If you're enjoying this video, we think you'll love our new SERIES on this topic! kzread.info/dash/bejne/ooCLssiwnMKxmpc.html

@PirateRadioPodcasts

Жыл бұрын

thx! Meanwhile: Q - Exactly, WHICH God exists? ODIN? THOR? SHIVA? HADES? MARS? SET, etc?

@rmt3589

Жыл бұрын

@@PirateRadioPodcasts יהוה

@YeshuaisnotJesus

Жыл бұрын

Lying on KZread is easy.

@John777Revelation

Жыл бұрын

For millennia, connotations of the word "God" have become so deteriorated. The terms Consciousness / Mind / Intelligence seem more relevant for these types of discussions. It seems that the concept of God is not experimentally testable. However, evidence for the effects of Consciousness / Mind / Intelligence are scientifically demonstrable. The illogical, irrational, and unreasonable position of claiming that there is No Universal Mind / Consciousness / Intelligence (i.e. Atheism): The fallacy is the assumption that something is true (i.e. Universal Mind / Consciousness / Intelligence does not exist) unless proven otherwise. The Claimant making a negative claim (i.e. Universal Mind / Consciousness / Intelligence does not exist) cannot logically, rationally, and reasonably prove nonexistence. Because, for a Claimant to know that X does not exist would require the Claimant to possess 100% knowledge of all things with 100% certainty and 100% accuracy (i.e. omniscience). Even mainstream secular scientists claim that approx. 95% of the Universe is still unknown (i.e. Dark Energy and Dark Matter). Of the remaining 5% of the Universe, only 0.0035% exists within the visible light spectrum which the human eye is capable of observing. Moreover, of all that is made of atoms and capable of being observed in this "Material" universe, 99.999999999% is actually empty space (i.e. "Non-material"). Therefore, there is much, much more that humanity does not know about the Universe and Reality than it does know. Based on just this information, the position of claiming to be Atheist is shown to be illogical, irrational and unreasonable. *_“… Everyone who is seriously engaged in the pursuit of science becomes convinced that the laws of nature manifest the existence of a spirit vastly superior to that of men, and one in the face of which we with our modest powers must feel humble.”_* Albert Einstein (1879 - 1955), founder of modern physics (Theory of Relativity inter alia) and 1921 Nobel prize winner *_“All matter originates and exists only by virtue of a force which brings the particle of an atom to vibration and holds this most minute solar system of the atom together. We must assume behind this force the existence of a conscious and intelligent mind (i.e. Observer). This mind is the matrix of all matter.”_* Max Plank (the Father of Quantum Physics) Modern scientific discoveries in Genetics (i.e. biology) have shown that functional / coded / digital Information (i.e. DNA code) is at the core of All Biological Systems. Without functional / coded / digital information, there is No biology. The only known source (i.e. cause) in the universe that has been Observed (i.e. Scientific Method) in nature to be capable of producing functional / coded / digital information, such as that found even in the most primitive biological systems, is mind / consciousness / intelligence. The fact that DNA / genes (biological coded information) exists at all shows that a Consciousness-'Intelligence-Mind' is involved in the initial introduction and subsequent propagation of living systems. Un-directed random material natural processes have never been observed in nature or experimentally demonstrated to be capable of producing Functional / Coded / Digital information such as that required for biological systems, even at the most primitive levels of biological life. *_"Language: All Digital communications require a formal language, which in this context consists of all the information that the sender and receiver of the digital communication must both possess, in advance, in order for the communication to be successful."_* (Wikipedia: Digital Data) Inherent in DNA is language. Language is scientifically proven to be the product of only Mind/ Consciousness / Intelligence. Laws of the Universe exist Independent of anyone's personal beliefs in the existence of the Laws of the Universe. Just as man-made laws govern society globally, Universal Laws govern the entire Universe. Un-directed random material natural processes have never been observed in nature or experimentally demonstrated to be capable of producing any form of laws. As scientifically confirmed, non-material laws are the product of only Mind / Consciousness / Intelligence. The “World’s Most Notorious Atheist” and World’s Icon and Champion Advocate for Atheism for over 50 years, Antony Flew, finally concluded, *_“I now believe that the universe was brought into existence by an infinite Intelligence. I believe that this universe’s intricate laws manifest what scientists have called the Mind of God. I believe that life and reproduction originate in a divine Source. Why do I believe this, given that I expounded and defended atheism for more than a half century? The short answer is this: this is the world picture, as I see it, that has emerged from MODERN SCIENCE.”_*

@TimBigler

Жыл бұрын

if only the one true christian God, somehow split in 3, but hey, he is God, he can do anything, right? anyways, he could come down, again, and just straighten everything out... or is he afraid of being double crossed?

As someone raised Catholic and moved away from the Church and faith, I found myself wondering/wandering in other spiritual directions. Upon reflection, I found myself with a “hole in my heart” seeking something which I didn’t understand. At first, I dismissed it as just my upbringings and “brainwashing”. I wandered into Yoga and some New Age ideas. These had inklings of spiritual Truths which satiated my heart on a surface level, but I found myself moving on. Much like the prodigal son, I am finding myself on the road back home- back to the Church. There are still plenty of doubts, but people/channels/The Church Fathers are places in which I’m finding knowledge and more importantly, wisdom. Thank you for sharing the brilliance of St. Thomas. I will continue to watch and (hopefully) grow closer towards God.

@ThomisticInstitute

2 жыл бұрын

Thanks so much for sharing this! We hope our work helps you to know and love God more! God bless you.

@Gwido7

Жыл бұрын

May the Holy Ghost guide you, brother and make you come back home to the Catholic Church.

@NinaZemlock

Жыл бұрын

You just LITERALLY explained EXACTLY what I’m going through! It’s like I wrote that comment lol .. good luck on your journey!!

@j-joe-jeans

Жыл бұрын

It sounds like you had this emotionally charged home and filled it with things of desire over what is true. Is satiating desire really more valuable than truth to you?

@j-joe-jeans

Жыл бұрын

@@NinaZemlock Why follow a path of blind faith over one of intellectual honesty and objective truth?

This brings St. Josephine Bahkita to mind. She was an African child who was brought into slavery, in the 19th century, following the killing of her parents. She had never heard of the Christian God. Though she would look up at the sun and the moon, and say, who ever made those has got to be very powerful! As she grew into a young women, she was bought by an Italian man who brought her back to Italy to care for his young daughter. At that time, she stayed at the convent with the nuns, who introduced her to the Christian God, for the first time. She ended up joining those Sisters...and amazingly went on to become a Saint! One would have thought she would have been consumed by anger and hate, following the abuse she suffered at the hands of her captors..but she wasn't! It's a beautiful story of love! 🌹

@steffen2165

2 жыл бұрын

Who gives a fuck about a dumb slave

@gfujigo

2 жыл бұрын

Slavery is evil. Period. Her captors and enslavers will pay for their evil. God does not ignore injustice.

@rosiegirl2485

2 жыл бұрын

@@gfujigo Slavery is evil...what your missing is that God allowed it..to bring a good out of it. St. Bakhita was very loving. She touched everyone she came into contact with. In the end...evil did not win!

@electrictroy2010

Жыл бұрын

THERE ARE 100,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 suns just like ours. Even if a superbeing existed, no way could he create that immense universe. AND there’s no reason he would care about our sun more than all the others. We are just a speck of dust in the grand scale of the cosmos .

@heartyhaha

Жыл бұрын

You have a truly beautiful perspective. However, please mindful of what you share, what you have shared opens moral wounds. I struggle to imagine many a slaves' resignation to their fate as "a story of love". Yours faithfully, A displaced immigrant who's family was torn apart by men of faith and "educated" by the Jesuits. I believe in God in hopes that one day we may meet and I may ask, is it truly just to impose existence on the unwilling?

Thank you from the bottom of my heart for your course and channel. I’m studying for an exam on medieval theology and I’m so grateful for these videos, both informative and peaceful! They help me to understand better the books I’m studying!

@sasutchi5695

2 жыл бұрын

To whom did Aquinas wrote the 5 ways of knowing God??

@electrictroy2010

Жыл бұрын

THERE ARE 100,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 suns just like ours. Even if a superbeing existed, no way could he create that immense universe. AND there’s no reason he would care about our sun more than all the others. We are just a speck of dust in the grand scale of the cosmos .

@janusg8680

Жыл бұрын

@@electrictroy2010 I think you are contradicting yourself, by saying that a superbeing is limited, i.e. not a superbeing.

@mikek4040

Жыл бұрын

@electrictroy2010 if you had 1 trillion dollars in bills made up of 1 billion dollar bills would you say the same thing?

@RonJohn63

6 ай бұрын

@@electrictroy2010 certainly someone as smart as you knows that gods are supposed to be supernatural, and what "supernatural" means.

