V Null

489 posts

V Null banner
V Null

V Null

@null00333

Red Earth 29, Saskatchewan Katılım Şubat 2017
54 Takip Edilen53 Takipçiler
Dr Berk
Dr Berk@oohglobbits5·
Self-existing things can exist? Go universe! Whoops, I've just debunked God.
Scott-Rod@Mr_Kustom

@Anyachi4ox Well He wouldn't be God if another being had created Him, would He? He is self existing. It is unfathomable, I know.

English
92
13
278
15.2K
V Null
V Null@null00333·
@matsciguycanada @oohglobbits5 @Mat_Hunt @AtheistBigfoot @tk_the_kitsune The dragon is refuted because that is a material form imposed on an immaterial purely actual actualizer. This means it has potentials that are unrealized so it cannot be the same god that Aquinas is referring to. Counter my refutation otherwise your dragon has been refuted
English
0
0
0
7
V Null
V Null@null00333·
@matsciguycanada @oohglobbits5 @Mat_Hunt @AtheistBigfoot @tk_the_kitsune Some of those are allegorical and not to be interpreted literally. But either way, the god Aquinas is arguing for is the god of the Bible which as Jewish people believed, is without material form so your dragon is refuted because that is a material form imposed on the immaterial
English
1
0
0
13