@Sentient23

i ahvenit

hi

what

lmao

yeah im definitely going to be able to read that

So if this is God and he has always been here

Y/N

Mate, hitler took speed so he could run the reich

Have a coffee and read it all

just let me tell you even if aquinas is wrong God is still real

When you are ready i think i can begin

but ill read it

The rustling of jimmies

I await your readiness, @Sentient23

read it

yeah

What issue do u take

bro

Okay so stop me where my interpretation of this doesnt match yours

i thought this was a rebuttal, this is just the first way explained

whoa, what?

But i usually try go the Yes, No, Y/N route

Dont be like my friend here

k go on

easy

*inb4 he presents the oppy rebuttal*

Right, so Aquinas is saying
"god exists and all things exist, change is the norm and the idea of a start isnt correct because we have no idea that things didnt ever not exist",
Y/N?

(I always say im not going to go into it then i go into it hehe)

no lol that's in no way what hes saying

Okay, whats he saying then

Hes saying that based on the fact that change occurs, and based on the nature of change, there must be something unchanging ontologically prior to EVERYTHING

He never appealed to ignorance

I dont see how what i said contradicts what you say there

"the idea of a start isnt correct because we have no idea that things didnt ever not exist", "

But thats okay, i see what youre saying

Ill skip to the point i like to drop

go on

An actual has to act to make a potential actual. There can only be a finite ammount of actuals. What was the first actual, one that didn't need another actual to cause it?

Is god all knowing?
Omnipotent, omnipresent, he knows all that is, will be and has been before, during and after it happening.