Related Videos: Against Physicalist Reductionism: kzread.info/dash/bejne/p3l1wdyfZ9icldY.html Scientific Evidence Against Reductionism: kzread.info/dash/bejne/poJ-xMqKhrngaKw.html Creation isn't what you think it is! kzread.info/dash/bejne/ZqNsz6mBfpzaYZM.html Yes, there is a Theory of Everything: kzread.info/dash/bejne/pKKu089pacTKl7A.html What is Faith?: kzread.info/dash/bejne/ZK5o2a18o6ebabQ.html Does God speak through Signs?: kzread.info/dash/bejne/g39txtGhoKmvmKg.html

@Aaqe

2 жыл бұрын

To the Thomistic Institute: This list of videos appears to be an indirect reply to my long comment published 9 days ago for which I have not received a reply from the Thomistic Institute. If this is the case, I find your attitude poor and indecent. It is like a student asking a question and the teacher sending the student to the textbook. This is bad practice. Once again I am stating that you cannot prove the existence of God and that Christianity is about faith and not proofs of the existence of God as you are trying to do deceiving us. Our faith does not need this kind of interference. God does not fall in the domain of science and no proof exists to confirm his existence. Once again I am letting you know that I expect a reply from you and a revision of the title of your video that reduces God to five proofs. Are there proofs of God in the Bible? What did Thomas Aquinas actually wrote regarding your claim of proofs for the existence of God?

@Aaqe

2 жыл бұрын

Only fools are on a mission to prove the existence of God. The Thomistic Institute has decided to ignore my comments about their video confirming what the people who run it really are.

@archangel_metatron

2 жыл бұрын

Infinity ♾️ is a closed loop because the beginning is the end and the end is the beginning. God is the first and the last. The beginning and the end. The Alpha and the Omega. God is the singularity responsible for the Big Bang and according to the many laws of conservation that singularity had to be equal to or greater than all of the mass, energy, and information/intelligence in the universe past, present, and future combined and since things are neither created or destroyed only transferred or transformed this means God became the universe. God is Omnipresent, Omnipotent, and Omniscient. God is everything everywhere. cmsw.mit.edu/angles/2015/is-the-universe-actually-a-giant-quantum-computer/ www.t-systems.com/de/en/newsroom/best-practice/01-2019-realtime/the-universe-is-a-quantum-computer Jesus is the only created being by God which is what is meant by only begotten son of God. Through Jesus all things were made. 1 Corinthians 8:5-6 5 For even if there are so-called gods, whether in heaven or on earth (as there are many gods and many lords), 6 yet for us there is one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we for Him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, through whom are all things, and through whom we live. Jesus will return after Jerusalem gets nuked by the abomination which causes desolation mentioned in Matthew 24. Prophets are angels. Revelation 22 6 The angel said to me, “These words are trustworthy and true. The Lord, the God who inspires the prophets, sent his angel to show his servants the things that must soon take place.” 7 “Look, I am coming soon! Blessed is the one who keeps the words of the prophecy written in this scroll.” 8 I, John, am the one who heard and saw these things. And when I had heard and seen them, I fell down to worship at the feet of the angel who had been showing them to me. 9 But he said to me, “Don’t do that! I am a fellow servant with you and with your fellow prophets and with all who keep the words of this scroll. Worship God!” 10 Then he told me, “Do not seal up the words of the prophecy of this scroll, because the time is near. 11 Let the one who does wrong continue to do wrong; let the vile person continue to be vile; let the one who does right continue to do right; and let the holy person continue to be holy.” The Earth is Hell in the future. It gets hit by an asteroid and pushed toward the sun. Isaiah 13:13, 2 Peter 3, and Revelation 9. After death is defeated Jesus returns the kingdom back to God. 1 Corinthians 15 This is the beginning of the kingdom of God. Then and asteroid will strike the Earth Revelation 9. It will open up the bottomless pit and knock the Earth out of its orbit toward the sun. The Earth is Hell is the future. The only escape is in the New Jerusalem. It will take the best of humanity and the glory of the nations to a new Earth. This is the beginning of the kingdom of heaven. Peter was given authority over who goes and stays by Jesus. Protestants are antichrist according to 1 John 2:18-19 ...for they went out from us showing that they were not of us, for if they were of us they would have stayed with us... When you die you sleep until the day of resurrection. 4 And I saw thrones, and they sat on them, and judgment was committed to them. Then I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded for their witness to Jesus and for the word of God, who had not worshiped the beast or his image, and had not received his mark on their foreheads or on their hands. And they lived and reigned with Christ for [a]a thousand years. 5 But the rest of the dead did not live again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection. 6 Blessed and holy is he who has part in the first resurrection. Over such the second death has no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with Him a thousand years. Hell is what Earth literally is in the future. Death will be defeated first. In Revelation 9 a falling star also known as an asteroid will penetrate the crust of the dark side of the Earth pushing it out of its Goldilocks orbit toward the sun. The Earth will eventually burn up with all of humanity brought back to immortal life. The finest of mankind and the glory of the nations will go into the New Jerusalem which is approximately 1500 miles x 1500 miles x 1500 miles and it will go to a New Earth. 2 Peter 3:10 But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night, in which the heavens will pass away with a great noise, and the elements will melt with fervent heat; both the earth and the works that are in it will be [d]burned up. 11 Therefore, since all these things will be dissolved, what manner of persons ought you to be in holy conduct and godliness, 12 looking for and hastening the coming of the day of God, because of which the heavens will be dissolved, being on fire, and the elements will melt with fervent heat? 13 Nevertheless we, according to His promise, look for new heavens and a new earth in which righteousness dwells. 21 Now I saw a new heaven and a new earth, for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away. Also there was no more sea.

@Aaqe

2 жыл бұрын

@@archangel_metatron OH, what a lecture! Does it come from Google?

@archangel_metatron

2 жыл бұрын

@@Aaqe wouldn't that be nice. Unfortunately, too many believe something other than the truth.

Thomas Aquinas was a most interesting man. His teachings should be more prevalent.

@sasutchi5695

2 жыл бұрын

To whom did Aquinas wrote the 5 ways of knowing God??

@wms72

2 жыл бұрын

I like Aquino's advice for sadness: cry, have fun, drink wine, take a warm bath and go to bed early

@poweroftruth9258

2 жыл бұрын

The Bible says in John 3:16-36 that whoever believes in the Lord Jesus Christ shall not perish but have everlasting life, the Bible also says in Romans 10:9 that those who declare with their mouth that Jesus Christ is their God, Lord, and Savior they shall be saved. Revelation 1:8 says that Jesus is the alpha and the omega. Luke and revelation is the ending times, and Jesus is returning back. So are you going to submit your life to him or no? Narrow is the path that leads to the gates of heaven, but only few people find it. The gates that is the path to destruction is where many people find it! Jesus loves you SO MUCH! That he died on the cross, and was resurrected from the dead 3 days later to give us eternal life.

@way2tehdawn

2 жыл бұрын

@@sasutchi5695 It was for theology students in the 13th century but yeah I mean anyone can read it now.

@Mikesorrento3344

2 жыл бұрын

It’s a scientific impossibility that something came from nothing. A book has an author, and a building an architect. Creation is proof of God. It would be scientifically impossible for there not to be a God. PS: There’s a Jesus as well. Humankind needs a Savior. Just look at us, look at the world. Trust me. I need a Savior.

the most comprehensive explanation I''ve ever heard in 31 years.

@ThomisticInstitute

2 жыл бұрын

Glad to hear it! Thanks for watching. God bless you.

@crongusclips7836

2 жыл бұрын

If this is the most comprehensive explanation you’ve heard in 31 years it just shows how little evidence there is of god’s existence. The video contains no real proof quoting the Bible as a source.

@Dr.HowieFeltersnatch

2 жыл бұрын

This entire video is a giant argument from ignorance fallacy. Basically, I couldn’t think of a better explanation for some phenomenon, so therefore God must have done it. This is irrational and leads you to wrong conclusions.

@gfujigo

2 жыл бұрын

@@Dr.HowieFeltersnatch How is the video a giant argument from ignorance? Is gravity an argument from our ignorance of how objects move? We can't think of a better explanation of how objects move so therefore it must be gravity. We don't even see gravity, we only see the effect of this phenomena. Einstein taught us to model it as space time being curved around masses. Yet, we don't see what is making it the case that space time reacts to masses by curving around them instead of doing something else. Are our cosmological theories and proposed entities (such as the inflaton field, etc.) simply an argument from our ignorance of the large scale structure of space and time? Also, what do you mean by the word "God"? This video makes sense. When you observe an effect, you infer a cause and you determine the nature of the cause based on the effect being observed. This is foundational scientific thinking. Here, this same thinking is being applied to all of physical reality and the attributes we observe. Theistic conclusions are actually quite modest. Here the conclusion is that there is a non-contingent cause of all reality capable of instantiating order, physical objects, laws, etc. This is so basic and rational a conclusion it's almost a tautology. What's wrong with this line of reasoning?

@gfujigo

2 жыл бұрын

@@crongusclips7836 How is there “little evidence” when all of physical reality is the evidence?

