Direct Messages

21:09

So this is the dm

21:09

?

Ig

21:09

Listen

Lets talk

Don't disrespect Islam or the prophet again if u want do in a mannered way

21:10

I can go personal too

21:10

Weill do it ur way

21:10

Simple

21:10

U give ur points

Arius

Don't disrespect Islam or the prophet again if u want do in a mannered way

Ok ?

I'll counter argue it and then u again

Ok first question why should i believe in what you are preaching?

Do u believe in god?

21:12

U said

21:12

U were agnostic

No i never said that

So u aren't a full atheist (edited)

Agnostic doesnt mean believing in a god

That u aren't sure if there's a god right

Yeah

Alright I'll use the classic example of design

Yes heard

I don't see where ur going with agnostic ideology (edited)

21:14

Basically a design needs a designer

21:14

It isn't independent

21:14

Anything u use

21:14

Ur smartphone

21:14

Ur computer

21:14

Everything is dependent

21:14

If u can create such things

21:15

Why don't u think god could have created u

21:15

And why do u not think that the universe is dependent on him

If design needs a designer, who designed the designer?

another_human0.0

If design needs a designer, who designed the designer?

Exactly

21:15

This creates an infinite regress

21:15

That means that

21:15

There should be a being which is self sufficient

21:15

Independent

21:16

And all knowing

Ali dawahs argument literally taken directly lmfao

The universe itself didn't come in existence

21:16

The universe has a end

21:16

It's dependent

21:16

There was a will that created it

another_human0.0

Ali dawahs argument literally taken directly lmfao

Counter argue it

21:17

Just like we agreed

21:17

I'll gather more till then

Exactly but if you can accept that a self sufficient being can exist without a designer, then why can’t the universe itself be that self sufficient reality?

21:19

Once you say one thing can be self sufficient and doesnt need a creator you are already breaking the rule that everything needs a designer, by thisn logic the universe can self exist

21:20

Also i have a simple question for u in this argument specifically ok?

21:23

You there?

another_human0.0

Exactly but if you can accept that a self sufficient being can exist without a designer, then why can’t the universe itself be that self sufficient reality?

Because it isn't self sufficient the universe itself has a end termed as heat death if it is temporary that means it doesn't have an eternal cause because the bigbang started it and even science says that there is possibility of something before the bigbang so u can't say that the universe is self sufficient

another_human0.0

Once you say one thing can be self sufficient and doesnt need a creator you are already breaking the rule that everything needs a designer, by thisn logic the universe can self exist

U missed the point from my first statement Let's take another example

21:25

If theres a light bulb (edited)

Arius

Because it isn't self sufficient the universe itself has a end termed as heat death if it is temporary that means it doesn't have an eternal cause because the bigbang started it and even science says that there is possibility of something before the bigbang so u can't say that the universe is self sufficient

Wait first let me answer this

another_human0.0

Wait first let me answer this

Arreee

21:26

U addressed ur points let me adress now

21:26

Have patience

You literally took 6 mins then refuted the argument and now is callin the argument rpwrong shouldnt you have called the argument wrong at first lmao

Bro

21:27

Don't do this okay

21:27

Let me finish first

21:27

Don't interrupt

True the current form of our universe might not be eternal but that doesn’t mean existence itself isn’t. The Big Bang describes the beginning of our observable universe, not the origin of its reality. The cause could be natural, quantum, or anything not necessarily a designer

Arius

Don't interrupt

Ok now you say what was wrong be nice

21:28

Be just

Arius

If theres a light bulb (edited)

.

21:29

That needs a switch to be turned on

21:29

But there's one condition

21:30

The switch can only be turned on

21:30

If there was someone before who had already turned it on

21:30

Then same for that guy

21:30

Same condition

21:31

By this way neither the switch nor the bulb will be turned on

21:31

However

21:31

If we see a bulb that is already turned on

21:31

It means that the chain was stopped somewhere

21:32

Aise bande ne switch on kia hai

Are you done?

Jis se pehle kisi ne nahi kia hai

21:32

Matlab ki aisa first cause

I get your point can i say now

Jo kisi ka effect na ho (edited)

21:33

That means that uss cause ka koi cause nahi tha

21:33

In the same way

21:33

If we exist u and me

I have heard it what makes you think i havent heard those dlassic arguments thiest give to justify god can i answer you now?

