Proof god exists tbh a more edited version

[ryhan]

Here is the Aristotelian proof at least .


1 That which has potential has a actualizer
2 before a particle in space time has a effect like for instance a potential going to an actual a pen going from potentially dropping to actually dropping by a physical force such as gravity it is always in a state of potential.
3 After a potential goes to an actual it is actualized by something prior.
4 this action happens continuously.
5 this is in a metaphysical sense rather than a law of physics while a law of physics describe a relation of the details of potential to change the metaphyics describes the conclusion of potential to change.
6 things cannot cause themselves in space time they always must be actualized by something prior.
7 this potential to change must be happening at the subatomic realms of reality continuously.
8 to avoid a infinite regress we get a being that is outside space time that fufills the function of moving this continually.
9 this happens continuously so it is not similar with the kalam this argument works regardless of how old the universe is.
10 god has no potential it is a being outside space time it is pure actual as the being we are referring to has no potential is outside space time and must necessarily exist to make sure exsistance is functioning on the basic level refer to the anthropic princaple as to why this is a rational universe.
11 God is uncreated he is not self created cause he has no potential so he is not in a state of actualization he is outside space time so he requires no creation in space time and his existence is sufficiently required to destroy an infinite regress.
C1 we live inside a rational universe it is constantly being moved by the uncreated creator.
C2 God exists and exsistance requires him to function.
QED god exists

 

[Guest2]

God exists

No he doesn't case closed

 

[ryhan]

No he doesn't case closed

Bruhhhhhhh the evidence points towards

 

[dyellow]

Why not use those arguments in a debate or something? I'm not sure if you're memeing but I don't know how you except anything but "not a single letter" responses

 

[Deleted member 1780]

1 That which has potential has a actualizer

Why?

 

[ryhan]

Why not use those arguments in a debate or something? I'm not sure if you're memeing but I don't know how you except anything but "not a single letter" responses

SOY reddit cucks kick me and discuck usually is on about politics it's brutal

Why?

Cause that is how change occurs unless your saying something moves without something acting on it if so show me how that is logically possible without violating the laws of logic

 

[dyellow]

SOY reddit cucks kick me and discuck usually is on about politics it's brutal

then post on theology subreddits or something or find people to debate on facebook or irl

 

[TheGoodGuy]

Stfu god lover every single one of your threads is about your ficticous god a being that doesn´t even exist get banned already ffs.

 

[ryhan]

then post on theology subreddits or something or find people to debate on facebook or irl

Face book is for cucks tbh theology sub reddits is a circle jerk and fucking i don't want to argue irl you just sound to controversial

 

[Dregster]

No he doesn't case closed

Cope

 

[ryhan]

Cope

Hes a soy cuck ignore him

Stfu god lover every single one of your threads is about your ficticous god a being that doesn´t even exist get banned already ffs.

 

[TheNEET]

gods me

 

[WawelDragon1683]

There is no god and also this isn't the palce to spam this shit. I think you will fit much better at reddit.

 

[dyellow]

Face book is for cucks tbh theology sub reddits is a circle jerk and fucking i don't want to argue irl you just sound to controversial

if you wanna go soy then go all the way in r/atheism is your place

 

[ryhan]

if you wanna go soy then go all the way in r/atheism is your place

Oh veyyyyy i tried i really did but they kept down vote massing me like the soy cucks they are

There is no god and also this isn't the palce to spam this shit. I think you will fit much better at reddit.

I'm not spamming tbh

 

[Deleted member 16455]

No he doesn't case closed

 

[Deleted member 1780]

Cause that is how change occurs unless your saying something moves without something acting on it if so show me how that is logically possible without violating the laws of logic

Causality is just a lense that humans view reality through. We can't help but understand how the world works through it. That doesn't mean it is inherent to reality though.

 

[ryhan]

Causality is just a lense that humans view reality through. We can't help but understand how the world works through it. That doesn't mean it is inherent to reality though.