I love that Thomas Aquinas assures all the faithful that God exists as well as provides a way to know this ourselves.

@handhdhd6522

2 жыл бұрын

Faith: belief beyond reasonable doubt

@Tzimiskes3506

2 жыл бұрын

@@handhdhd6522 atheism - a belief

@handhdhd6522

2 жыл бұрын

@@Tzimiskes3506 how is atheism a belief if you don’t believe in anything??

@Tzimiskes3506

2 жыл бұрын

@@handhdhd6522 believe the oxford dictionary...

@handhdhd6522

2 жыл бұрын

@@Tzimiskes3506 a - absence, theism - belief of god, atheism - absence of belief if god

The intelligence behind the creation is God. His power is not perceived by human beings but is there all the time. God is intelligence and almighty power, He permeates all things.

@petermeyer6873

Ай бұрын

"His power is not perceived by human beings but is there all the time" To say this as a human beeing is just as logic as to claim: "Im sniffing the fart, that nobody let go"

List starts at 6:20

I have seen a number of descriptions of the Five Ways, all of which were fairly impenetrable to me. This is the first which explains it in a graspable form. Thank you, Father James.

@ThomisticInstitute

2 жыл бұрын

You're welcome! Glad you found it helpful.

A very brief summary of the line of reasoning which leads us to God: we know there are dependent things all around us - things which do not have to exist, and which therefore do not exist solely by themselves, but are dependent on causes. Fire, trees, people, planets, molecules, atoms, stars, and so on. Naturally, there must be a cause or explanation for why and how all dependent things exist. Even if there were an infinity of dependent causes, one producing another, this would still not be an explanation for why the totality of dependent things exist - why do all of these things and causes exist, rather than nothing, or some other totality of things? How can any totality - even if infinite in number - of dependent things manage to exist in the first place? The only explanation is if there is a Foundation of things which is itself independent, self-sufficient, necessary, unconditioned, which could not even in principle have failed to be. A Foundation which is the ultimate cause and ground of the existence of all dependent, conditioned things. Why is this Necessary, Unconditioned, Absolute Foundation of reality called God? Here are a few brief reasons. First, the Foundation is all-powerful, because it is the ultimate cause of all possible dependent things. Every existing thing and reality ultimately derives from this Foundation. Secondly, the Foundation, besides being necessarily-existing, self-sufficient, unconditioned, eternal, all-powerful, etc., is also very plausibly personal and intelligent, since A) all powers and realities ultimately derive from the Foundation, which means the Foundation has all powers and all its configurations, including intelligence, and B) the order and harmony of dependent reality, which has regular natural laws instead of chaos, and life, consciousness, complexity, and so on, makes it very plausible that the Foundation/First Cause is intelligent. Much more could be said, but I'll leave this here as a brief summary.

@ThomisticInstitute

4 жыл бұрын

You might chat through this with Pat Flynn. He has recently come up with a sketch that sounds very similar in its essential contours.

@alexmcd378

4 жыл бұрын

Do you hold a deist or theist position? Is this prime mover that you accept an unknowable creator (deist), or a personal god from a particular ancient holy text(theist)? If a particular god, how is the prime mover argument, as this argument is known, proof of your specific god instead of another? If one prime mover exists, then could not additional ones exist? How can you differentiate a universe caused by one original entity vs a universe caused by multiple entities working together?

@mordec1016

4 жыл бұрын

Alex McD 1- I'm a theist, but also a Catholic Christian. Proving the existence of an intelligent Creator doesn't automatically get us to Christianity, of course, for that other arguments would be required. The video (and my comment) are only about God, in a broad theistic sense; 2- I believe there can be only one creator, on the basis of further arguments. One which I find very powerful is Avicenna's tawhid proof of oneness, which Aquinas also uses: we have established the existence of a Necessary Being. Why couldn't there be more than one? Because if there were two Necessary first causes, say, NB1 and NB2, they would have to have some differentiae which makes them two distinct beings instead of one. They share a common nature - that of being a necessarily-existing thing -, which we might call N. But then NB1 is N+A and NB2 is N+B. A and B are the purported differences between NB1 and NB2. The problem is that there would be no explanation whatsoever for these properties - why does NB1 have A and NB2 has B? It cannot stem from N, since both of them share N, so if A or B were essential properties of N both necessary beings would have them, and so wouldn't be distinct. But if A and B are not essential, then they are contingent - but in this case, there's nothing that could produce the properties for NB1 and NB2, since that would make NB1 and 2 dependent upon whatever gives them their distinct properties, and as necessary beings and first causes they cannot be dependent. This is not a problem for contingent entities such as us, since we get our contingent properties from causes - I have my height because of the specific powers in the genes of my parents, etc... With a Necessary Being, all properties must be essential. They must always have them, independently, solely by their own nature. But we've already seen that this cannot be the case, since Nb1 and 2 share the same essence N, so all their essential properties would have to be the same. But then Nb1 and 2 cannot have any distinct properties. If they can't have any distinct properties, they can't be different, and if they can't be different, they're One and not two. So there can be at most one necessary being, Q.E.D. This argument can be very demanding logically, so be careful not to get confused. There are also other arguments for preferring only one necessary first cause instead of two, such as Ockham's razor, Gellmann's argument, etc. I suggest you watch Robert Koons's "why the first cause is God" video on Capturing Christianity here on KZread; he discusses several arguments including in favor of uniqueness.

@alexmcd378

4 жыл бұрын

@@mordec1016 I'm afraid that argument has never been very convincing. Why must all traits of a necessary being be necessary? Couldn't two necessary beings differ in their capacity to support dependent entities? They could differ in location, having access to dimensions of movement we cannot perceive. They could differ in moral compass, being benevolent, or malevolent, or amoral. And we are discussing an entity that would be beyond our comprehension of it existed, so it may well have differentiating traits we can't imagine.

@alexmcd378

4 жыл бұрын

Mordec 101 also, your own argument precludes the god of the Bible. If a necessary entity has only traits defined by N, then they are unable to change in any capacity since N cannot change. But the god of the Bible changes over time, from book to book and even within stories. He is repeatedly surprised by the actions of his creations, which means gaining knowledge, which is a change. What he considers immoral or an abomination changes over time. His own personality changes dramatically from old to new testament. And most dramatically, he changed from an evident god physically manifesting all over the place to a hidden god that doesn't measurably interact with the world in any way that is different from the laws of nature. These are changes in traits, which means these traits aren't necessary, which means the god of the Bible cannot be one with the necessary being that you defined into existence.

If i thought that i would be exposed to this kind of wisdom i would surely join the Catholic Church. Ive studied eastern wisdom for years and what i believe as a result is evidently what St Thomas taught. Thank you.

@markrudis4419

4 жыл бұрын

Subscribed.

@shastasilverchairsg

3 жыл бұрын

I dabbled in new age spirituality, nonduality etc and listened to "enlightened" gurus... got absolutely nowhere with all of their "nondual" nonsense about equanimity and "the watching conciousness". 5 minutes of going back to my childhood religion did more for me than 5 years of new-agey-Buddhist-Hindu-enlightened-impervious-to-pain-yogis.

@markrudis4419

3 жыл бұрын

@@shastasilverchairsg that is why there is more than one path to the Devine. Thomas Aquinas acknowledges the same verdict. My path is obviously different than yours.

@eraimattei

3 жыл бұрын

Buddhism brought me to the first clear ideas of life. But it's always the same. Only the highest forms of philosophy will bring you to enlightenment, that's why Thomas adored Aristoteles and ancient Greek philosophers. Of course we must understand these notions WITH christ but it's never a matter of imposing one idea unto another but only a continuous flow of historical thoughts.

@toninobelimussi296

3 жыл бұрын

@@markrudis4419 There may be more than one path to God, since there is a path from each of us to God (attracting each of us to Himself). But no path is true if it avoids Jesus Christ. At some point, either God became (also) Man (2nd Person of the Triune God) so that all of us, potentially, could be saved or - as many believe - that didn't happen or, if it did, somehow it was pointless because there are other ways to reach salvation. True Salvation comes from Jesus Christ, true God and true Man. Jesus Christ came to die for us on the Cross, but that doesn't mean "anything goes" since He warned "if you're not with me, you're against me".

Thank you @Thomistic Institute, I enjoyed this. Just beginning module 3 of 101, getting my teeth into the weighty stuff at last, having been studying how to think. Great course.

@ilovegodandjesusjohn316

2 жыл бұрын

Luke 11:28 But he said, Yea rather, blessed are they that hear the word of God, and keep it. 1 Corinthians 14:33 For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints. 1 Corinthians 14:34 Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the law. 1 Corinthians 14:35 And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church. Luke 6:38 Give, and it shall be given unto you; good measure, pressed down, and shaken together, and running over, shall men give into your bosom. For with the same measure that ye mete withal it shall be measured to you again.

@electrictroy2010

Жыл бұрын

THERE ARE 100,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 suns just like ours. Even if a superbeing existed, no way could he create that immense universe. AND there’s no reason he would care about our sun more than all the others. We are just a speck of dust in the grand scale of the cosmos .