It means that the creator's chain was stopped somewhere

Bruh i get it can i answer you now?

21:35

I am answering Yeah but that example already assumes the bulb needs a person to turn it on. What if the bulb turns on automatically or the power was always there? The universe might not work like switches and bulbs — it could be self starting or always in some form. So the chain doesn’t need to stop at a god, it could stop at the natural laws that just exist.

another_human0.0

True the current form of our universe might not be eternal but that doesn’t mean existence itself isn’t. The Big Bang describes the beginning of our observable universe, not the origin of its reality. The cause could be natural, quantum, or anything not necessarily a designer

How ever that is also believing isn't it?

21:35

Ur believing something not backing it up

Arius

How ever that is also believing isn't it?

Im not just believing Im saying we dont have proof that the cause has to be a god. Science admits there are possibilities we dont fully understand yet. Saying ‘God did it’ ends the search but saying we don’t know yet keeps it honest and open to real evidence Isnt that common sense

another_human0.0

I am answering Yeah but that example already assumes the bulb needs a person to turn it on. What if the bulb turns on automatically or the power was always there? The universe might not work like switches and bulbs — it could be self starting or always in some form. So the chain doesn’t need to stop at a god, it could stop at the natural laws that just exist.

If u multiply 0 by 0 u will get 0 this invalid in some form is an exaggeration of yeah that there was a form there that created the know universe ur literally contradicting urself

another_human0.0

Im not just believing Im saying we dont have proof that the cause has to be a god. Science admits there are possibilities we dont fully understand yet. Saying ‘God did it’ ends the search but saying we don’t know yet keeps it honest and open to real evidence Isnt that common sense

Science doesn't oppose religion some famous scientists like. Albert Einstein believed in god islam also promotes science with countless miracles in it to believe it.

You’re using math rules to explain existence but math is just a tool we made to describe reality, not control it zero in math doesn’t mean ‘nothing’ in reality. We’ve never seen true nothing something has always existed in some form. So saying something came from nothing isn’t a contradiction, it’s just us not fully knowing what that something was.

Arius

Science doesn't oppose religion some famous scientists like. Albert Einstein believed in god islam also promotes science with countless miracles in it to believe it.

And that proves religion?

21:39

Thats like the worst argument

another_human0.0

You’re using math rules to explain existence but math is just a tool we made to describe reality, not control it zero in math doesn’t mean ‘nothing’ in reality. We’ve never seen true nothing something has always existed in some form. So saying something came from nothing isn’t a contradiction, it’s just us not fully knowing what that something was.

Exactly u r backing my statement up that there was something before the universe itself that made it happen

another_human0.0

And that proves religion?

No that was my way of telling u that science doesn't have a problem with religion

21:40

Or u can say

21:40

Religion doesn't have a problem with science

Arius

Exactly u r backing my statement up that there was something before the universe itself that made it happen

Yeah, I agree there was something before but that doesn’t prove it was a god. It could be a natural force, energy, or something we don’t understand yet. Saying ‘something’ doesn’t automatically mean it’s a conscious creator. You are jumping from something existed to someone existed, and that’s the point I’m not making.

another_human0.0

Yeah, I agree there was something before but that doesn’t prove it was a god. It could be a natural force, energy, or something we don’t understand yet. Saying ‘something’ doesn’t automatically mean it’s a conscious creator. You are jumping from something existed to someone existed, and that’s the point I’m not making.

Again it's the same argument of infinite regress

21:41

If there was something before the universe which u think is not god in some form

21:42

Then that means that force or energy also had something before it to make it happen

21:42

Ur falling into a paradox unfortunately believing in god makes more sense to me

21:42

Abadullah

21:42

Imma have dinner first

Arius

Ur falling into a paradox unfortunately believing in god makes more sense to me

Lol you are wrong Okay, but then we’re both saying something doesnt need a cause you say its God, I say it could be the base reality or energy itself. The question isn’t whether something is uncaused, its which thing is. You choose to call it God, I choose to say we don’t know yet. Both are guesses mine just doesn’t add an extra layer.

