The First Proof of God

[Vastator]

The First Way: Argument from Motion

1. Our senses prove that some things are in motion.
   
   
2. Things move when potential motion becomes actual motion.
   
   
3. Only an actual motion can convert a potential motion into an actual motion.
   
   
4. Nothing can be at once in both actuality and potentiality in the same respect (i.e., if both actual and potential, it is actual in one respect and potential in another).
   
   
5. Therefore nothing can move itself.
   
   
6. Therefore each thing in motion is moved by something else.
   
   
7. The sequence of motion cannot extend ad infinitum.
   
   
8. Therefore it is necessary to arrive at a first mover, put in motion by no other; and this everyone understands to be God.

But something had to set this "God" into motion..

No, God is not material and not having come from the material universe is not subject to time either.

Once God created the material universe time began.

That’s pure conjecture. There’s nothing to state that an influence of “natural” origin didn’t breach our universe causing the results we see today. Still no evidence of a “sentient” being...

 

[Vastator]

Short of God showing himself to the world, there is no such proof he exists. You having faith in a being that you've been raised since to birth to believe in is not proof.

"God exists", of itself is self-evident, for the predicate is the same as the subject.... Now because we do not know the essence of God, the proposition is not self-evident to us; but needs to be demonstrated by things that are more known to us, though less known in their nature—namely, by effects." Thomas Aquinas

I’ve seen no evidence that what many refer to as “God” being a sentient entity. If merely the first cause is the only argument... how does that differ from the kinds of religions that worship other natural phenomena?

Like what? Throwing virgins in a volcano eruption? Or making sacrifices during eclipses?

You tell me. You’re referring to actions. I wasnt...

 

[ding]

Short of God showing himself to the world, there is no such proof he exists. You having faith in a being that you've been raised since to birth to believe in is not proof.

"God exists", of itself is self-evident, for the predicate is the same as the subject.... Now because we do not know the essence of God, the proposition is not self-evident to us; but needs to be demonstrated by things that are more known to us, though less known in their nature—namely, by effects." Thomas Aquinas

I’ve seen no evidence that what many refer to as “God” being a sentient entity. If merely the first cause is the only argument... how does that differ from the kinds of religions that worship other natural phenomena?

Like what? Throwing virgins in a volcano eruption? Or making sacrifices during eclipses?

You tell me. You’re referring to actions. I wasnt...

You asked me how does that differ from the kinds of religions that worship other natural phenomena?

Can you give me an example of other religions that worship other natural phenomena?

I don't know what you are talking about.

 

[Vastator]

Short of God showing himself to the world, there is no such proof he exists. You having faith in a being that you've been raised since to birth to believe in is not proof.

"God exists", of itself is self-evident, for the predicate is the same as the subject.... Now because we do not know the essence of God, the proposition is not self-evident to us; but needs to be demonstrated by things that are more known to us, though less known in their nature—namely, by effects." Thomas Aquinas

I’ve seen no evidence that what many refer to as “God” being a sentient entity. If merely the first cause is the only argument... how does that differ from the kinds of religions that worship other natural phenomena?

Like what? Throwing virgins in a volcano eruption? Or making sacrifices during eclipses?

You tell me. You’re referring to actions. I wasnt...

You asked me how does that differ from the kinds of religions that worship other natural phenomena?

Can you give me an example of other religions that worship other natural phenomena?

I don't know what you are talking about.

Prehistoric, primal types who worshiped things like wind, fire, earth, and water... Shit like that.

 

[Penelope]

The First Way: Argument from Motion

1. Our senses prove that some things are in motion.
   
   
2. Things move when potential motion becomes actual motion.
   
   
3. Only an actual motion can convert a potential motion into an actual motion.
   
   
4. Nothing can be at once in both actuality and potentiality in the same respect (i.e., if both actual and potential, it is actual in one respect and potential in another).
   
   
5. Therefore nothing can move itself.
   
   
6. Therefore each thing in motion is moved by something else.
   
   
7. The sequence of motion cannot extend ad infinitum.
   
   
8. Therefore it is necessary to arrive at a first mover, put in motion by no other; and this everyone understands to be God.

But something had to set this "God" into motion..

No, God is not material and not having come from the material universe is not subject to time either.

Once God created the material universe time began.

Aquinas and Lao Tzu believed God is existence. I do too.

Not in a pantheist kind of way though. He's not in everything. He just is.

So you see God as the energy of the universe?

 

[ding]

"God exists", of itself is self-evident, for the predicate is the same as the subject.... Now because we do not know the essence of God, the proposition is not self-evident to us; but needs to be demonstrated by things that are more known to us, though less known in their nature—namely, by effects." Thomas Aquinas

I’ve seen no evidence that what many refer to as “God” being a sentient entity. If merely the first cause is the only argument... how does that differ from the kinds of religions that worship other natural phenomena?

Like what? Throwing virgins in a volcano eruption? Or making sacrifices during eclipses?

You tell me. You’re referring to actions. I wasnt...

You asked me how does that differ from the kinds of religions that worship other natural phenomena?

Can you give me an example of other religions that worship other natural phenomena?

I don't know what you are talking about.

Prehistoric, primal types who worshiped things like wind, fire, earth, and water... Shit like that.

That reason is found in God.

This is just the 1st of five proofs by Thomas Aquinas. It is all based on reason and logic.

 

[ding]

The First Way: Argument from Motion

1. Our senses prove that some things are in motion.
   
   
2. Things move when potential motion becomes actual motion.
   
   
3. Only an actual motion can convert a potential motion into an actual motion.
   
   
4. Nothing can be at once in both actuality and potentiality in the same respect (i.e., if both actual and potential, it is actual in one respect and potential in another).
   
   
5. Therefore nothing can move itself.
   
   
6. Therefore each thing in motion is moved by something else.
   
   
7. The sequence of motion cannot extend ad infinitum.
   
   
8. Therefore it is necessary to arrive at a first mover, put in motion by no other; and this everyone understands to be God.

But something had to set this "God" into motion..

No, God is not material and not having come from the material universe is not subject to time either.

Once God created the material universe time began.

Aquinas and Lao Tzu believed God is existence. I do too.

Not in a pantheist kind of way though. He's not in everything. He just is.

So you see God as the energy of the universe?

No. Existence itself. The final state of fact.