*

;)

"...strange"

...still strange... different dear ones died then...:):(
then Danu Died {yeh of dear old age, but I can't release her ashes yet...{my bad}}}

if you weren't around with your special gifts and insights.

Please understand the gentlemen are ultimately very kind and a certain kind of Buddhist. {...and of course they meant warriors as men & women for we "fight" together ;) }

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Judaism/shema.html

...brought my many sided education back haunting me, even from the head of a Department in Loyla Maramount University, during a certain time, saying he would give me {...with my specially tested "abilities" to my most sacred order - once, at a time - The Jesuits {...if I Was A Man }. Well I am an obvious woman, so he told me to keep "working" in my way - in a goodly manner, for I am a good being. ;):( {...ultimately, still am. ;}

Let us Pray... {...the old fashion way...} /|\)0(

He knew I was a teaching Witch {Wiccan}. He wanted to see if my powers were God given or Devil. ;);( Tis Time To Brew More Tea. ;)

Medieval Sourcebook:
Thomas Aquinas:
Reasons in Proof of the Existence of God, 1270

Summa Theologia
Article II. Whether the existence of God is demonstrable:
Let us proceed to the second point. It is objected (1) that the existence of God is not demonstratable: that God's existence is an article of faith, and that articles of faith are not demonstratable, because the office of demonstration is to prove, but faith pertains (only) to things that are not to be proven, as is evident from the Epistle to the Hebrews, 11. Hence that God's existence is not demonstratable. Again, (2) that the subject matter of demonstration is that something exists, but in the case of God we cannot know what exists, but only what does not, as Damascenus says (Of the Orthodox Faith, I., 4.) Hence that we cannot demonstrate God's existence. Again, (3) that if God's existence is to be proved it must be from what He causes, and that what He effects is not sufficient for His supposed nature, since He is infinite, but the effects finite, and the finite is not proportional to the infinite. Since, therefore, a cause cannot be proved through an effect not proportional to itself, it is said that God's exisence cannot be proved.
But against this argument the apostle says (Rom. I., 20), "The unseen things of God are visible through His manifest works." But this would not be so unless it were possible to demonstrate God's existence through His works. What ought to be understood concerning anything, is first of all, whether it exists. Conclusion. It is possible to demonstrate God's existence, atthough not a priori (by pure reason), yet a posteriori from some work of His more surely known to us.
In answer I must say that the proof is double. One is through the nature of a cause and is called propter quid: this is through the nature of preceding events sirnply. The other is through the nature of the effect, and is called quia, and is through the nature of preceding things as respects us. Since the effect is better known to us than the cause, we proceed from the effect to the knowledge of the cause. From any effect whatsoever it can be proved that a corresponding cause exists, if only the effects of it are sufficiently known to us, for since effects depend on causes, the effect being given, it is necessary that a preceding cause exists. Whence, that God exists, although this is not itself known to us, is provable through effects that are known to us.
To the first objection above, I reply, therefore, that God's existence, and those other things of this nature that can be known through natural reason concerning God, as is said in Rom. I., are not articles of faith, but preambles to these articles. So faith presupposes natural knowledge, so grace nature, and perfection a perfectible thing. Nothing prevents a thing that is in itself demonstratable and knowable, from being accepted as an article of faith by someone that does not accept the proof of it.
http://faculty.uml.edu/rinnis/45.304%20God%20and%20Philosophy/Thomas%20A...

Ahhh St Tom ;)

*??*
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S1gZFUJuj-w
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vInQNJO3jzM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3dpA94wDNjI&feature=related