@zxncxzx: all other ideas of this sort which many proclaim, by distorted reasoning set effect for cause #epicurus #teleology #causality #

عبدالله 🇸🇦 :

Ibn sina and averroes >

ابو غوي :

who is waiting for them

james qadir al īsa :

what’s wrong with teleology?

☧matt¹¹⁶¹ :

Just read Leibniz or also Kantian demonstration of PSR💔

dscolover345 :

the kalam Is bad contingency argoument Is Better, the best One Is the modern argoument from change

plantinga :

My boy Epicurus

Clean :

Thomas carry

Quinn Williams :

I love both

animanga_editor01 :

now ur comparing ibn sina with sub5 philo💀?

⚛ Potatoman ⚛ :

Based and atomismpilled.

Wawan :

what's the difference about teleology and theology?

riteofheresy :

First greek word I memorised in my class properly was τέλης🙏🏻🙏🏻

đổ bóng hình học không gian :

no David Hume?

Skinny bitch :

زکریای رازی داداش چطوری ؟

Cyrus :

ibn sina 🇮🇷 >

tamson :

Cool but nah

illogium horror :

Truly

Void✱ :

Tuff but no😡

theosis :

Nicola :

The User :

Thoughts? : P1: Either God was eternally willing the universe into existence, or He was not. P2: If God was eternally willing the universe into existence, then the universe would also be eternal. P3: Under Abrahamic theology, the universe is not eternal, it began to exist. P4: Therefore, God was not eternally willing the universe into existence. P5: If God was not eternally willing the universe into existence, then there was a change, from not willing (or not creating) to willing (or creating). P6: Change implies succession, which is the definition of time (a progression of existence). P7: If God underwent change, then He exists within time. P8: According to Abrahamic theology, God is timeless and outside of time. Conclusion: Therefore, the Abrahamic conception of a timeless God who creates the universe entails a contradiction, God cannot both be outside time and perform a temporal act of creation.

Minisis :

@DingalingaRing teleology...

arkham :

Nothing was disproved here btw😭

Dimihatestiktok :

Luis :

😂