Message from @Deleted User
Discord ID: 624315083551670272
<:yus:538083968881524747>
Islam has no place in the west
I feel that too
Ok lets start a fire
**god exists**
Now meet your burden of proof. @kaf
whoops
@kaf You made a positive claim. This now must be tested, so you need to provide an argument.
That is a minor proof but we all know God exists all around us so denying existences is no different from Denying God.
But like
Evidence though
@!GoldenKingship! Wrong. Where is your argument?
Where is he around us?
Everywhere you go is a result of his actions
He enacted the first move of the universe and from there it had caused what we know as the "Big Bang" begining of time space and physics.
Everything we know today is a result of God.
@!GoldenKingship! Prove that.
Ok i will, prepare to get debunked athiest.
Me- "So lets go over one reason or proof of God existence, We all know that motion in the what we call universe had to have been started by another motion of action.
This action for say is done by a mover, this mover enacts a force onto another object which then moves.
So if you go back to the first mover. We know that it had to of been put in motion by no other than; and everyone knows this to be God."
This is what i said like last week.
No that's the incorrect definition of motion.
Anient science proves it
Like I said before.
Motion is relative, things are movig relative to other things that are moving relative to them.
This is not ancient science.
It is Aristotelian metaphysics which is false, since we have a better understanding of physics.
Things were never infinetley in motion to begin with.
Metaphysics follows physics.
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.