That is a appeal to ignorance we can understand casualty cause this is not a physics question your begging the question really as to what causes things when we have answers especially since this is not concerned with fully the details rather the conclusion of thing going from a state of potential to actual to deny this is to deny simple change when you fire a electron it goes from a potential state to a actual state this is fundamental law in everything things don't just cause themselves we cant prove that and to say such a state ment is a logical contradiction as it vioaltes the laws of logic and a logical contradictory idea can be refuted as a falsifiable claim

 

[needsolution]

cope, god doesnt exist

 

[NEETard]

Wheres the proof this is just random bullshit

 

[ryhan]

cope, god doesnt exist

Then logic doesn't than we don't

 

[needsolution]

Then logic doesn't than we don't

cope

 

[ryhan]

cope

You do know what this means right we can tap into the god mind

 

[needsolution]

You do know what this means right we can tap into the god mind

cope

 

[ryhan]

This is just the "universe had to have a cause" argument with the "but God is an exception" special pleading, both of which have been torn to shreds worse than an industrial woodchipper.

Not a argument i argued for this works with the big bang the big crunch doesn't matter which theory you use and it is not special pleading as all creation happens when a potential is actualized by a prior and also creations in space time happen here that which is outside don't require creations in space time as for what happened before it's not ex materia you don't know either what happened before the big bang i would claim that instead of ex nihilo or ex materia it's ex deo god created creation out of his parts

 

[Guest2]

the big crunch

Lold

 

[Deleted member 18912]

Another religious cope thread...
If he exists, he is the biggest piece of sadistic shit, to have ever walked in existence.

 

[ryhan]

Another religious cope thread...
If he exists, he is the biggest piece of sadistic shit, to have ever walked in existence.

Let a man cope

 

[Deleted member 18912]

Let a man cope

 

[Sparrow's Song]

We need to hack his PC...

 

[ryhan]

Even if I would grant you your entire malformed argument, it would only prove the universe required a kick-start. It still does nothing to prove even a deistic God, let alone a biblical one.

Let me make it in a set of premises you can understand.

1 change is possible.
2 for something to go from potential to an actual change must be done by a prior actualizer.
3 Potential and actual is happening constantly.
4 things to not self cause actuals that is akin to saying you can birth yourself without a prior actualizer unless that things has no potential.
5 start applying this to everthing on a larger scale and you start seeing that not only does this prior potential to actual must be happening constantly it also is going down in a functional until you get down to the first mover that is unmoved and has no potential.
6 this being is doing this constantly and is not some unconscious being because well the anthropic principle states that which hosts life must have the sufficient means to hold that life in other words why this not that.
7 this being has consciousness.
8 this being has no creation it did not self cause cause it had no begging cause it had no potential or change it just is.
9 it also exists outside space time so it could have no ceration in space.
10 This being would have to be every where to be powering everything constantly.
11 this being could only be 1 as to say their is something greater is to say their was never a 1 to begin with.
12 This being is omnibenovlent the fact were still around without dying.
C1 God exists and his being is every where.
C2 this moves towards panenthiesm

 

[ryhan]

The problem isn't that I don't understand your argument, the problem is your argument is malformed and has already been debunked ad nauseum.

What is the issue here your using so much appeals to ignorance here what if the laws were different x where else not understanding it's a universal rather than a monoversial (universal within the universe such as a law of physics) Your not even understanding the argument

 

[IamJacksBrokenHeart]

that feel when i eat cereal for breakfast

the big crunch

 

[ryhan]

Perhaps your tenuous grasp on English is impacting your ability to display your thoughts clearly.

You said it yourself you understand the arguments they speak for themselves where is the debunking here.

 

[Deleted member 17883]

You should stope asking if he exists and start asking how to destroy him or what he wants from us.

 

[ryhan]

You should stope asking if he exists and start asking how to destroy him or what he wants from us.

Well if he exists we can tap into the god mind

Search "watchmaker argument" on Google or "irreducible complexity". The basis of these arguments are the same as yours, you've just dressed yours differently. Unless, as I explained, your English skills are causing you to misportray your argument.

Not the watchmaker argument theoretically the universe could be infinite doesn't change the argument cause it is addressing the teleology behind it all the argument is suggesting is this is a rational universe that is it that is why i point out said the anthropic principle.

Also this is not addressing evolution either it is talking about universals here not monoversials but if you want to use a watch maker universe your just magnifying this gods power even more The argument is addressing why is this universe rational rather than irrational that's it it's not saying life is fine tuned for us rather the universe itself is a rational place

 

[Deleted member 1780]

That is a appeal to ignorance we can understand casualty cause this is not a physics question your begging the question really as to what causes things when we have answers especially since this is not concerned with fully the details rather the conclusion of thing going from a state of potential to actual to deny this is to deny simple change when you fire a electron it goes from a potential state to a actual state this is fundamental law in everything things don't just cause themselves we cant prove that and to say such a state ment is a logical contradiction as it vioaltes the laws of logic and a logical contradictory idea can be refuted as a falsifiable claim

Holy run on sentence. What are you saying? Can you put aside all the fancy verbalism, and get your point across?

