself, but also as He is the beginning of things and their last end, and especially of rational creatures, as is clear from what has been already said, therefore, in our endeavor to expound this science, we shall treat: (1) Of God; (2) Of the rational creature's advance towards God; (3) Of Christ, Who as man, is our way to God.

In treating of God there will be a threefold division, for we shall consider: (1) Whatever concerns the Divine Essence; (2) Whatever concerns the distinctions of Persons; (3) Whatever concerns the procession of creatures from Him.

Concerning the Divine Essence, we must consider: (1) Whether God exists? (2) The manner of His existence, or, rather, what is NOT the manner of His existence; (3) Whatever concerns His operations---namely, His knowledge, will, power.

Concerning the first, there are three points of inquiry:

(1) Whether the proposition \"God exists\" is self-evident?

(2) Whether it is demonstrable?

(3) Whether God exists?

Whether the existence of God is self-evident?

Objection 1: It seems that the existence of God is self-evident. Now those things are said to be self-evident to us the knowledge of which is naturally implanted in us, as we can see in regard to first principles. But as Damascene says (De Fide Orth. i, 1,3), \"the knowledge of God is naturally implanted in all.\" Therefore the existence of God is self-evident.

Objection 2: Further, those things are said to be self-evident which are known as soon as the terms are known, which the Philosopher (1 Poster. iii) says is true of the first principles of demonstration. Thus, when the nature of a whole and of a part is known, it is at once recognized that every whole is greater than its part. But as soon as the signification of the word \"God\" is understood, it is at once seen that God exists. For by this word is signified that thing than which nothing greater can be conceived. But that which exists actually and mentally is greater than that which exists only mentally. Therefore, since as soon as the word \"God\" is understood it exists mentally, it also follows that it exists actually. Therefore the proposition \"God exists\" is self-evident.

Objection 3: Further, the existence of truth is self-evident. For whoever denies the existence of truth grants that truth does not exist: and, if truth does not exist, then the proposition \"Truth does not exist\" is true: and if there is anything true, there must be truth. But God is truth itself: \"I am the way, the truth, and the life\" (Jn. 14:6) Therefore \"God exists\" is self-evident.

On the contrary, No one can mentally admit the opposite of what is self-evident; as the Philosopher (Metaph. iv, lect. vi) states concerning the first principles of demonstration. But the opposite of the proposition \"God is\" can be mentally admitted: \"The fool said in his heart, There is no God\" (Ps. 52:1). Therefore, that God exists is not self-evident.

I answer that, A thing can be self-evident in either of two ways: on the one hand, self-evident in itself, though not to us; on the other, self-evident in itself, and to us. A proposition is self-evident because the predicate is included in the essence of the subject, as \"Man is an animal,\" for animal is contained in the essence of man. If, therefore the essence of the predicate and subject be known to all, the proposition will be self-evident to all; as is clear with regard to the first principles of demonstration, the terms of which are common things that no one is ignorant of, such as being and non-being, whole and part, and such like. If, however, there are some to whom the essence of the predicate and subject is unknown, the proposition will be self-evident in itself, but not to those who do not know the meaning of the predicate and subject of the proposition. Therefore, it happens, as Boethius says (Hebdom., the title of which is: \"Whether all that is, is good\"), \"that there are some mental concepts self-evident only to the learned, as that incorporeal substances are not in space.\" Therefore I say that this proposition, \"God exists,\" of itself is self-evident, for the predicate is the same as the subject, because God is His own existence as will be hereafter shown (Q[3], A[4]). Now because we do not know the essence of God, the proposition is not self-evident to us; but needs to be demonstrated by things that are more known to us, though less known in their nature---namely, by effects.

Reply to Objection 1: To know that God exists in a general and confused way is implanted in us by nature, inasmuch as God is man's beatitude. For man naturally desires happiness, and what is naturally desired by man must be naturally known to him. This, however, is not to know absolutely that God exists; just as to know that someone is approaching is not the same as to know that Peter is approaching, even though it is Peter who is approaching; for many there are who imagine that man's perfect good which is happiness, consists in riches, and others in pleasures, and others in something else.