Arius

Imma have dinner first

Ok

Ok now what happens u give me a point i refute and it goes on

another_human0.0

Lol you are wrong Okay, but then we’re both saying something doesnt need a cause you say its God, I say it could be the base reality or energy itself. The question isn’t whether something is uncaused, its which thing is. You choose to call it God, I choose to say we don’t know yet. Both are guesses mine just doesn’t add an extra layer.

If you just call the base of reality “energy” or a “brute fact,” you’re leaving the biggest questions unanswered: Why does that base reality have the exact power and order to create a universe, life, and minds like ours? Saying “God” gives you a real answer: a cause with intelligence, purpose, and power—explaining why the universe is not random chaos or nothing at all. “Energy” can’t explain why there’s logic, order, and you here asking questions. God does. That’s why calling the base “God” wins: it actually explains the “why” behind everything, not just the “what.”

Arius

If you just call the base of reality “energy” or a “brute fact,” you’re leaving the biggest questions unanswered: Why does that base reality have the exact power and order to create a universe, life, and minds like ours? Saying “God” gives you a real answer: a cause with intelligence, purpose, and power—explaining why the universe is not random chaos or nothing at all. “Energy” can’t explain why there’s logic, order, and you here asking questions. God does. That’s why calling the base “God” wins: it actually explains the “why” behind everything, not just the “what.”

You say God just exists and made everything I say maybe reality just exists and made everything We both believe something was always there you call it God I call it reality

22:15

Also with all this logics you are trying to prove god lemme tell you smthng , If God is beyond human understanding then maybe there is no way to prove him with human logic

another_human0.0

You say God just exists and made everything I say maybe reality just exists and made everything We both believe something was always there you call it God I call it reality

Ur saying the same thing

Arius

Ur saying the same thing

You are calling it a creature

another_human0.0

You are calling it a creature

With logic actually

22:16

Why does that base reality have the exact power and order to create a universe life and minds like ours?

another_human0.0

Also with all this logics you are trying to prove god lemme tell you smthng , If God is beyond human understanding then maybe there is no way to prove him with human logic

What part of beyond human are u talking about

22:18

I can describe him if u want me to try (edited)

Arius

Why does that base reality have the exact power and order to create a universe life and minds like ours?

Maybe it just does the same way you say God just does you stop at God I stop at reality both answers end at something we cannot fully explain

Not perfection but a little bit

Arius

Not perfection but a little bit

A little bit but defined not enough to prove his existence

22:19

*definitely

another_human0.0

Maybe it just does the same way you say God just does you stop at God I stop at reality both answers end at something we cannot fully explain

Doesn't believing in god make more sense then to believe it all happened randomly bcs "base reality" energy exploded

If you could prove god basically all athiests would leave the reason why there exists smthngblike athiesm is beacuse you cant prove god but ok u try

Well ur not a atheist though right

22:20

We do have some understanding between us don't we

22:20

What makes u different from atheists is that ur not sure about it

Arius

Doesn't believing in god make more sense then to believe it all happened randomly bcs "base reality" energy exploded

It may feel easier to say God did it, but that does not make it proven. Saying it happened naturally is not saying it was random, it means it followed rules we do not fully understand yet. Believing in God explains it emotionally, not logucally.

But I gave u an enough of a reason to be sure

Arius

Well ur not a atheist though right

Yeah but that group exists for a reason you know

22:21

While most(all) religions exist on make believe

Arius

But I gave u an enough of a reason to be sure

No you didnt

another_human0.0

It may feel easier to say God did it, but that does not make it proven. Saying it happened naturally is not saying it was random, it means it followed rules we do not fully understand yet. Believing in God explains it emotionally, not logucally.

who created those rules? Ur contradicting urself again

No one needed to create the rules, the rules are simply how reality works. You say God just exists with power, I say reality just exists with rules. Both stop at something that simply is.

