Rationality Rules On The Unmoved Mover

[Apologiaphoenix]

Is the Unmoved Mover debunked or is Rationality Rules?

The link can be found here.

-----

Is the unmoved mover a bad argument? Let's plunge into the Deeper Waters and find out.

I have been dialoguing with an atheist via text message a local pastor told me about. Last night, we were talking about Aquinas's argument for the unmoved mover. He wanted to send me a video arguing against it to get my thoughts. He told me the video was by someone who went by "Rationality Rules." I have noticed that so many people who identify themselves by rationality or reason or logic often honor the idea with their lips, but their heads are far from it. I asked him to send it so I could see it. It can be found here

[TheWall]

So when are you going to met up with deflating atheism? Deflating also deals with guys like rationality rules. Kreeft is brilliant. He wrote a summary of the summa. Personally i havent read aquianas. I think Lewis is the equivalent to me of aquianas for you.

[37818]

Motion as we know is relative.

In order to have an unmovable anything, there would have to be an infinite and all objects which move relative to it, that infinite, also do not move relative to it, that infinite. Yes, both things would have to be true at the same time. Remember it is infinite and unmovable. It remains stationary to all moving objects. Kind of like the speed of light is always the same to all frames of motion. What changes is the relative energies to the moving objects, not the speed of light.

Also take note:

Existence does not need the proof in the argument, God does.

Uncaused existence needs no God.

[firstfloor]

[37818]

God is the original atheist, He has no God.