Reply to Objection 2: Perhaps not everyone who hears this word \"God\" understands it to signify something than which nothing greater can be thought, seeing that some have believed God to be a body. Yet, granted that everyone understands that by this word \"God\" is signified something than which nothing greater can be thought, nevertheless, it does not therefore follow that he understands that what the word signifies exists actually, but only that it exists mentally. Nor can it be argued that it actually exists, unless it be admitted that there actually exists something than which nothing greater can be thought; and this precisely is not admitted by those who hold that God does not exist.

Reply to Objection 3: The existence of truth in general is self-evident but the existence of a Primal Truth is not self-evident to us.



Whether it can be demonstrated that God exists?

Objection 1: It seems that the existence of God cannot be demonstrated. For it is an article of faith that God exists. But what is of faith cannot be demonstrated, because a demonstration produces scientific knowledge; whereas faith is of the unseen (Heb. 11:1). Therefore it cannot be demonstrated that God exists.

Objection 2: Further, the essence is the middle term of demonstration. But we cannot know in what God's essence consists, but solely in what it does not consist; as Damascene says (De Fide Orth. i, 4). Therefore we cannot demonstrate that God exists.

Objection 3: Further, if the existence of God were demonstrated, this could only be from His effects. But His effects are not proportionate to Him, since He is infinite and His effects are finite; and between the finite and infinite there is no proportion. Therefore, since a cause cannot be demonstrated by an effect not proportionate to it, it seems that the existence of God cannot be demonstrated.

On the contrary, The Apostle says: \"The invisible things of Him are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made\" (Rom. 1:20). But this would not be unless the existence of God could be demonstrated through the things that are made; for the first thing we must know of anything is whether it exists.

I answer that, Demonstration can be made in two ways: One is through the cause, and is called \"a priori,\" and this is to argue from what is prior absolutely. The other is through the effect, and is called a demonstration \"a posteriori\"; this is to argue from what is prior relatively only to us. When an effect is better known to us than its cause, from the effect we proceed to the knowledge of the cause. And from every effect the existence of its proper cause can be demonstrated, so long as its effects are better known to us; because since every effect depends upon its cause, if the effect exists, the cause must pre-exist. Hence the existence of God, in so far as it is not self-evident to us, can be demonstrated from those of His effects which are known to us.

Reply to Objection 1: The existence of God and other like truths about God, which can be known by natural reason, are not articles of faith, but are preambles to the articles; for faith presupposes natural knowledge, even as grace presupposes nature, and perfection supposes something that can be perfected. Nevertheless, there is nothing to prevent a man, who cannot grasp a proof, accepting, as a matter of faith, something which in itself is capable of being scientifically known and demonstrated.

Reply to Objection 2: When the existence of a cause is demonstrated from an effect, this effect takes the place of the definition of the cause in proof of the cause's existence. This is especially the case in regard to God, because, in order to prove the existence of anything, it is necessary to accept as a middle term the meaning of the word, and not its essence, for the question of its essence follows on the question of its existence. Now the names given to God are derived from His effects; consequently, in demonstrating the existence of God from His effects, we may take for the middle term the meaning of the word \"God\".

Reply to Objection 3: From effects not proportionate to the cause no perfect knowledge of that cause can be obtained. Yet from every effect the existence of the cause can be clearly demonstrated, and so we can demonstrate the existence of God from His effects; though from them we cannot perfectly know God as He is in His essence.



Whether God exists?

Objection 1: It seems that God does not exist; because if one of two contraries be infinite, the other would be altogether destroyed. But the word \"God\" means that He is infinite goodness. If, therefore, God existed, there would be no evil discoverable; but there is evil in the world. Therefore God does not exist.

Objection 2: Further, it is superfluous to suppose that what can be accounted for by a few principles has been produced by many. But it seems that everything we see in the world can be accounted for by other principles, supposing God did not exist. For all natural things can be reduced to one principle which is nature; and all voluntary things can be reduced to one principle which is human reason, or will. Therefore there is no need to suppose God's existence.

On the contrary, It is said in the person of God: \"I am Who am.\" (Ex. 3:14)

I answer that, The existence of God can be proved in five ways.