22:22

You havent made a single argument that proves the existence of god

U can't say every form of intelligence was random the place of earth the distance between the sun and the earth the moon that everything this order ur saying this is random and not god created and terming it as base energy form how could energy create this order

You keep saying i contradict myself while you keep saying a god made it hell maybe a human made it Theres no reason to believe a creature made you

Arius

U can't say every form of intelligence was random the place of earth the distance between the sun and the earth the moon that everything this order ur saying this is random and not god created and terming it as base energy form how could energy create this order

Order does not always mean design. Snowflakes, crystals, and galaxies form perfect patterns without anyone planning them. Nature creates order by following simple laws again and again, not by choice or mind. So the universe can be ordered without needing a god to arrange it.

another_human0.0

You havent made a single argument that proves the existence of god

I did u just refuse to beleive it again u contradicted urself before u were agreeing on some part but naming it a different thing a "form" an "energy" now ur saying that I didn't make a valid argument decide first

I am not contradicting myself, I am saying we both agree something has always existed. You call that God, I call it reality or energy. The difference is you add a mind and purpose to it without proof. I am not refusing to believe, I just do not add stories where there is no evidence.

another_human0.0

Order does not always mean design. Snowflakes, crystals, and galaxies form perfect patterns without anyone planning them. Nature creates order by following simple laws again and again, not by choice or mind. So the universe can be ordered without needing a god to arrange it.

Yes it does order literally is a design why are u terming it as a different thing the whole food chain is a design what makes u the apex predator is ur mind which has a perfect design that mind is what "orders around "

If order automatically means design, then who designed the mind of God, which you say has perfect order? If you say God just exists with that design, then by your own logic order can exist without a designer. That means the universe could also have order without one. Lmao

22:28

You say order means design, but that rule fails the moment you apply it to God. If God has perfect order in his mind, then by your logic, that order needs a designer too. If you say God does not need one, then you admit order can exist without design. Once you accept that, your own argument no longer works, because the same can be true for the universe.

another_human0.0

I am not contradicting myself, I am saying we both agree something has always existed. You call that God, I call it reality or energy. The difference is you add a mind and purpose to it without proof. I am not refusing to believe, I just do not add stories where there is no evidence.

U don't make sense tho energy possibility can't create order or design u might have heard that energy can neither be created nor destroyed so u can't create something out of nothing therefore the need for a designer who himself is a cause and wasn't an effect

another_human0.0

If order automatically means design, then who designed the mind of God, which you say has perfect order? If you say God just exists with that design, then by your own logic order can exist without a designer. That means the universe could also have order without one. Lmao

Again the argument of infinite regress I thought I made it clear to u

Arius

U don't make sense tho energy possibility can't create order or design u might have heard that energy can neither be created nor destroyed so u can't create something out of nothing therefore the need for a designer who himself is a cause and wasn't an effect

Lmao science, You are using science when it helps your belief and ignoring it when it does not. If energy cannot be created or destroyed, then it always existed that means it does not need a creator. You cannot say energy needs a cause and then quote the law that says it has no beginning. The law you used already removes the need for a designer.

Arius

Again the argument of infinite regress I thought I made it clear to u

You didnt you keep arguing and nthng has been proved yet

22:29

The infinite regress was anssers and you replied back thats how we reached here bruh

22:30

There wasnt a single argument not answered and i agree u replied to every argument too

another_human0.0

Lmao science, You are using science when it helps your belief and ignoring it when it does not. If energy cannot be created or destroyed, then it always existed that means it does not need a creator. You cannot say energy needs a cause and then quote the law that says it has no beginning. The law you used already removes the need for a designer.

Isnt it over?

another_human0.0

You say order means design, but that rule fails the moment you apply it to God. If God has perfect order in his mind, then by your logic, that order needs a designer too. If you say God does not need one, then you admit order can exist without design. Once you accept that, your own argument no longer works, because the same can be true for the universe.

My argument literally works but ur straight up ignoring it I even gave u an example but u seem to have forgotten the bulb light thing i mentioned

Arius

My argument literally works but ur straight up ignoring it I even gave u an example but u seem to have forgotten the bulb light thing i mentioned

I answered?

U didn't

22:31

U can't decide what u want to believe actually

another_human0.0

I am answering Yeah but that example already assumes the bulb needs a person to turn it on. What if the bulb turns on automatically or the power was always there? The universe might not work like switches and bulbs — it could be self starting or always in some form. So the chain doesn’t need to stop at a god, it could stop at the natural laws that just exist.

