Thomas Aquinas presented five ways to prove the existence of God. Among these five ways the first way or the argument from motion looks most likely or reasonable to me. I have chosen the argument as the best argument because it is the universal truth that some unknown supreme or natural energy exists, which controls our senses. These senses help us to identify that some things are always in motion. For instance, air molecules are always in motion and they are not controlled by any living creature. So, it is predictable that they are controlled by a supreme power (Gracyk).

I support this argument because it helps us to understand that God helps us to create potential motion, which converts to actual motion. The source of potential motion is created by our minds and I believe that a spiritual mind always produce proper actual motion. Aquinas argued that it is not possible to have actual and potential motion in the same time, which proves that nothing can move itself. I believe that people improve their potential energy by practicing spiritual believes of God, which help them to create innovative ideas in their minds. As a result of innovative thinking, people can do fruitful works in society (Gracyk).

Aquinas argued that the sequence of motion is not possible to increase till infinity. Thus, it is predictable that the force of actual motion is controlled by the supreme power. In the same way the source of initial potential motion is also controlled by the supreme power. So, it proves that God exists and he/she helps us to produce our actual motion. Thus, I think the first argument helps us to understand the existence of God (Gracyk).

However, we can provide some objections against St. Thomas Aquinas's arguments because God is not demonstrable. Aquinas has faith that the motion, initial energy, power etc, are controlled by God, but in reality faith are not demonstrable. A proper demonstration needs scientific or practical proves and faith does not provide proper evidence. Aquinas argued that the existence of God is must be proved by his causes, but his effects are not sufficient for his supposed creativity, nature etc. Also, Aquinas argues that God's effects are finite but in reality God is infinite and finite is not equal to infinite, so it proves that the motion, energy etc, are not controlled by an infinite power. Aquinas believes that the unseen things of God are visible or understandable through his manifest works, but this does not prove the existence of God. In current century science has the answer for most of the questions that were provided by philosophers to prove the existence of supreme power in past century. Inventions of science proved that the creations of living things are possible through scientific experiments. Science shows the source of actual motion. Also, it proves that energy can be converted from one phase to another. It describes the initial source of energy, which creates motion. Aviation engineering shows the possibility of infinite motion by inventing hypersonic aircrafts, which proves that Aquinas arguments are not fully acceptable.


From above discussion we can come to a conclusion that Thomas Aquinas arguments help us to understand the existence of God. He proves us the existence by providing his strong arguments, such as the argument of motion, argument from efficient causes etc. However, it is possible to provide objections against those arguments because God is not demonstrable. Anyway, I think that we can enrich our lives and personalities by believing God and his existence because positive spiritual believes create infinite energies to the human beings.

Works Cited

Gracyk, Theodore. "The Existence of God can be Proved in Five Ways". St. Thomas Aquinas. 2004. Web. 15 Feb. 2014.

Related essays