The first and more manifest way is the argument from motion. It is certain, and evident to our senses, that in the world some things are in motion. Now whatever is in motion is put in motion by another, for nothing can be in motion except it is in potentiality to that towards which it is in motion; whereas a thing moves inasmuch as it is in act. For motion is nothing else than the reduction of something from potentiality to actuality. But nothing can be reduced from potentiality to actuality, except by something in a state of actuality. Thus that which is actually hot, as fire, makes wood, which is potentially hot, to be actually hot, and thereby moves and changes it. Now it is not possible that the same thing should be at once in actuality and potentiality in the same respect, but only in different respects. For what is actually hot cannot simultaneously be potentially hot; but it is simultaneously potentially cold. It is therefore impossible that in the same respect and in the same way a thing should be both mover and moved, i.e. that it should move itself. Therefore, whatever is in motion must be put in motion by another. If that by which it is put in motion be itself put in motion, then this also must needs be put in motion by another, and that by another again. But this cannot go on to infinity, because then there would be no first mover, and, consequently, no other mover; seeing that subsequent movers move only inasmuch as they are put in motion by the first mover; as the staff moves only because it is put in motion by the hand. Therefore it is necessary to arrive at a first mover, put in motion by no other; and this everyone understands to be God.

The second way is from the nature of the efficient cause. In the world of sense we find there is an order of efficient causes. There is no case known (neither is it, indeed, possible) in which a thing is found to be the efficient cause of itself; for so it would be prior to itself, which is impossible. Now in efficient causes it is not possible to go on to infinity, because in all efficient causes following in order, the first is the cause of the intermediate cause, and the intermediate is the cause of the ultimate cause, whether the intermediate cause be several, or only one. Now to take away the cause is to take away the effect. Therefore, if there be no first cause among efficient causes, there will be no ultimate, nor any intermediate cause. But if in efficient causes it is possible to go on to infinity, there will be no first efficient cause, neither will there be an ultimate effect, nor any intermediate efficient causes; all of which is plainly false. Therefore it is necessary to admit a first efficient cause, to which everyone gives the name of God.

The third way is taken from possibility and necessity, and runs thus. We find in nature things that are possible to be and not to be, since they are found to be generated, and to corrupt, and consequently, they are possible to be and not to be. But it is impossible for these always to exist, for that which is possible not to be at some time is not. Therefore, if everything is possible not to be, then at one time there could have been nothing in existence. Now if this were true, even now there would be nothing in existence, because that which does not exist only begins to exist by something already existing. Therefore, if at one time nothing was in existence, it would have been impossible for anything to have begun to exist; and thus even now nothing would be in existence---which is absurd. Therefore, not all beings are merely possible, but there must exist something the existence of which is necessary. But every necessary thing either has its necessity caused by another, or not. Now it is impossible to go on to infinity in necessary things which have their necessity caused by another, as has been already proved in regard to efficient causes. Therefore we cannot but postulate the existence of some being having of itself its own necessity, and not receiving it from another, but rather causing in others their necessity. This all men speak of as God.

The fourth way is taken from the gradation to be found in things. Among beings there are some more and some less good, true, noble and the like. But \"more\" and \"less\" are predicated of different things, according as they resemble in their different ways something which is the maximum, as a thing is said to be hotter according as it more nearly resembles that which is hottest; so that there is something which is truest, something best, something noblest and, consequently, something which is uttermost being; for those things that are greatest in truth are greatest in being, as it is written in Metaph. ii. Now the maximum in any genus is the cause of all in that genus; as fire, which is the maximum heat, is the cause of all hot things. Therefore there must also be something which is to all beings the cause of their being, goodness, and every other perfection; and this we call God.

The fifth way is taken from the governance of the world. We see that things which lack intelligence, such as natural bodies, act for an end, and this is evident from their acting always, or nearly always, in the same way, so as to obtain the best result. Hence it is plain that not fortuitously, but designedly, do they achieve their end. Now whatever lacks intelligence cannot move towards an end, unless it be directed by some being endowed with knowledge and intelligence; as the arrow is shot to its mark by the archer. Therefore some intelligent being exists by whom all natural things are directed to their end; and this being we call God.