Go TI! Bless you and this content. Biggest fan!! Happy New Year and I am benefiting so much from your hard work and it enables me to pass it on! My career is in addressing and helping people who’s lives depend on getting through the issue of “ How can I believe in God?” In a very real way. Specifically those suffering with opiate and alcohol addictions where belief in a high power is non negotiable for a beginning point within the process of recovery. These videos bring up in a general way a place where you can start someone on seeing the world both philosophically and with reason! Bless you and thank you for all you do!

@ThomisticInstitute

4 жыл бұрын

Ian, we're delighted to hear. That's super encouraging. All the best in your work! God bless you.

Even though I'm protestant theologically I did appreciate this exposition of Aquina' s 5 points. Thank you.

@ThomisticInstitute

4 жыл бұрын

Excellent! You're welcome.

@nigelhunter4230

3 жыл бұрын

My theological position is contained within the Westminster Confession of Faith and I protest against heretical teaching or rather earnestly contend for the faith. See Jude 3. Albert! I don't worship the Jews. I pray for their salvation.

@nigelhunter4230

3 жыл бұрын

@Doge di Amalfi We will all have to give an account of our sins. You're either saved or unsaved.

@Zwei4815

3 жыл бұрын

@@DirtyHairy01 "With words like these you make the patients incurable, rather than curable." --St. Peter Canisius.

@toninobelimussi296

3 жыл бұрын

If a Protestant admits that Jesus instituted the Holy Sacrifice (Eucharistic Sacrament) so that He would make Himself available to His followers, Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity; if a Protestant admits that the Holy Virgin is the Co-Redemptrix, if a Protestant admits that the Church is the Mystical Body of Christ i.e. One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic, I salute that Protestant. I'd also argue that there are heresies aplenty to fight, even nowadays (courtesy of our Judas-loving Pope and numerous homosexuality-inspired members of the clergy), but that they are best fought by following in the steps of Christ, not Luther (who ended up literally hating Christ and adoring s8n), see kzread.info/dash/bejne/gpWKyNuClsyZf5c.html.

Praised be the Lord for the wisdom infused in Aquinas. The argument of the Uncaused Cause was enough to break the despisable Humean view of causation and Descartes empirism, heavy weights during my conversion. "For an accidental category 'cause' can't exist in a 'non-being', i.e., nothing." Saint Thomas Aquinas, pray for us!

@cnault3244

2 жыл бұрын

Can you guess why it is the ARGUMENT for the uncaused cause and not the EVIDENCE for the uncaused cause? Btw, the argument doesn't get you to that cause being a sentient deity. It could be natural. As for a god, that argument does not get you to the god of the Bible.

@arthurcuesta6041

2 жыл бұрын

@@cnault3244 One can see you're not very bright. I assume the "evidence" you mention would be an empiric one, right? Funny how if you argue that knowledge can only be empiric (as in "the rest are merely arguments") you incur in a paradox, as that affirmation is aprioristic (and therefore not empiric). Logic is irrefutable, cringe "science" man.

@cnault3244

2 жыл бұрын

@@arthurcuesta6041 "One can see you're not very bright." One can see you know you don't have any good arguments or evidence, which is why you resort to a childish ad hominem attack. " I assume the "evidence" you mention" Why do you feel the need to put the word evidence in quotation marks? It's like you are implying there is evidence and something which is not evidence so it must be designated by typing it as "evidence". "would be an empiric one, right?" To be evidence it would have to be something which can be examined and verified. " Funny how if you argue that knowledge can only be empiric (as in "the rest are merely arguments")" You seem confused. At no point did I state the arguments used are not knowledge. I pointed out that the arguments are not evidence. If they were, they would be presented as evidence rather than arguments. Are you a Christian? If so, why would you care about these arguments? These arguments don't get you to the god of the Bible or to Christ.

@arthurcuesta6041

2 жыл бұрын

@@cnault3244 Ad hominem only happens if I justify my argument by means of the offense, like "you're wrong because you're not very bright". Calling you dumb and then proceeding to refute you isn't ad hominem. You should know what sentences mean before using them. Because empiric evidence is only one kind of evidence, which you would know had you studied epistemology. There's no confusion, you purposely made a distinction between these two as if they had different epistemological values. Well made and logic-proof arguments are evidence, even the Greeks knew that. Yes, I am Christian. And although these arguments don't direct me to Christ, atheist lies do turn others from Him. It is necessary to refute and crush lies, wherever they appear.

@cnault3244

2 жыл бұрын

@@arthurcuesta6041 Having stated you are a Christian, you should stop wasting time on Aquinas' arguments, which do not get you to the god of the bible or to Christ. Being a Christian, you must believe the Bible story of Christ's resurrection. What evidence do you have to prove that story?

I know, the fear of the Lord is everything and good. Thank you good Man for stressing this point which is clear.

@josephzammit8483

2 жыл бұрын

kzread.info/dash/bejne/pqWDy5qDhsy8ldY.html

Watch The Rome Boys Show as we discuss St. Thomas Aquinas in our Hangin’ With The Saints Series! m.kzread.info/dash/bejne/Ynhl0LNwn8XYaLw.html

Thank you very much for sharing! I just suscribed and I will stay alert of every video! God bless you

@ThomisticInstitute

4 жыл бұрын

God bless you too!

I am Mexican. I was raised catholic. I lost my way in my teens and became an atheist. I am now 34 and there is a strong conviction in my heart that sometimes I feel, and I wonder if it’s too late for me for God to accept me back 😢

@adriandurancolombo2448

10 ай бұрын

It will never be too late, he's been waiting for you to comeback, and a good father never gets tired of waiting for his children 😺

@grommetsfrog6596

4 ай бұрын

Impossible. The Church is waiting! You have an infinitely rich identity as a Catholic and from a long line of Catholics no less. Try the Traditional Latin Mass. It puts everything in its proper order through an unimagineable beauty. God bless you.

@devmyster925

4 ай бұрын

when you take one step toward God, he runs to you. it’s never to late brother

@Protestant_Paladin440

2 ай бұрын

Read chapter 15 of the Gospel of Saint Luke. The Lord does not forget those who return, nor think less of them.

Great Video. I'm hoping that The Thomas institute expands to other Christian Theologians and Apologists beyond just Thomas Aquinas. Aquinas is not the only Theologian out there to study.

After a search of two complete days, I finally ended up on this video n started understanding what St. Aquinas work was? Thanx

My dad was an Orthodox Christian priest but he taught 7th and 8th grade religion at a catholic grade school along with English and Social Studies. The first day of 7th grade religion class was the 5 ways of Thomas Aquinas. There was also one by Anselm., and Ontological argument, and there was also an argument called the ladder of perfection. Maybe that was Aquinas's argument of degrees.

I have yet to meet an honest religious apologist. This video didn't change that.

Thank you for the excellent exposition on this. I appreciate the work that the Thomistic Institute has put in to make these concepts more clear and accessible. I totally agree with point about false philosophies, specifically how many of the "New Atheists" completely misunderstand/misinterpret the 5 ways (for example Richard Dawkins confusing an essentially ordered series with an accidental one). However I am wondering about whether the institute has engaged with the critiques of Aquinas' 5 ways put forward by serious contemporary analytic atheist philosophers, such as J.L. Mackie, J.H. Sobel and Graham Oppy, all who have provided forceful critiques of Aquinas in their works?

@bradleymosman8325

2 жыл бұрын

I think that Carl Gustav Jung helped us when he said, "God's existence does not upon our arguments." (Memories, Dreams, and Reflections) Do we think that God will come into existence because we've made the best argument? For me, God is encountered through my personhood. Jesus died on the Cross as a Person, not a theory. The Arguments are merely a way of talking about God. And it seems to me that arguments for God's existence stand on their own. Atheist arguments are merely rebuttals. When God is the subject, they have nothing of their own. They depend upon the theists but the theists don't need the atheists.

in my experience God teaches and guides me inch by inch in this journey so that I could follow him…

Wow. Fr.Brent makes it so simple. Thanks, Father...God bless TI

Thanks so much for sharing this. I wished I could have started studying this when I was younger

This video shows how my thinking has evolved over time, when I was a teenager I rejected the church's teachings because I didn't like just being told that gd exist's with out a reason, as I aged and read many secular books, I started to faintly think there must be someone directing everything, now I believe there is a god, but I still have questions as to how it relates to the Catholic church's view of the trinity, so like this explanation says, it's a work in progress, for the time being it has been enough to make me a practicing Catholic, even do I still have many questions or things I need to understand...thanks for the video and I will subscribe to the podcast's

@ThomisticInstitute

4 жыл бұрын

Our pleasure! Keep plugging!

@ThomisticInstitute

4 жыл бұрын

@fynes leigh Have you watched this video (kzread.info/dash/bejne/lZmfucOYicfHpaQ.html)? It's a basic exposition of Aristotle and St. Thomas's teaching on the matter . . . coming at it from a bit of a different angle. I'll get to your other comment here shortly. Cheers!