.

Arius

U can't decide what u want to believe actually

Bruh u do realize how we reached here?

U first told me that u believe there was a form of energy existing before all of the universe

Yes, I said that, and it fits your own rule. You say God just exists without being created, I say energy or reality just exists without being created. We both stop at something eternal, but yours is a being you imagine, mine is something we can actually observe.

Actually

22:33

Yours is something which makes lesser sense here lol

22:33

Saying that god exists make more sense onto why such a perfect order exists

It only seems like it makes less sense to you because you start with the belief that a god must exist. But between two options, one that we can see and measure like energy, and one that has no proof at all, the one that makes less sense is not mine.

22:33

Sadly

Arius

Saying that god exists make more sense onto why such a perfect order exists

Saying God exists only moves the question back one step. If perfect order needs a creator, then who created the perfect order inside God? If you say God just has it, then you already accept that perfect order can exist without a creator. That means the universe could too.

22:34

Bruh

Where is saying energy created this order? That means the energy had the capability of creation and intelligence, isn't that what god is? Abadullah?

You are trapped in your own thoughts you get that?

22:35

No, intelligence means choice and intention, energy does not choose it simply acts by its nature. Fire burns, gravity pulls, water flows none of them think, yet they create order. Calling that God adds a mind and intention without proof. Energy does not decide to create, it just does what it always does.

another_human0.0

You are trapped in your own thoughts you get that?

The latter actually

Arius

The latter actually

You were literally answered every single time

another_human0.0

Saying God exists only moves the question back one step. If perfect order needs a creator, then who created the perfect order inside God? If you say God just has it, then you already accept that perfect order can exist without a creator. That means the universe could too.

This again ur ignoring the examples I gave in the beginning

I answered those examples excuse me

22:36

You memory loss

22:36

Do you just write or do you read the answers too?

Ur argument is flawed and full of holes I have an answer to everything which I already gave asking same questions with different narrative doesn't change a thing.

Saying you have an answer to everything does not make your answers true. You are just repeating belief as fact. I am asking the same questions because your answers never solve them, they only stop at “God did it.” That is not an explanation, that is an ending to thinking. Sorry to say

another_human0.0

I answered those examples excuse me

U didn't answer anything lol u just presented it in a different way and that same thing applies to that way too

Arius

U didn't answer anything lol u just presented it in a different way and that same thing applies to that way too

You are saying I did not answer, but that is because you are not listening. You keep calling belief an answer. I am showing that your logic works both ways, and when it does, your rule breaks. If saying “God just exists” works for you, then saying “reality just exists” works the same. You cannot accept one and deny the other without contradiction. You are ignirant and ig dont understand what you are saying

another_human0.0

Saying you have an answer to everything does not make your answers true. You are just repeating belief as fact. I am asking the same questions because your answers never solve them, they only stop at “God did it.” That is not an explanation, that is an ending to thinking. Sorry to say

Now ur repeating what I said lol, literally ur asking the same questions with different narrative each time, then again in the end u reach to point where u term it as energy which ofcourse doesn't make any sense to a sane person surely there was a cause to all this yet u refuse to believe

You start with “God exists” and then use that to prove “God exists.” That is not reasoning, it is belief repeating itself. Until you can prove God without using God as part of the proof, the debate is already over.

Arius

Now ur repeating what I said lol, literally ur asking the same questions with different narrative each time, then again in the end u reach to point where u term it as energy which ofcourse doesn't make any sense to a sane person surely there was a cause to all this yet u refuse to believe

You keep saying there has to be a cause, but then you say God has no cause. That is the contradiction. You break your own rule and then pretend it makes more sense. When I say reality itself may be the thing with no cause, you reject it only because it does not fit your belief. That is not logic, that is bias.

