Message from @Deleted User
Discord ID: 624316863425282067
Hence the 'meta'.
You can't not have somthing move and another not move.
You are denying the fact that in our universe there is a begining and an end.
An unmoved mover does not equal God as well.
No b-theory of time.
"Began to exist" is incoherent.
In the begining chaos was the lack of motion, and in the end there is nothing but frozen cosmo.
Nope.
You say there is no such thing as a beging because your claiming its all infinitley relative without the involvement of God even begining it all?
You are using Aquinas' first way, yes?
No I'm claiming 'began to exist' is incoherent according to b-theory of time.
And your definition of motion is incorrect, I'm correcting it.
Even proven in the Bible
Wrong.
Why are you using the Bible?
Arguing for God does not require prior belief.
This is metaphysics, not the Bible.
Because its recorded in the bible.
Circular reasoning.
Why are you taking Golden boy seriously lol
The library of alexandria was burned so humanity lost like 5000 years of knowledge and now people like you come out of the wedlock to deny God had any involvement in the creation of the universe and Manm
This is called begging the question fallacy.
Clearly this man has not hard of the school of skepticism.
Nor of epicureans.
This has nothing to do with the topic.
This debate is about philosophy and religion. The fact that you deny aquinas's perspectives is just another dumbfounded counter arguement to make
Aquinas has been refuted though.
Refuted by who? The "Experts"
His definition of motion is incorrect.
Yes, philosophers.
And modern day physics.
His metaphysics relies on Aristotle which is outdated.
So do you concede?
You cannot defend your faith nor your belief in God.
Modern day phics literally proves that there had to be a first artificial motion in place in order for there to even be motion
Wrong.
Where does it say this?
Please send me a study.
Your whole argument is built around athiesm but you fail to even reinforce how God doesnt exist.