@ThomisticInstitute

4 жыл бұрын

@fynes leigh Yikes, okay, this link should work: kzread.info/dash/bejne/lZmfucOYicfHpaQ.html

@MarcovonAntoni-jb6bh

3 жыл бұрын

The Most Holy Trinity is out of the domain of knowledge of the philosophy, even if it had inspired philosopher and theologians. Trinity belongs to the domain of the Christian faith. Philosophy has demonstrated the existence and the uniqueness of God, but it never ha demonstrated its being of three divine persons. And that it is strange because the Trinity is God Himself: to say we can't rationally demonstrate God of three divine person would mean to say He could be reasonably made differently, of one single person like the philosophy normally thinks Him to be. But concerning the Logos, His not to be capable to be derived from nature as a Triune God would be a great deception, needy to be solved.

@Lerian_V

3 жыл бұрын

@@MarcovonAntoni-jb6bh I think Bishop Barron gave a good framework: Philosophical framework - kzread.info/dash/bejne/dIGpo5KknpStc9Y.html Theological framework - kzread.info/dash/bejne/e3Wm0M-mp7TVdNI.html

Thank you for posting this video Fr. Brent. Watching it was like walking into a church. Hearing the truth spoken, particularly about Truth itself is like eating a piece of the sacred bread reserved for the Holy of Holies. Only it tastes more like divine pie. Thinking on Divine things like feeling the warmth of the burning bush (was it warm if it didn’t consume?). I can’t study metaphysics without being drawn into the presence of God; even when just watching your videos. I blame it on my guardian angel. I think he just keeps “poking me with his elbow” whenever the subject of our beloved comes up; well, God Himself, and anything He has done, will do, or is currently doing.

Such a wonderous video thank you! Beautifully delivered/explained! Praise be to God ,for all you Priests for all your energy in putting it all together,to enlighten n help us to know God.

@ThomisticInstitute

2 жыл бұрын

You're welcome! God bless you.

@electrictroy2010

Жыл бұрын

THERE ARE 100,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 suns just like ours. Even if a superbeing existed, no way could he create that immense universe. AND there’s no reason he would care about our sun more than all the others. We are just a speck of dust in the grand scale of the cosmos .

Thankyou very much for sharing about the life of St Thomas of Aquinas. Such a great Theologian abd a saint. Praise the Lord.

@ilovegodandjesusjohn316

2 жыл бұрын

Luke 11:28 But he said, Yea rather, blessed are they that hear the word of God, and keep it. 1 Corinthians 14:33 For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints. 1 Corinthians 14:34 Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the law. 1 Corinthians 14:35 And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church. Luke 6:38 Give, and it shall be given unto you; good measure, pressed down, and shaken together, and running over, shall men give into your bosom. For with the same measure that ye mete withal it shall be measured to you again.

@electrictroy2010

Жыл бұрын

THERE ARE 100,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 suns just like ours. Even if a superbeing existed, no way could he create that immense universe. AND there’s no reason he would care about our sun more than all the others. We are just a speck of dust in the grand scale of the cosmos .

I have to listen more than once to grasp what is said as I am older(age 70). Older, not intellectually challenged. I find my experience helps add depth to these presentations.

@martam4142

3 жыл бұрын

Well done! :)

@smokeymcpot69

2 жыл бұрын

You're adorable!

@ilovegodandjesusjohn316

2 жыл бұрын

Luke 11:28 But he said, Yea rather, blessed are they that hear the word of God, and keep it. 1 Corinthians 14:33 For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints. 1 Corinthians 14:34 Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the law. 1 Corinthians 14:35 And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church. Luke 6:38 Give, and it shall be given unto you; good measure, pressed down, and shaken together, and running over, shall men give into your bosom. For with the same measure that ye mete withal it shall be measured to you again.

These ways are wonderful! I'm new to the teachings of Aquinas. I had never heard these ways. Quite lovely, I must say. Thank you for creating a video that outlines this and sharing it with the world.

1. order of motion in nature 2. cause and effect 3. contingent beings 4. degrees or perfection 5. things without intelligence act for the sake of ends

This is such a wonderful explanation, Thank you. Liked and subscribed.

@ThomisticInstitute

2 жыл бұрын

You're welcome! Thanks for watching. God bless you!

How do you identify whether you’re dealing with a genuine god as opposed to a counterfeit one?

@m.935

2 жыл бұрын

Genuine God can rule over/change/"skip" physical laws of the universe He created (command waves to stop with His Word, raise people from the dead by command, resurrect Himself and so on-what Jesus did). But you still have freedom of choice to accuse Him of not being genuine despite all the evidence or choose that it is not enough evidence for you because of what you think God should be and do, and what shouldn't (i.e. putting yourself in the position of God/original sin/pride). But to be clear, God has no counterfeit.

@gfujigo

2 жыл бұрын

If there can be more than one, we are not talking about God.

@SATISFYPLANET

2 жыл бұрын

Marian apparitions should help you decide who is the real God; there are countless Catholic miracles that our world just ... sweeps under the rug. I will never understand that.

@randee4550

2 жыл бұрын

All are counterfeit, because they're all fake

While I'm not a Catholic I will always hold Thomas Aquinas in high regard. He was a truly great man

@DocReasonable

Жыл бұрын

St Thomas Aquinas considered it virtuous to burn heretics, and favoured the option of burning them alive. All manner of activities constituted heresy. It was heretical to eat meat on Friday, to read the bible, to know Greek, to criticise a cleric, to refuse to pay Church taxes, or to deny that money lending was sinful.

Explanation of the 5 ways begins at 6:21. They are only "sketched" and appear to be very similar. However, proof #5 seemed extremely powerful. Thank you for this video. I was looking for a deeper explanation, but the truth is I'll just have to read the Suma for myself.

@ThomisticInstitute

2 жыл бұрын

Thanks for the comment, Ted. Yes, this video is more of a prologue and a sketch than an in-depth exploration of each theme. We do hope to do some videos that take a closer look at the five ways, though, so stay tuned!

Terrific content, and outstanding even whimsical production accents that pair terrific with presentation in a really helpful way - thank you for these mini-seminars!!

@ThomisticInstitute

2 жыл бұрын

You're welcome! Thanks for watching. God bless you.

@electrictroy2010

Жыл бұрын

THERE ARE 100,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 suns just like ours. Even if a superbeing existed, no way could he create that immense universe. AND there’s no reason he would care about our sun more than all the others. We are just a speck of dust in the grand scale of the cosmos .

Great videos! I would love to see a video dedicated to each of the Five Ways, especially the second and fourth ways.

@electrictroy2010

Жыл бұрын

THERE ARE 100,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 suns just like ours. Even if a superbeing existed, no way could he create that immense universe. AND there’s no reason he would care about our sun more than all the others. We are just a speck of dust in the grand scale of the cosmos .

@joezilla07

Жыл бұрын

@@electrictroy2010 Some people do not believe in God because they don't fully grasp the concept of infinity. It sounds like you might be one of them. If there really were an all-powerful being, He would have no limit and His power wouldn't even be quantifiable. So it would actually be very simple to create an immense universe, because a speck of dust and an entire universe would be equally insignificant next to the infinitely powerful and perfect being.

I didn't know about this channel until just now. How awesome! My parish is St. Dominc's SF. I love Dominican teaching and preaching!

@ThomisticInstitute

2 жыл бұрын

Awesome! Thank you!

I sat through an hour and a half class the other day about the 5 ways and this video made more sense than anything I learned in the class.

@ThomisticInstitute

2 жыл бұрын

We're very glad this video helped! Thanks for watching, and may the Lord bless you!

@paulspence7600

11 ай бұрын

You should try biology and chemistry, they really make sense.

I was taught these 5 reasons at my Catholic high school!

Many yrs. ago in my early twenties I started to lose belief in the existence of GOD. One day I begun to question the human body and its functions and complexities. I questioned nature in the same way. Then I questioned the universe in all it's orderly fashion. When I questioned these things it was from that day forward that I knew that there had to be a GOD. Over the yrs. I realized that our very existence proved that there was a creator. I learned that you cannot throw lots of small sized stones on the floor and that they will fall in place to form a circle with two stones in the place of eyes, one in the place of a nose a those in the place of a mouth. If one was to see this face made from stones they would know that someone who was there put all those stones in place to make that face.

@dominicpardo4783

2 жыл бұрын

The argument of incredulity is the most easily dismissed.

@liliencalvel6151

2 жыл бұрын

@@dominicpardo4783 Many humans love to live in sin; so they would rather choose not to believe in GOD so that they do not have to acknowledge that their sins are wrong

@dominicpardo4783

2 жыл бұрын

@@liliencalvel6151 A. Define sin. B. I'm agnostic. Because I've never been presented with sufficient evidence that any god exists.