22:40

Sadly you are biased

another_human0.0

You are saying I did not answer, but that is because you are not listening. You keep calling belief an answer. I am showing that your logic works both ways, and when it does, your rule breaks. If saying “God just exists” works for you, then saying “reality just exists” works the same. You cannot accept one and deny the other without contradiction. You are ignirant and ig dont understand what you are saying

I am listening I never said belief was the answer I said logic is my logic doesn't work both ways if u actually paid attention god exists and reality just exists doesn't work the same ur ignoring the system and order

Arius

I am listening I never said belief was the answer I said logic is my logic doesn't work both ways if u actually paid attention god exists and reality just exists doesn't work the same ur ignoring the system and order

You say a god exists, I say I am not sure. The reasoning I gave shows that what you call God could simply be reality itself. That is why I am agnostic not because I refuse to believe, but because I do not see enough reason to claim certainty.

Arius

I am listening I never said belief was the answer I said logic is my logic doesn't work both ways if u actually paid attention god exists and reality just exists doesn't work the same ur ignoring the system and order

I explained how it works both ways now you are saying bs

another_human0.0

You start with “God exists” and then use that to prove “God exists.” That is not reasoning, it is belief repeating itself. Until you can prove God without using God as part of the proof, the debate is already over.

It was over the moment u termed beginning as energy my point is was and is better then ur flawed argument ngl

Arius

It was over the moment u termed beginning as energy my point is was and is better then ur flawed argument ngl

Oh really you exempt God from the rule you apply to everything else If you insist every ordered thing needs a designer, then by that rule God also needs a designer. If you exempt God from the rule, then you have abandoned the rule. Pick one.

another_human0.0

You keep saying there has to be a cause, but then you say God has no cause. That is the contradiction. You break your own rule and then pretend it makes more sense. When I say reality itself may be the thing with no cause, you reject it only because it does not fit your belief. That is not logic, that is bias.

Don't manipulate my words to ur liking lol I said god has no cause and universe has his effect don't change my narrative to make it comfortable for u

Arius

Don't manipulate my words to ur liking lol I said god has no cause and universe has his effect don't change my narrative to make it comfortable for u

You said god has no cause

22:44

I never put words into your mouth

22:44

Now this is straight up lying

another_human0.0

I explained how it works both ways now you are saying bs

Ur point has many flaws tho saying it just happened doesn't seem uptight again something cant come out of nothing

another_human0.0

You said god has no cause

Yeah?

another_human0.0

Now this is straight up lying

What

u don't know what ur saying bro (edited)

22:45

Read again

You are literally trapped in your own thinking and cant understand the points been made

22:45

Every single thing was refuted

another_human0.0

Every single thing was refuted

Nothing was refuted

22:45

What was the conclusion

22:46

U said

Arius

Nothing was refuted

You keep saying something cannot come from nothing, but nobody has proved that true nothing ever existed. Even empty space has energy and laws, so it is not nothing. Saying God made it only moves the question back one step, because then who made God? The difference is I admit we do not know yet, while you claim to know everything without proof. Science looks for answers, belief just stops at one.

Energy

22:46

I said god

Yeah and does that prove god no it doesnt you are really stupid

another_human0.0

You keep saying something cannot come from nothing, but nobody has proved that true nothing ever existed. Even empty space has energy and laws, so it is not nothing. Saying God made it only moves the question back one step, because then who made God? The difference is I admit we do not know yet, while you claim to know everything without proof. Science looks for answers, belief just stops at one.

Nice try ai'ing ur way

another_human0.0

You keep saying something cannot come from nothing, but nobody has proved that true nothing ever existed. Even empty space has energy and laws, so it is not nothing. Saying God made it only moves the question back one step, because then who made God? The difference is I admit we do not know yet, while you claim to know everything without proof. Science looks for answers, belief just stops at one.

Exactly even empty space has energy so there existed something before the universe

22:47

Which u term as energy right

Ok ubknow we should do one thing lets ask ai to say who had better arguments in the entire chat that way everything would be neutral right?

Saying that energy created all this order and design is what is flawed in ur argument

22:48

U can do that?

22:48

Lol

Arius

Saying that energy created all this order and design is what is flawed in ur argument

It is not flawed because we see energy creating order everywhere. Heat makes air currents, gravity shapes planets, stars are formed by collapsing clouds of gas, and life evolves through natural processes powered by energy. None of these need a mind to arrange them. Energy does not design by choice, but by consistent laws that naturally create order from chaos. That is not belief, that is what we observe in every part of the universe.

