We can never reach an Absolute understanding of reality.

God is the father of everything. The First mover.

@Mongke Khan#2673 http://www.goodreads.com/list/show/91080.Introduction_to_Marxism_Leninism

Thanks

ok then we could find the origin of our universe and still ask for who created it and so on

until there's nothing

I don't think you understand the argument Aquinas is trying to make.

In what you quoted

Aquinas still assumes that bigger moves the weaker

but look how in space there isn't gravity

and in a different universe or part this could be different too

or a multiverse

Is there any proof to a multiverse?

@Mros as many as with first mover

I'm not so advanced

@Firefly So when you say, it is only based on abstraction; as far as abstractions go, it is still logical. You are correct about saying the abstractions follow reality, not the other way around. It is not an Absolute statement. It is based on the abstraction of motion.

I don't know proofs of it

Is there any logical explanation for the existence of the multiverse or is it just pure speculation?

@Deleted User correct. But most abstractions that people had in history went wrong.

So we really don't have a prove.

But we have a lot of fanatics

Believing in abstractions.

hypotheses, I found a video explaining an alternative but I don't remember it, neither I find the video; I'd have so search it, Still, I don't think I could explain this since I'm not advanced

@Firefly Abstractions become wrong when they are shown to be illogical. This argument is 800 years old and has not been shown to be illogical based on reason or science.

Is there a proof of God?

Aquinas is still making a logical and reasonable explanation.

It is the closest thing to proof that exists.

Like the other ones, it could be a lot of things

Of course it isn't definitive proof, but it at least makes it a possibility.

@Deleted User That is not true. Abstractions are wrong when they are not reflecting reality.

@Mros Multiverse theory is just a postulation to try and explain the beginning of the universe. It is a secular theory for the first mover of this universe, even though it does not explain the ultimate first mover. It is special pleading.

Who proved what doesn't matter.

Ok, thanks for the explanation.

@Firefly That is semantics. How do you prove that it does not reflect reality? You need to use logic.

I've heard of the multiverse theory but I've never heard any convincing arguments for it.

Nope

You have to do an experiment AND use logic.

Sure. You need data.

And if you don't have data you have only naked anstraction

It is not prove

I agree.