@liliencalvel6151

2 жыл бұрын

@@dominicpardo4783 I nor anyone can help you with that. Nor will I waste my time. Nothing beyond what is in this video or in the comment that I first wrote is going to convince you of anything. If those are not sufficient evidence for you that there is, than I am afraid that nothing will ever convince you. I will just say that you came into existence from thin air. It is much easier to get you to accept that. I will not go into telling you that one day GOD will judge you because you don't believe in him. Hope for your sake that he is not real. I would not place my bets on that hope. Goodbye.

@liliencalvel6151

2 жыл бұрын

@@dominicpardo4783 I wish you well in life Dominic. Hope that you find answers to your questions

Hi T.I. Very good video. I did philos. 101 about 50 years ago and still enjoy tinkering with thinking. 6/ Three proofs of God from freewill premise. Thomas Aquinas didn't develop a "proof of God from freewill", despite freewill being a unique characteristic of life. Non-life (rocks) can only follow deterministic laws and cannot make choices, only life has the possibility of freewill. I assume freewill exists because the difference between non-life and life is stark and undeniable. This leaves "hard determinist" materialism in a quandary. 1/ If life is solely material life, then before life began, life and freewill must have been determined to begin to exist. However "a freewill that is determined to begin to exist" is a contradiction, because by definition, determinism cannot choose to change itself into freewill. The quandary is resolved by accepting that originally life was non-materialistic, which proves God. 2/ Carbon forms four covalent bonds and is the defining element in organic chemistry. Materialists claim carbon with its four "choices" is in a limited sense "alive", but if this is true it means life is built into the physical universe pan-theistically, which also proves God. 3/ Without freewill, consciousness has no function and would not have evolved beyond the simple "stimulus-response" reflex of an amoeba. Even in an evolutionary universe, there's a necessary link between freewill and God. Freewill is atheism's "Achilles heel", explaining why atheistic materialists vehemently reject freewill, and must argue the absurdity that there's no philosophical difference between non-living matter and living matter. Thomas Aquinas' "proof from first cause" indicates he was locked into the apostle Paul's concept of deterministic predestination, which was official Church dogma. This probably explains why he didn't develop a proof of God from freewill. Like many other great mediaeval thinkers, his work was subject to strict ecclesiastic approval. Thanks for your good work. Cheers, from soft determinist, P.R.

Excellent video and production quality.

The other day I was driving down the road and saw smoke, yet I could not see the cause. Thus we can logically infer the existence of fire giants. How could you have smoke without fire giants? Therefor the most logical response is to worship Odin in order to entreat him to protect us from the fire giants.

@whelperw

11 ай бұрын

Yeah, smoke analogy is kinda weak. Without former experience with fire and without ability to see how fire produces smoke, we wouldn't have a slight idea what cause it. And I could add one idea to thoughts dumpster. You can produce smoke without fire, via chem reactions.

@bydlokun

10 ай бұрын

but Odin has nothing to do with old pagan philosophers

@richardscotland1

4 ай бұрын

Your ignorance is breathtaking. Nobody mentioned fire giants. Look up the dictionary reference for the word “inference”. Most people on seeing smoke will presume that the smoke is coming from something that is on fire, they infer from the smoke that fire is the probable cause of the smoke, after all it would not be a common saying that “there is no smoke without fire” if that were not usually the case. Of course something else, other than fire, could be the cause of the smoke. Now the driver of the car can only assume that the smoke is caused by the fire unless he investigates further, in which case, if he examines the source of the smoke he will be able to tell for sure one way or the other. Order, design and purposefulness in nature infer a creator, they do not prove his existence that will require further investigation, which will itself require openness, instead of a closed mind and a little humility, both of which you apparently lack.

@Nymaz

3 ай бұрын

@@richardscotland1 Read the Poetic and Prose Eddas. They mention fire giants with smoke billowing out from them. Therefor when we see smoke but can't see the source it is logical to infer that the smoke originates from fire giants. I'm sorry that in your arrogance you wish to deny the existence of fire giants and thus the existence of Odin, but it is said that in the days of Ragnarok there will be those that in their fear deny what they see in front of them. I understand how easy it is to let fear control you, but I hope that you will let go of your fear and see the truth.

"He did not affirm that the existence of God was undeniable" Then this entire video is a waste of time. By definition, God is almost impossible to falsify. Which is to say, we can't prove it wrong so we can't prove it right. I think it was Carlyle that made the point that divine inspiration or a miracle is only evidence of God to the original recipient, to everyone else it is heresay. Edit: No, I think that was Thomas Paine.

@crongusclips7836

2 жыл бұрын

Fr the majority of the comments on here are a big circle jerk

@xenphoton5833

2 жыл бұрын

Would you consider the point about "divine inspiration", whoever may have said it, to be in favor of the existence of God or does it promote non-belief?

@aaronbrown8377

2 жыл бұрын

@@xenphoton5833 Well, it's Thomas Paine so... non-belief.

@el34glo59

2 жыл бұрын

Right.....

@Thedisciplemike

Ай бұрын

Depends on how your define God

Very interesting to learn this Thomistic approach to our belief in God. Is it true that the Holy Spirit infuses us with the gift of faith in God when we are baptized? And, this gift of faith can be blocked when we commit a mortal sin and do not repent of it? I ask this because I cannot remember a time when I did not believe in God. And, to think if it were not for the Sacrament of Confession, I might not have this gift of faith anymore. I thank God every day for this gift, and also, thank my parents who cooperated with God to have me baptized as a very young baby. What greater gift could God and my parents have given me, except for the gift of life itself? Praise God!

Would love to hear a talk contrasting and comparing Aquinas with Nagarjuna. Good video.

Thank you, Father James, I very much understood, and it helped me in my defense of the faith. I wish there was a video detailing each way, that would be even more helpful!

@ThomisticInstitute

2 жыл бұрын

Thanks for watching, and definitely stay tuned for more! May the Lord bless you!

Great explanation i have been searching for a video like this. God bless you. Abraços do Brasil 🇧🇷

@ilovegodandjesusjohn316

2 жыл бұрын

Luke 11:28 But he said, Yea rather, blessed are they that hear the word of God, and keep it. 1 Corinthians 14:33 For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints. 1 Corinthians 14:34 Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the law. 1 Corinthians 14:35 And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church. Luke 6:38 Give, and it shall be given unto you; good measure, pressed down, and shaken together, and running over, shall men give into your bosom. For with the same measure that ye mete withal it shall be measured to you again.

Romans 1 was the final nail in the coffin made of doubt that made me an atheist. The thing that completely convinced me the writers of the bible had no idea of what they were talking about.

I like this very much. Thank you. I just came upon this yesterday.

@ThomisticInstitute

2 жыл бұрын

You're most welcome. Thanks for watching. God bless you!

Great video!!!

@ThomisticInstitute

4 жыл бұрын

Thanks!

@ThomisticInstitute

4 жыл бұрын

Spread the word!

I studied St. Thomas Aquinas' five proofs in college and this video explains them very well.

@electrictroy2010

Жыл бұрын

THERE ARE 100,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 suns just like ours. Even if a superbeing existed, no way could he create that immense universe. AND there’s no reason he would care about our sun more than all the others. We are just a speck of dust in the grand scale of the cosmos .

@apologiaromana4123

Жыл бұрын

@@electrictroy2010 Is that a serious argument?

@follower2thelord43

Жыл бұрын

@@electrictroy2010 We are a unique thing among all the Cosmos, the naturalist odds a single protein would come about as a building block of life is 10^93 and the odds that would form a functional cell is 1/10^300+. If you want to know how large that is, it’s literally a transcendent mathematical possibility, the imagine you stock pile those odds of that SINGLE cell surviving to create all the diverse life we see and “mutating” for no apparent reason to create all the great creatures of life. We are special, we are a perfect distance away from the sun, with the Sun and the Moon being just the right distance away to eclipse each-other, to be the only known planet in all of Cosmos to sustain life, and whom the many arguments prove God is at work initiating and maintaining all of reality with his divine will and mind. God is the causes of causes, he is causality itself, and causes everything else to be able to cause things, it is only by his self explanatory existence that we can exist as well. God is not only real, but is the source for reality, and is the ultimate truth of everything.

I found God.. then signed up for hmforces. Was given the bible. I need nothing but his saving grace. Keep open your heart and mind.

After listening to a few of these videos it actually makes sense now that God first introduced Himself as “I am”.

Thanks Father

@ThomisticInstitute

4 жыл бұрын

You're welcome!

@crongusclips7836

2 жыл бұрын

@@ThomisticInstitute To be considered proof tho doesn’t there have to be some kind of scientific evidence involved?

4:30 is a great example of how we can know of God’s existence even with the veil present.

@twokidsmovies

2 жыл бұрын

legitimately one of the worst analogies I have ever heard. This is a logical fallacy, and a false equivalency. No "one" must be behind the world around us first of all, and second, the example he gave is utter nonsense. We can actually test to see if you have an infection in your throat to prove it is really there in order to back up your subjective experience of having a sore throat, you cant do that with god because A) there is no natural way to prove he exists, and B) there is no evidence for his existence other than faith based assertions which we know are not a reliable pathway to the truth.

