Errors in the صدیقین argument Avicenna proving the existence of God
Thank you dear friend. As I had written in response to the previous کامنتگذار, I have the opportunity to write a story about Mulla sadra who unfortunately still not ahead position. The last entry, he is also the more detailed responses.. Be victorious.

Errors in the صدیقین argument Avicenna proving the existence of God
Thank you dear friend. Your argument seems to صدیقین with another argument Avicenna in the name of the argument were pasted into صدیقین. The argument صدیقین (The most correct means and استوارترین argument) Also called argument Avicenna and Mulla sadra argument. Mulla sadra's philosophy is not the same but similar to Avicenna. Features that you mention is not a similarity to the metaphysics of Mulla sadra metaphysics Avicenna or as I wrote you earlier I have such a thing in the philosophy of Avicenna did not see.

God is pure existence without essence, quality or property that undergoes change or motion. The origins of this doctrine lie in Avicenna’s account of radical contingency that considers the distinction between Necessary and contingent to lie in the simplicity of existence of the Necessary producing the complexity of the existence and essence of the contingent, where the contingent is an existent to whom accidents pertain bundled in what is known as their ‘essence’.

In the case of Mulla sadra as another friend had mentioned on this page must be in the appropriate opportunity to write a separate entry. Be victorious.

Errors in the صدیقین argument Avicenna proving the existence of God
Thank you dear friend. The first argument is valid (valid) But it seems to me perfect (sound) Offline. I did not see where Avicenna's argument that there is a God. As far as I read the argument Descartes is similar to Avicenna argued the existence of God is not of the essence of God منفک. That is, the essence of God is essential to the existence of God does not necessarily. It therefore does not mean that there is the same essence. The existence of a property is to the essence of God is not of the essence of this property, but it is not the same as منفک. In the English text that you sent to me, as far as I noticed, that there is the same essence. So this is the first in the argument you are correct assumptions unless you put yourself documentary text. Otherwise, the existing "God" means that there is significant and the creature is also available and is not self.

The second argument in the case of the first and second assumption is incorrect. Whatever it is, and there is not anything other than. Here are the concept and hence is being. If it is so well and if not then. Nothingness cannot be. You can't say there is a lack of. The lack of means of the accused and the nothingness. Whatever it is that there is significant existing is not there;. The third assumption is that because there are two things the essence and then if there is not an essence Be sure it is the lack of. We argue that there are two things of wisdom and knowledge is not there, if the fellow is the lack of.

But a bug in the argument Avicenna was that I did not mention in the text and it is also possible that there may be a whole chain of the exalted one alojodeha makes possible the essential means exalted one cannot be disabled unless the entire chain of the universe, the exalted one obligatory reduction. There is the possibility of spending requires the existence of possible alojodeha is off the chain.

Of the actions of the Iranian Shiites: The Kaaba and the black stone wall ruin turn to rock the toilet bowl
The toilet is the mouth of the one who pushed you to lower the average IQ of Iranians!
Muslim! Momen! Retarded! Illiterate! Somebody's for 20 years. / Urinating in the stone of al-Aswad, you have also paid your life for hajj pilgrimage to be filled with a toilet bowl stone; what is my crime? I just got the point، and I left the source.. Go to the Gospel of God and ask God to give you a piece of stone.. Then kiss me with a big kiss.!

(With two years of delay, this user has a broken mouth.!)

Of the actions of the Iranian Shiites: The Kaaba and the black stone wall ruin turn to rock the toilet bowl
A book published by an academic publication, such as Yale University, which is an expert in this field, is called a reliable source.! Instead of writing three times what you believe and what you don't believe, look at the source and the content once..

Insult to Cyrus the great in University of Tabriz
This "knowing" of you and your kind has made me one in these fourteen – Fifteen years when I was familiar with you, the beasts perished.!
of course, i have to admit, i still don't understand what this "turk" means to you.! You know enough, and then you have done the same thing..

The reasons for 50 tons of the most prominent scientists in the world who do not believe in the existence of God or religion properly

To believe in the existence or absence of God, no scientific or evidence or any trial is accountable for your questions.. It only depends on the understanding of thoughtful humans..

If you are not accountable to any scientific, evidence and trial, then what are the mastermind people to understand? How coordinated the perception of "mastermind people" is not based on testing, science, or evidence. How can thinking and perceptual be considered valid but not on the basis of any reasons?

However, I believe that God would deny my mother's mercy to me, and I have come to my own womb and evolve.

Your opinion is not important because we are talking about your intentions. Objective/Objective issues such as the emergence of people from the mother's womb or the evolution of issues related to the world are material and their authenticity with evidence and testing is proved. The opinion of people is related to the subjects.

That says 《 you, even if the world is made, does not cause god 》 and I must say that your opinion is completely non-منطقیه. I'm going to create a car that we now have, without getting to the hands of someone gradually.. Or a more vivid example of the not that you do not turn into any plant, so that one should get a grown-up to grow up but that plant cannot understand and realize you.. Because the world of plants is different.

My article I wrote for another user (I guess this post or post "Irdat" Mulla Sadra) Was that if we assume the world before the Big Bang, this is not necessarily the cause of God, while this assumption is a big assumption that before the Big Bang was not the time to be causation.. This type of curative deduction is fake. If we say because we do not know anything, then it is not necessarily God, then the "God of the holes" because they don't do something we can't get the desired result..
About the genesis of creatures is a different situation. We are certainly aware of the complexity of the evolution and the natural selection arise (Objective/Objective) That does not require smart creation..

Here's how I explained:

https://farda.us/?p=4743

Iran's expulsion of the Imam
Hello

Before we get to the definition of ignorance, these two images are both photoshopped.. So that your image is not deleted and others will know what we're talking about in the future and don't click on your link (It's not safe.!) i'll put a copy of your image here:

Please pay attention.: Photoshop images can be identified by certain software, and these two images are both photoshopped.. This means that the description may have been photoshopped in the first image, in the second image the brick was added to the wall or added to the first image of the panel for the second explanation..

But It doesn't matter.! In order to understand the ignorance you are referring to, it doesn't matter which image is photoshopped.. Even in the image you sent, the guy holding the letter put it in the well.–That his 1,200-year-old Imam, who beed imam at the age of five and broke his seven-year-old grandfather's record in his Shiite imamate,– Sing, it's the same as ignorance..

If for any reason he doubts the existence of a person with the identity of the Imam of time
Or you don't believe that you're providing evidence from written sources or documents.

You (And your like-minded people.) You have an unusual claim (extraordinary claim) About the 1,200-year-old Imam and his well that you are obliged to bring proof of the authenticity of your claimi'm not obliged to show against your claim.