Reflections on Thomas' Arguments for the Existence of God

Part 2, Signposts of Mystery

There's a common misunderstanding of Thomas Aquinas. Due to the style of the Summa, the analytical prowess of Thomas' mind, and how we've characterized his arguments for the existence of God as "proofs," we tend to think we're in the land of logic rather than mysticism. But Thomas was most definitely a mystic. And few appreciate the apophatic nature of the Summa, especially when it comes to Thomas' arguments for the existence of God.

Let me explain.

When Thomas makes his arguments concerning the existence of God he is very clear in the Summa to make a distinction between God's existence and God's essence. People often miss this hugely important point. True, we might make an argument for God's existence, but that is a very thin claim. That God exists we might get our head around, but What God is and How God is, well, about such matters we have no clue. 

Consider how Thomas ends each of his five arguments for the existence of God. He makes his argument--like how a infinite regress of causes is impossible thus demanding a "first" cause--and then states the conclusion this way: "This is what everyone names as God." For Thomas in these arguments the name "God" functions as a cipher, a word that points toward a mystery. We name the Source and Origin of the cosmos "God," but we really have no idea what we're talking about, what the word "God" actually names or means. 

This is why it's a mistake to describe Thomas' arguments as "proofs for the existence of God." Thomas' arguments are better characterized as Signposts of Mystery. The human mind follows its innate metaphysical curiosity to the edge of the cosmos. And at that edge our minds stare into the Beyond. We know that the universe cannot be its own explanation. Why does it exist? How does it exist? We don't really know, but the word "God" points toward that Mystery. In this sense, even atheists agree with Thomas' arguments. All rational people know that a halo of Mystery encircles the material universe and fences in the human search for its Ultimate Source. And it's pretty well agreed, among both theists and atheists, that the word "God" has been historically used to point to such questions and mysteries. Whatever caused all this to come into existence, as Thomas says, "this is what everyone names as God," at least traditionally. And while today the word "God," as a metaphysical cipher, might be objected to, there should be no controversy that the Mystery the word "God" has traditionally pointed toward hasn't gone anywhere. 

Basically, the ontological questions that "God" names? These remain.