@Eric_01

2 жыл бұрын

I would also add that SCIENCE and medicine can literally prove the source of a sore throat. We know that virus exists, not because of faith, but because they are not invisible as the video claims, you can see them clearly under a microscope. We even know exactly what Covid-19 looks like at the cellular level and how to combat it with science, not prayer. That the most prevalent argument for the existence of god is merely that other things exist falls flat on its face every time. Even the smoke and fire analogy is laughable because we have all seen fire, we can make fire, and it is not invisible merely because it's out of your line of sight. C'mon, man.

I have heard people now days say that the 5 causes are wrong or out of date. They like to pont to things like "matter can't be created or destroyed" if that even applies or is true.

I love this cartoons and pics of Aquinas in our modern world. 😁

There’s only one way to know of a god’s existence, and that demonstrable evidence must come from god himself in person in a peer reviewed setting for all to experience. Books, feelings or personal experience don’t count.

@planteruines5619

7 ай бұрын

but if it does , then people will basically have no choice ...

@outs78

7 ай бұрын

​@@planteruines5619 No choice of what? To believe without evidence (faith) is the mentality of a child believing in santa, and anyone who believes otherwise is an idiot. Heaven based religions survive only because gullibility and credulity. Try again.

@planteruines5619

7 ай бұрын

@@outs78 faith is not based upon affirmation but question that were answered , anyway some people just will never acknowledge His existence, and no proofs will suffice , maybe you need to ask , after all , what does it costs you ?

@outs78

7 ай бұрын

@@planteruines5619 I was born and raised in that shit. faith is voluntary ignorance (play pretend). There is nothing you can say that I didn’t already use when I was a nondenominational christian. Only the indoctrinated (abused) and stupid rely on faith in an unproven spiritual world. now go lose somewhere else.

@duncanbryson1167

7 ай бұрын

​@@planteruines5619 If any deity proved its existence to me, I would chose to NOT worship it, especially the alleged Abrahamic deity.

Signs are everywhere in nature, sit comfortably somewhere and remain sitting until you breathe in and out enough times where you can vividly hear all the sounds of nature, here is your sign, God is in the audio frequencies and tuning the mind into receiving these things

A quantum loop sounds more plausible to me than a god, it’s certainly more explainable than: “it simply just exists”.

Just found this great video thanks for sharing

@ThomisticInstitute

2 жыл бұрын

You're welcome! Thanks for watching. God bless you!

Your sore throat analogy is perfect. Because just because we have a sore throat, doesn't mean we know what causes a sore throat. And all the reasons we came up with before science actually figured stuff up were not even close to the truth. Also note that illnesses were often thought to have supernatural causes, until science figured the natural one, as is always the case.

thank you Fr Brent..I learned a lot from St Thomas teaching

@DocReasonable

Жыл бұрын

Your beloved Thomas Aquinas also said 'Heretics (Protestants) must not be tolerated. They must not only be excommunicated, but they must be delivered to the secular power to be EXTERMINATED.” Aquinas considered it virtuous to burn heretics, and favoured the option of burning them alive.

May God grant you many years Fr. James Brent.

What a great Video!

Five ways of the existence of God have been explained quite vividly and aptly.

God created us in his image. There is an unseen part of our nature that resembles God. This gives us the ability to recognize him in his creation and in the causes and effects all around us. Just as all animals are able to recognize each other distinct from other animals, and stay together in flocks and herds, humans are able to recognize their Creator distinguished from all creation and flock to Him. This is, of course, subject to all the limitations spoken of in the talk.

@sdfgsfg1812

Жыл бұрын

Thank you

Q - WHICH God exists? ODIN? THOR? SHIVA? HADES? MARS? SET, etc?

Blessed be God forever for the Thomist. Love from Singapore.

@ThomisticInstitute

Жыл бұрын

Greetings to you in Singapore! Thanks for watching and commenting, and may the Lord bless you!

These proofs are historically interesting, but none of them have really stood the test of time and scrutiny, especially after Kant. Of them, the ontological argument is to me by far the most interesting.

@oliverford5367

2 жыл бұрын

And after Darwin and genetics, where it's better understood how things can evolve to look like they were designed without being designed. Design arguments have never been able to explain the flaws in the apparent design

I really needed this. Really needed it. Thank you so much. It is such a work of mercy just going to the trouble of preparing, filming and circulating this video. God bless you.

@electrictroy2010

Жыл бұрын

THERE ARE 100,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 suns just like ours. Even if a superbeing existed, no way could he create that immense universe. AND there’s no reason he would care about our sun more than all the others. We are just a speck of dust in the grand scale of the cosmos .

@arthurcuesta6041

Жыл бұрын

@@electrictroy2010 Lmao dude spends most of his day angry at Christian's. Christ keeps winning.

@Adam-lw8lv

Жыл бұрын

@@electrictroy2010 cringe

Exactly what I needed. Thank you. Really well done.

@ThomisticInstitute

2 жыл бұрын

You're welcome! Very glad you found this helpful. God bless you.

@Eric_01

2 жыл бұрын

What you needed? What did you hear today that you had not already heard? Which part was the "proof" for you?

Very interesting video. I appreciated the thoughts about looking at our intuitions for evidence of God, and then looking to the natural world to better understand God's nature. There are a couple of questions that arise and the answers kind of recap my journey to atheism. What is the purpose and authority of the Bible? In many instances it directly contradicts the evidence of nature, so which "wins"? In my view, if there is a god then the natural world is his direct product while the bible is a product of the flawed understanding of a few people who lived thousands of years ago, anthologized, transcribed, translated and re-interpreted many times to the current plethora of versions. In my view the evidence of nature wins every time. The trouble is that every time we discover the cause behind a natural phenomenon or change that cause has never turned out to be god. The more closely I examined my vague and amorphic intuitions about a god, and compared them to the evidence, the less I believed that a god actually exists. Those intuitions themselves turn out to have a naturalistic explanation in our evolution as pattern-seeking animals. For those reasons, the 5 Proofs do not convince me at all that there is a god.

THANK YOU. Aquinas hit the nail on the head.

@Tooinsecuretousemyrealname

Жыл бұрын

So did Luther. *Zing*

Thomas lived in the middle ages so he can't be blamed for not knowing modern science. But in the 21st century, there's no excuse for repeating his naive arguments.

@bobaphat3676

2 жыл бұрын

Show me where modern science can prove that God exists or doesn't exist.

@lauterunvollkommenheit4344

2 жыл бұрын

@@bobaphat3676 I wrote about Thomas's arguments, not about whether God existed.

@bobaphat3676

2 жыл бұрын

@@lauterunvollkommenheit4344 Understand, but to your second point with regard to "repeating his naïve arguments." St. Thomas arrives at discerning the existence of God with reason, a faculty he argues is given by God. Human beings are rational creatures. Whether or not he had the scientific method is irrelevant. The scientific method is not concerned with proving or disproving God's existence since it is concerned with natural phenomena and mechanisms. God is beyond the scope of Scientific enquiry.

@lauterunvollkommenheit4344

2 жыл бұрын

@@bobaphat3676 I wrote about modern science, not about the scientific method. Modern science has changed our notions of space, time, causality, consciousness, etc. Of course, Thomas didn't know anything about the theory of relativity, thermodynamics, quantum physics, neuroscience, and the rest. Once more: I'm talking about his arguments, not about God's existence. Please try to understand this.

@bobaphat3676

2 жыл бұрын

I understand that science has made leaps and bounds in many areas. However, you claim his arguments are "naïve" without being specific on which particular arguments you have a contention with.

What a fantastic service and indispensable work of spiritual mercy this is. Thank you so much, and thanks be to God for the Dominicans.

Thanks for this. One thing that occurs in the point about Bees - don’t they create honey to have food during winter/rainy seasons? Isn’t that the end for their work? Or am I missing the point? Bless you. 😁

Great aid for the soul

Many thanks, very insightful.

@ThomisticInstitute

4 жыл бұрын

Cheers!

From absolute Being rises contingent existence. That Thomistic mystery continues to hold this Baptist boy.

@crongusclips7836

2 жыл бұрын

Cringe

@gerardk51

2 жыл бұрын

@@crongusclips7836 cringe to you

Very interesting. As a scientist I use the scientific methods to measure all sorts of Gods works. If God did not exist than most of our world population is misguided to include many of the brightest minds.

@merikijiya13

2 жыл бұрын

What have you found to be “gods work” using the scientific method?

Great video. Great course. Thank you

@ThomisticInstitute

4 жыл бұрын

Our pleasure!

@ilovegodandjesusjohn316

2 жыл бұрын

Luke 11:28 But he said, Yea rather, blessed are they that hear the word of God, and keep it. 1 Corinthians 14:33 For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints. 1 Corinthians 14:34 Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the law. 1 Corinthians 14:35 And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church. Luke 6:38 Give, and it shall be given unto you; good measure, pressed down, and shaken together, and running over, shall men give into your bosom. For with the same measure that ye mete withal it shall be measured to you again.

