The Five Ways of Knowing
The Five Ways of Knowing: Thomas
St. Thomas Aquinas listed what he saw as five intellectual proofs of the existence of God—proofs that were dependent on reason and observation, yet not the revealed word of God. For centuries, the five ways were regarded as the truth and revered by theologians and common folk alike. The five ways deal with reason and observation.
The first way, Aquinas explained, revolves around a first mover. As described by Young, W. (2004) this is, “the change of something from being at rest to being in motion is a change in its nature from potential to actuality, and this is only possible if something that is already active sets the potential mover in motion” (p. 530). Essentially, without believing in an unmoved mover, nothing in the world would be explicable. The first way generally posits that there must be a first mover, and that first mover must be God. According to Cahn (2009),
Whatever is moved must be moved by another. If that by which it is moved be itself moved, then this also must needs be moved by another and that by another mover, consequently, no other mover, seeing that subsequent movers move only inasmuch as they are moved by the first mover; as he staff moves only because it is moved by the hand. Therefore it is necessary to arrive at a first mover, moved by no other; and this everyone understands to be God. (p. 60).
My question is who caused God to move and who or what gave God the energy to begin the movement? As stated by Cahn (2009), “motion is nothing else than the reduction of something potentiality to actuality. But nothing can be reduced from potentiality to actuality, except by something in a state of actuality” (p. 60). Given his argument, it is only logical to counter act this with the question, what or who was in a state of actuality that gave energy and actuality to God? I feel it worthy to present the question as to why this ‘first mover’ must be God. How do we know the first mover wasn’t
St. Thomas Aquinas listed what he saw as five intellectual proofs of the existence of God—proofs that were dependent on reason and observation, yet not the revealed word of God. For centuries, the five ways were regarded as the truth and revered by theologians and common folk alike. The five ways deal with reason and observation.
The first way, Aquinas explained, revolves around a first mover. As described by Young, W. (2004) this is, “the change of something from being at rest to being in motion is a change in its nature from potential to actuality, and this is only possible if something that is already active sets the potential mover in motion” (p. 530). Essentially, without believing in an unmoved mover, nothing in the world would be explicable. The first way generally posits that there must be a first mover, and that first mover must be God. According to Cahn (2009),
Whatever is moved must be moved by another. If that by which it is moved be itself moved, then this also must needs be moved by another and that by another mover, consequently, no other mover, seeing that subsequent movers move only inasmuch as they are moved by the first mover; as he staff moves only because it is moved by the hand. Therefore it is necessary to arrive at a first mover, moved by no other; and this everyone understands to be God. (p. 60).
My question is who caused God to move and who or what gave God the energy to begin the movement? As stated by Cahn (2009), “motion is nothing else than the reduction of something potentiality to actuality. But nothing can be reduced from potentiality to actuality, except by something in a state of actuality” (p. 60). Given his argument, it is only logical to counter act this with the question, what or who was in a state of actuality that gave energy and actuality to God? I feel it worthy to present the question as to why this ‘first mover’ must be God. How do we know the first mover wasn’t