Reply to Objection 1: As Augustine says (Enchiridion xi): \"Since God is the highest good, He would not allow any evil to exist in His works, unless His omnipotence and goodness were such as to bring good even out of evil.\" This is part of the infinite goodness of God, that He should allow evil to exist, and out of it produce good.

Reply to Objection 2: Since nature works for a determinate end under the direction of a higher agent, whatever is done by nature must needs be traced back to God, as to its first cause. So also whatever is done voluntarily must also be traced back to some higher cause other than human reason or will, since these can change or fail; for all things that are changeable and capable of defect must be traced back to an immovable and self-necessary first principle, as was shown in the body of the Article.
Latest Posts Comments Articles
    • TOTJO Embroidered Patches? (Last post by Kamizu)
    • Black and olive green are not apart of the ACU color scheme nor are they on traditional subdued army patches for that uniform. You said "match the uniform pictured " so I did. If you want this one (which is in two shades of gray), it's ready to go. If you want one in black and OD green, get on the waiting list when it comes. Simple :)
    • Tai chi chuan for begginers (Last post by MrBruno)
    • Quote: But how do you know you've mastered it? What if you went to somebody who knows it and they were like: "you've learned this all wrong!" ? Unfortunately I think I run the risk of learning some things wrong, but the search for a good teacher continues. Unfortunately many things here in Brazil are limited and if not for this material or many others that we have here in the temple, maybe I had not already learned much of what I learned and made a difference in my life. The difference is that here I am counting on good teachers. :lol:
    • Your Cave of Evil (Last post by MrBruno)
    • Quote: Very good so like said in previous posts. We regain our strenght and return to the cave in certain periods of our life? During our lives we see many nightmares, not all of us managed to overcome, then sooner or later you come back to find them, until you overcome
    • Is avoiding certain food help you achieve better M... (Last post by MrBruno)
    • From what I have learned about Buddhism in Bushijin temple, you have to avoid anything that takes their concentration or change your perception. I will give examples: alcohol changes the perception, drugs also being hungry draws its concentration, overeating will cause discomfort that will take your concentration and so on. Personally when I meditate I make sure that all my physiological needs are well (all), I feed, brush my teeth, go to the bathroom, etc. In doing so I guarantee that nothing will hinder me or inwardly or outwardly.
    • Wary of old habits - confused (Last post by MrBruno)
    • I have also been a compulsive gambler and I have many friends who live video games.Previously he spent days without sleep, without seeing sunlight, without leaving my room. Over time this was going on. Everything in excess is bad, even things that we think are good; when I was a kid my mother taught me one thing; all we can draw a good lesson, so whenever I play video games or see a movie, I try to take something good, something to teach me and make me grow. Try to find a balance to all situations and always try to take a good lesson of all, you will realize that video games are more than just fun. I believe a good solution to eliminate bad habits and adopt other habits that are better and that you have fun at the same time, they make you happy. I changed a little bit of video games with a good book
    • Do you believe in psychic abilities and/or magic/k... (Last post by den385)
    • Short answer: yes Long answer: I believe in evolution and hard work through millions of years can make it happen. There is also progress which can boost it. I am contempt with just sensing the Force - the Living and the Unifying. Energy work has great self-hypnosis capabilities and is of great psychological help - both in internal work and in socialization. Controlling or altering the Force like in franchise - there is little need for that now other than for the lulz.
    • The Hidden Life Within (Last post by Loudzoo)
    • [attachment] “My artwork shows, with the language of sculpture, the essence of matter and tries to reveal with the work, the hidden life within.” –Giuseppe Penone From the MOMO website: "In The Hidden Life Within, Italian artist Guiseppe Penone carves out a young tree with an older tree to reveal its past, showing us what once grew inside so that it may now "live in the present." Penone arrives at these forms by carving the tree trunk leaving the knots in place until they emerge as limbs, revealing the sapling within. Inspired by the quiet slowness of growth in the natural world, the artist asks us to take a moment to stop and think about the concept of time and how there's a common vital force in all living things." [attachment] [attachment]