I don't know....maybe if there were **six** ways to prove that God exists I would be convinced......

@randyhelzerman

2 жыл бұрын

@@jannguerrero If there were 5 arguments for atheism, would you be convinced? How about 6? No? What about 7?

@merikijiya13

2 жыл бұрын

@@jannguerrero I think the problem of evil kind of crushes the biblical idea of god. Also Occums razor. Or the fact that there is no empirical evidence of god.

@merikijiya13

2 жыл бұрын

I can get you three ways and a half eaten butterfingers how about that?

@merikijiya13

2 жыл бұрын

@@jannguerrero I am sure beyond a reasonable doubt that the biblical god doesn’t exist. I can not say for sure beyond a reasonable doubt that something like a deistic god doesn’t exist. Occam’s razor eliminates the need for positing a god since existence could come about naturally. What do you mean by “began to exist”?

@merikijiya13

2 жыл бұрын

@@jannguerrero My basis for moral objections are subjective since there is no such thing as objective morality. God doesn’t explain anything though. It only adds more questions. In the Bible god supposedly created the universe from nothing. That doesn’t explain what happened at all. Now I’m just the question where did god come from, how did he make the universe, why etc etc. there’s no need to apply agency to the universe.

4:55. "something is responsible". there is a scientific explanation for the world, that is all we need

@fredriksvard2603

2 жыл бұрын

There are explanations of how things behave but not of what they really are, or how things came to be, why there is something rather than nothing. We dont know what consciousness, black holes, dark matter, quantum stuff either and gravity is hazy.

@el34glo59

2 жыл бұрын

@@fredriksvard2603 Exactly

Ive listened to lany talks on this subject and this suites me better than any ive come across so far

@ThomisticInstitute

Жыл бұрын

We're happy to hear that it helped! Thanks for taking the time to watch and comment. May the Lord bless you!

What did Aquinas think of the ontological argument?

@kelvinvillegas5310

4 жыл бұрын

@fynes leigh Thanks for your comment that actually made me think of what he might have thought about it. (Note: I am wondering what he thought of the ontological argument as formulated by St. Anslem. The ontological argument can only work for God, if it works. It is not suppose to work for any X or Y) First, it is not true the it is fallacious to derive is from ought. Well, you would see it as true if you follow Hume and other Moderns in rejecting Teleology. However, in my view (and we could spend more time on this) the moderns seem to misunderstand what teleology is suppose to be. Anyways, the point of teleology is that the nature of something dictates what is good for it. Given that a the nature of a tree is to grow and have have fruits it needs nourishment (water & sunlight). In other words, because it is in a certain way (it has a certain nature, it ought to have nourishment . Secondly, a key view of Aquinas is the distinction between essence and existence. It is only for God that his existence is identical to his essence. That is, it is only for God that his essence includes existence. Other essence do not necessarily have to exist and so do not include existence in their essence. That seems to be at least inspired by the ontological argument. What I take the ontological argument to be getting at is that given the essence/nature of God, He can not fail to exist. Aquinas at least is adding to that by saying that it is because his essence includes existence that that is so. What I am not sure is what Aquinas thought of St. Anslem's ontological argument. I haven't seen anywhere that he addresses it. He does not count it among the five ways so that at least a clue that he doesn't think too much of it.

@ThomisticInstitute

4 жыл бұрын

He doesn't think that it obtains. He gives it as an objection in Ia Q. 2, a. 1, obj. 1 and refutes it in his reply to objection 1. You can read his reply here: aquinas101.thomisticinstitute.org/st-ia-q-2#FPQ2A1THEP1

@kelvinvillegas5310

4 жыл бұрын

@fynes leigh I am happy to give an example of something that I said, but I'm sure what you would like an example of.

@kelvinvillegas5310

4 жыл бұрын

@@ThomisticInstitute Thank You!

@ThomisticInstitute

4 жыл бұрын

@@kelvinvillegas5310 Sure thing!

God help me spread this wisdom

Its the same as New Thought, through inductive reasoning and argument from what we know, we find nature of God

This makes more sense to me if I replace the word "god" with the lightheartedly, just as inconceivable and silly, and often referred to "purple spaghetti monster." Sure, that's fairly cliqued, but no more so than the idea of "god."

@gerardk51

2 жыл бұрын

Idiot.

If someone lay their faith in something like this, I feel sorry for that person. So wrong in so many ways.

You make a sincere effort in a very civil manner. The early arguments from Aquinas are obviously circular as you are using references from within the bible to point to its own proof. Such methods are foundationally illogical and despite your gentle presentation, they fail to run to a rock bottom truth. The simplest perspective for me is whether all statements have a linguistic nature being just words. Each statement can be assessed too for how it triggers our amygdalas for emotional responses and particularly to the fear of death and loss. I suggest to you how confrontingly it can feel to put away all ideas from externally prescribed sources and accept the true nothingness of death, and the absolute value of each present moment. It was tough for me to shed doctrinal delusions but for each individual, it must be done for personal harmony. There are things what we can't know certainly about our existence and where we find ourselves in the physical realm but the search for the "ultimate cause" is a trap to our neurotic pride.

@areskoumis9147

2 жыл бұрын

Denying the ultimate cause can be a bigger trap to our neurotic pride.

@Snillocad143

2 жыл бұрын

@@areskoumis9147 .. I have absolutely no idea about how to make what you just wrote become relevant to what I wrote. You are civil and intelligent and sincere but I don't get your point.

@areskoumis9147

2 жыл бұрын

@@Snillocad143 "but the search for the "ultimate cause" is a trap to our neurotic pride.'" A central tenet of science is that the universe is knowable. One starts on a journey of scientific inquiry and discovery with the certainty that keeping after the quest will reveal some truth - if not to us, then to a future fellow inquirer carrying on the work. Complementarily, Christian philosophy says that the fact the universe is knowable is a reflection of the Mind that created it, and the intent - again by design - is for universe to be knowable, by us, reason being just one of the paths that leads to faith that leads to God. Denying this "quest to know" to feed, say, prideful atheism ("haven't' we gotten past all that superstitious nonsense, y'know? I'm obviously smarter than you...") is in itself, neurotic. As defined, a mental or emotional reaction that is irrational. It is irrational - neurotic - *not* to seek the truth - even ultimate Truths - to feed a belief that arrogated its genesis nowhere else but the modern human ego - which in itself, can be an "externally prescribed source" of confirmation bias. The supernatural can't be because...well...it just can't be.....full stop. Your massively presumptive dictum "it must be done for personal harmony" and glib dismissal of 6,000 years of documented human experience with the Divine, as a "triggered amygdala" indicates a certain purposefully simplistic dogmatism that precludes free inquiry into the nature of the universe. If it works for you, great, but your belief - and that's what it is, belief - does not justify a judgement of "neurotic" on those who, like Aquinas, believed - and believe - differently, with good reason. And OBTW, arguments from contingency to a Prime Mover or First Cause do not have their roots in Scripture. More like Aristotle. So your estimation of theological circularity is faulty.

@Snillocad143

2 жыл бұрын

@@areskoumis9147 Your reasoning too is circular because there ought to be something external to the human mind which would support the prehistoric tradition of assigning human nature onto the environment, but all you do essentially is refer to Man's ability to think as a primary basis for arguing in favor of a supernatural being. Your topic is broadly familiar to me but your logic loses me. My best understanding about neurosis which is not pathological/medical would point to the ego's unwillingness to accept the world without requiring absolute knowledge of the cause/purpose. The triggered amygdala reference is specifically to cover how religion tells people from an early age whether they are born to be worthless but whether religion holds the key to the presumed salvation. If we dispense with that whole explicit bullying which is thus delivered in the familiar cognitively dissonant terms of a god who at once loves us but is damning us to hell, we can get on with living life which has plenty of its day to day struggles. Thanks! I'll leave it there!

@areskoumis9147

2 жыл бұрын

@@Snillocad143 "which would support the prehistoric tradition of assigning human nature onto the environment," I have no idea what you meant by that. "would point to the ego's unwillingness to accept the world without requiring absolute knowledge of the cause/purpose." So unless I accept your judgement that life is meaningless I am neurotic? Got that. As I said, unquestioned ego drives much of the argument against the existence of the divine. "The triggered amygdala reference is specifically to cover how religion tells people from an early age whether they are born to be worthless but whether religion holds the key to the presumed salvation." You somehow jump from amygdala to a theological judgement that is pretty faulty, when it comes to Christianity. Your usage of "bullying" says to me that as I pointed out, there is some underlying dogmatism - perhaps induced by bad personal experiences - that impel you to dismiss faith and belief as "cognitive dissonance." Again, seen it before, and I understand it works for you. So we'll leave it there.

“Honeybees are not intelligent” the audacity in this sentence 😂

Thank you for this!