Login or register


Last status update:
Gender: male
Age: 23
Date Signed Up:3/16/2012
Last Login:8/25/2016
FunnyJunk Career Stats
Comment Ranking:#21283
Highest Content Rank:#14010
Highest Comment Rank:#420
Content Thumbs: 81 total,  137 ,  56
Comment Thumbs: 9337 total,  10181 ,  844
Content Level Progress: 40% (2/5)
Level 6 Content: New Here → Level 7 Content: New Here
Comment Level Progress: 77% (77/100)
Level 287 Comments: More Thumbs Than A Hiroshima Survivor → Level 288 Comments: More Thumbs Than A Hiroshima Survivor
Content Views:11673
Times Content Favorited:12 times
Total Comments Made:1394
FJ Points:8895

latest user's comments

#149 - Thanks! 10/23/2014 on Right in the feels +1
#66 - Picture  [+] (2 new replies) 10/23/2014 on Right in the feels +25
#134 - twoderrick (10/23/2014) [-]
Take this.
#149 - zzitro (10/23/2014) [-]
#7 - lol, that giggle at the end 10/15/2014 on Just do it, Kevin! +9
#11 - I like that FJ skips content you have seen recently.  [+] (1 new reply) 10/15/2014 on It's an old meme, sir +24
User avatar
#23 - WATCHAGUNADOBOUTIT (10/15/2014) [-]
#40 - In case you were interested 10/12/2014 on Around the Internet PART 21 0
#94 - My cats name is also Simba 09/30/2014 on Finland 0
#114 - I began to have my doubts, but when it got to the one where bl… 09/28/2014 on Interesting Facts 0
#44 - As in tear himself a new one 09/28/2014 on This will happen to all SJWS 0
#155 - I agree, though personally I lean towards option 2. Y…  [+] (1 new reply) 09/27/2014 on context +1
User avatar
#165 - repostal (09/28/2014) [-]
Good points on my examples. I guess with my second example it would be that the first event just occurred. ie the universe just suddenly appeared out of nothing with no cause - which is like your option 2, but without any cause.
Personally, I think a first mover is fairly logical, but wanted to put another argument out since I don't think either can be proved on logic alone.
#154 - So your saying that I am wrong because I used a part of Aquina…  [+] (1 new reply) 09/27/2014 on context 0
User avatar
#172 - greyhoundfd (09/28/2014) [-]
My point is that if you want to defend not-the-catholic-God, then you need to be phrasing things better. If you want to say that there might be a supernatural origin for the universe, then say that instead of "God created the universe because xyz" and then later trying to cover it up by saying "I'm not talking about God, I'm talking about a supernatural event".

If I stood up and loudly shouted "ALLAH IS GREAT" and then when people got mad said that I consider allah the same thing as life, and I meant "Life is great", then no one would be willing to acknowledge that as a valid argument.

Your entire argument up until I called you out on it consisted of "God exists, Thomas Aquinas had a proof for it, so accept what I'm saying.", not "A supernatural event created the universe, we should consider it the equivalent of God, Thomas Aquinas has an explanation that works for this."

Regardless of where this goes, you're still wrong because Einstein was a spinozist, and neither believed in a metaphysical "god" as an explanation for the origin of the universe, nor in a physical/personal "God" like Christianity did.