    • Examples of Deep, Knightly-Virtuous Truths, Learne... (Last post by OB1Shinobi)
    • I must not fear. Fear is the mind-killer. Fear is the little-death that brings total obliteration. I will face my fear. I will permit it to pass over me and through me. And when it has gone past I will turn the inner eye to see its path. Where the fear has gone there will be nothing. Only I will remain. That which submits rules. ... The willow submits to the wind and prospers until one day it is many willows — a wall against the wind. This is the willow's purpose. The mystery of life isn't a problem to solve, but a reality to experience. - Mood? What has mood to do with it? You fight when the necessity arises — no matter the mood! Mood's a thing for cattle or making love or playing the baliset. It's not for fighting. - Think you of the fact that a deaf person cannot hear. Then, what deafness may we not all possess? What senses do we lack that we cannot see and cannot hear another world all around us? - Muad'Dib learned rapidly because his first training was in how to learn. And the first lesson of all was the basic trust that he could learn. It's shocking to find how many people do not believe they can learn, and how many more believe learning to be difficult. Muad'Dib knew that every experience carries its lesson. - ----- Frank Herbert DUNE
    • Astral Projection (Last post by Sven One)
    • Interesting. Makes me want to be mindful I was attempting it the other night and I kept hearing footsteps and a shadow of a beast. I immediately came out of it...fear cropped me I was ashamed I normally control my fear, anger, ect well it tough situations but, its creepy.
    • Perspectives: Jedi vs. Sith (Last post by MrBruno)
    • My take on the Sith is as follows. The Jedi avoid the intense emotions, chaos toward a middle way where there is coexistence of all things. The Sith are passionate about everything they do and what they want, they guide the strength of his feelings for something good and positive; I will give an example. In Star Wars Episode II, Anakin sees his dead mother in his arms, weak through the torture of sand people; at that time he kills all the people sand seeking revenge fueled by feelings of hatred, but he could have used his sand people of hatred and realized that killing them would not bring his mother back and returned to his duties. He could feel an uncontrollable hatred of the Sand people and a terrible pain for the loss of his mother and used it all to become a better rider, used all these feelings as fuel to use in their journey and in their training. Seeing this instance I think Jedi and Sith are no different, both seek a middle path, Jedi on one side, and the other Sith, but all converging to the center.
    • Meditation on Death? (Last post by Aqua)
    • Quote: As it stands right now, two members of my family are nearing their passing. My Papa just turned 86 and he is in treatment for bone cancer. He looks sickly, thin and struggling to move as well as he used to. The second is my dog Candice who is an 8 year old Boxer. She has many lumps around her body (may or may not be cancerous), and she has recently been favouring one leg and now limps around. I know that their time here is limited, but I want to be able to accept each of their deaths as they are the first losses I have experienced in my family (actually my last dog died when I was in grade 10, so the first human loss). I know it's going to hit me hard and I want to be prepared. Does anyone have any suggestions on how to do this by meditating or by other means? I know that the Code says that their is no death but there is the Force (or Death, yet the Force) but I know it will still be hard to accept it. Death as energy flow in this world, part of the force. If you can not accept, you should not try to force yourself to accept it. Take the time you need, if you find yourself not able to accept it, could you accept or tolerate that part of yourself? Minding about that what is not accessible anymore can be difficult. But minding about that what can not leave our thoughts can be difficult to. :blush:
    • jedi haiku (Last post by Alexandre Orion)
    • Grey are all actors ; Of many hues are the Acts ... ... And what of the Stage ? ;)

There are 488 visitors, 12 guests and 49 members online (3  in chat): Akkarin, Br. John, Sarus, steamboat28, baru, Jestor, ren, Joe, candymanyyyy, Connor L., Adder, Desolous, Reliah, Proteus, Luthien, V-Tog, isisinabi, Alexandre Orion, Rosalyn J, PatrickB, Whyte Horse, Llama Su, Archon, Kamizu, Edan, Avalonslight, carlos.martinez3, Cabur Senaar, SeventhSL, Goken, Aqua, focone oceanlast, Exarchias, Rocda, OB1Shinobi, Loudzoo, Krieger, Adi Vas, Tellahane, herbalc, Eynar, Kenji, Mikhael, rwriter, The Polish Winged Hussar, Katash Weivorki, Zachariah, Spiral, Twelve, Ciardha, Kyr.

Follow Us