 

[ryhan]

Holy run on sentence. What are you saying? Can you put aside all the fancy verbalism, and get your point across?

Your using 2 fallacies begging the question and an appeal to ignorance.

2nd material casuality things going from actual to potential are not inductive things like science but deductive things we can be sure of and is not falsifiable for instance.

1 Dog is a mammal.
2 All dogs are mammals.
C1 their fore all dogs are mammals if we know something prior we can come to a conclusion we can be assure of the argument doesn't change cause it isn't falsifiable

 

[LastGerman]

The word god itself need to be explained first. Its etymology is quite interesting:

The English word god continues the Old English god (guþ, gudis in Gothic, guð in Old Norse, god in Frisian and Dutch, and Gott in modern German), which is derived from Proto-Germanic *ǥuđán.

Wōdanaz
Some variant forms of the name Odin such as the Lombardic Godan may point in the direction that the Lombardic form actually comes from Proto-Germanic *ǥuđánaz. Wōdanaz or Wōđinaz is the reconstructed Proto-Germanic name of a god of Germanic paganism, known as Odin in Norse mythology, Wōden in Old English, Wodan or Wotan in Old High German and Godan in the Lombardic language. Godan was shortened to God.

Gaut
A significant number of scholars have connected this root with the names of three related Germanic tribes: the Geats, the Goths and the Gutar.

The word god is linked to a specific race and has a biological root, which means only German people can be god since this is our term to describe ourselves.

 

[ryhan]

The word god itself need to be explained first. Its etymology is quite interesting:

The English word god continues the Old English god (guþ, gudis in Gothic, guð in Old Norse, god in Frisian and Dutch, and Gott in modern German), which is derived from Proto-Germanic *ǥuđán.

Wōdanaz
Some variant forms of the name Odin such as the Lombardic Godan may point in the direction that the Lombardic form actually comes from Proto-Germanic *ǥuđánaz. Wōdanaz or Wōđinaz is the reconstructed Proto-Germanic name of a god of Germanic paganism, known as Odin in Norse mythology, Wōden in Old English, Wodan or Wotan in Old High German and Godan in the Lombardic language. Godan was shortened to God.

Gaut
A significant number of scholars have connected this root with the names of three related Germanic tribes: the Geats, the Goths and the Gutar.

The word god is linked to a specific race and has a biological root, which means only German people can be god since this is our term to describe ourselves.

Imean the god of classical theism the omni god if 1 wills

 

[LastGerman]

Imean the god of classical theism the omni god if 1 wills

It is German.

 

[Deleted member 16455]

Man just go back to not believing in god

 

[ryhan]

It is German.

The omni god i though it was greek

 

[LastGerman]

The omni god i though it was greek

No. The words alone are all linked to the word itself, which means German.

For example:
''Godan was shortened to God over time and was adopted/retained by the Germanic peoples of the British isles as the name of their deity, in lieu of the Latin word Deus used by the Latin speaking Christian church, after conversion to Christianity.''

Godan is a race. They are Germanic. If you want to look to the so called ''Greek'' god, it is Jupiter:
''Latin Deus (originally used to address Jupiter, but later adopted as the name of God)''

 

[ryhan]

No. The words alone are all linked to the word itself, which means German.

For example:
''Godan was shortened to God over time and was adopted/retained by the Germanic peoples of the British isles as the name of their deity, in lieu of the Latin word Deus used by the Latin speaking Christian church, after conversion to Christianity.''

Godan is a race. They are Germanic. If you want to look to the so called ''Greek'' god, it is Jupiter:
''Latin Deus (originally used to address Jupiter, but later adopted as the name of God)''

MEH i prefer deus anyways tbh deus peter sounds better than god the father in my opinionn the first sounds so badass

 

[Deleted member 17724]

Proof that God is incel:

1. He exists.
2. He doesn't have a gf.

 

[ryhan]

Proof that God is incel:

1. He exists.
2. He doesn't have a gf.

God is the ultimate slayer tbh