Summa Theologica sucks

[Anonymous No.11206495]

>important question
>objection 1: some dude in a historically unsound, a dozen times translated in the biggest game of telephone in history, said this
>objection 2: this other dude said this while jerking off thinking of god
>objection 3: principles upon principles either part of circular logic or "dude God said so lmao"
>synthesis: Have this response out of my ass because it's obvious, otherwise you just don't get it.

Why do people take this book seriously?

[Anonymous No.11206506]

Why do you spread such ignorance Anon?

Does it make you laugh?

[Anonymous No.11206512]

>>11206506
If you want to refute me then do it. Your reply isn't an argument.

[Anonymous No.11206579]

>>11206512
Niether is your post

[Anonymous No.11206586]

Apologetics exist to reinforce faith in believers. You can tell because the authors of such works bever came to Christianity through argument. It's always that they had a religious experience.

Because religion has no ground to stand on though they have to create complicated and or silly arguments to try and trick people into thinking they have a point to. CS Lewis is a good example. Christians like him, but everyone else realizes his books are just big loads of crap.

[Anonymous No.11206676]

>>11206586
Both Aquinas and Lewis just illegitimise and tarnish Christianity, though. Faith is faith, dancing around and pretending otherwise with retarded shit anyone with half a brain can see through is ultimately a denial of faith as faith. And shows that you are not actually faithful, you're simply delusional. The faithful don't need infantile crutches to remain and reinforce. It cannot and should not be anything more. I'm irreligious but I can appreciate faith. These empty arguments and justifications only make it more like theory-fiction or New Age trash, than a true religion with true faith (which is independent of and immune to any form of argument/truth/reason).

[Anonymous No.11206749]

>>11206495
actually, dummy, many of the objections proposed by Aquinas are misconceptions a half-wit student of theology or layman might have even today. they serve a purpose in organizing not only Aquinas' argument but also identifying common fallacies.

please stop posting, and delete your youtube channel as well.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U3yKxvW9yNA

[Anonymous No.11206758]

>>11206495
>Syllogisms are circular logic

[Anonymous No.11206783]

>>11206758
correct

[Anonymous No.11206792]

>>11206495
Imagine being this much of a brainlet.

[Anonymous No.11206799]

>>11206792
Explain?

[Anonymous No.11206827]

>>11206749
wtf I posted a comment on this video a few months back and now it's gone. was a joke about how amazingatheist not understanding metaphysics destroys his authority and the premise of the channel. youtube is truly the worst.

[Anonymous No.11206839]

>>11206783
Idiot

[Anonymous No.11206888]

>>11206839
Look up circular reasoning.

[Anonymous No.11206927]

>>11206495
moron