Griggsy

Originally posted by Griggsy

Giod, no, such begged things and no ad hominems.Instead you beg the questin of directed outcomes. My pointing out that those two fail, is no ad hominem, just that fact for us naturalists. Why don't you learn what are begged questions and ad hominems?
SatantheAlien,Technomange and I rebut both those men easily. Their detailed arguments cannot vouchsafe themselves but instead self-destruct! Again, the authors I list are on the cutting-edge of the philosophy of religion whilst Feser gets hardly any attention.
Thomism is not regnant, as I understand anymore,
in the Roman Catholic Church.
That non-existent intent shows up in prayer as answered prayers are post hoc-coincidneces, and apologists ever make up silly rationalizations for unanswered ones. Ever are miracles just natural manifestations. The rainbow needed no intent but comes forth from necessity due to natural law.
Chaos, order, regularity and the laws are inherent in Nature. So,all Aqunas and Feser's silly efforts to invert that ever fail!
Indeed, for Him to act, He'd depend on them as the secondary cause! No wonder apologists fail; they see matters backwards with their backward's causation. I delve into that causation in another thread here.
I know that theists prefer their superstition of reduced animism just as full animists and polytheists do,but no intent belies all three.
Aquinas' hierarchical cosmological argument begs the question when he states that to take away the Priary Cause, people take away all causes. He does not propose here a chronological way as Craig does but only an explanatory one as Leibniz does.
When theists claim that God has such and such attributes, they merely define without giving any evidence for them. Their intuitions don't reflect reality! Theists merely beg the question and special plead for Him to be radically different!
So,querying what caused or created him is no multiple question as William Sahakian alleges when they first make that begged question.
In the end, the Polyverse needs no kind of Creator, either that of the god of the scientific gaps or that of the putative explanatory gap. Nature is the Creator in both ways!