Arius

U can do that?

Yes

another_human0.0

It is not flawed because we see energy creating order everywhere. Heat makes air currents, gravity shapes planets, stars are formed by collapsing clouds of gas, and life evolves through natural processes powered by energy. None of these need a mind to arrange them. Energy does not design by choice, but by consistent laws that naturally create order from chaos. That is not belief, that is what we observe in every part of the universe.

Oh how the tables have turned

22:49

Ur Copy pasting now

22:49

Lol

I just did twice how many times you did?

22:49

Wasnt it allowed

22:49

Lmao

Doesn't this basically mean u had nothing against me in this argument

I had everything against you lets ask ai

When u reached at ur limit of understanding

22:50

U asked ai

22:50

We can see who has limited thinking here

Arius

U asked ai

No i didnt i am saying we should ask AI who was better arguing and did arius proved god ok?

Sadly not me

This way we can have someone "neutral" deciding who won

another_human0.0

This way we can have someone "neutral" deciding who won

I don't trust ur neutral lol

Arius

We can see who has limited thinking here

Because you wont agree you had worser arguments

Let our friends decide

22:51

Who had a better argument

Arius

I don't trust ur neutral lol

I will say in the prompt be unbiased ok?

22:51

I will share the screenshot

22:51

What else do u want?

Can u tell me how u do it so I can do it too?

Arius

Can u tell me how u do it so I can do it too?

Yeah just take all the screenshots/copy all the text from a browser then ask AI please give a detailed unbiased neutral summary of who had the better arguments and was arius able to prove the existence of a god.

22:52

Lmao

22:53

Dont be sad if it says you were losing you can lose you just have to accept it.

another_human0.0

Yeah just take all the screenshots/copy all the text from a browser then ask AI please give a detailed unbiased neutral summary of who had the better arguments and was arius able to prove the existence of a god.

That question itself is biased lol

No it isn't how is it?

22:53

You were trying tonprove me god exists

22:53

I was saying theres no way to tell?

22:54

Thats why i am agnostic and you are believer?

Instead ask who had the better arguments and can we determine by this that if there is a god or not which makes more sense

Arius

Instead ask who had the better arguments and can we determine by this that if there is a god or not which makes more sense

Nah the point of it was u said u could prove gods existence while i said no there isnt a way but u kept saying everything points and your logic points towards a god

another_human0.0

Nah the point of it was u said u could prove gods existence while i said no there isnt a way but u kept saying everything points and your logic points towards a god

See now u don't wanna text that u probably said this to that ai and got a response which u didn't like

Arius

See now u don't wanna text that u probably said this to that ai and got a response which u didn't like

Which ai wdym?

Why don't u accept it?

Accept what?

Ur argument is flawed u lost this one

Beacause I didnt lose

22:56

You lost?

22:56

Lmao

Between energy and god at our peak of argument god makes more sense

another_human0.0

You lost?

That's what I call copium

Yeah still i am right uk that right?

I know even if I make my point as clear as I can u won't accept islam

You wont accept you lost i wont accept i lost

22:57

Thats ad but true

Wallah Allah has abandoned u

Arius

Wallah Allah has abandoned u

And no don't argue about this now

I might probably accept if i got the proofs but you wont still accept if i got the proofs

Arius

And no don't argue about this now

Whybare you acting like you won bruh

22:58

You literally kept saying god exists because reality cant

another_human0.0

I might probably accept if i got the proofs but you wont still accept if i got the proofs

There is nothing of a proof in ur argument I do as much agree 90% with u but in the end you term it as energy I term it as god

22:58

With logic tho

another_human0.0

Whybare you acting like you won bruh

Because I did and u won't accept it

You term it as smthngn random and anything i term it "can" be energy

22:59

You dont see the difference here?

22:59

If it can be god it can be energy either that was the argument?

22:59

You dont get that?

another_human0.0

You literally kept saying god exists because reality cant

What are u saying nga stop putting words in my mouth lol again don't turn the narrative to ur liking

Arius

What are u saying nga stop putting words in my mouth lol again don't turn the narrative to ur liking

Sure if u wanna believe thats the narrative

another_human0.0

You term it as smthngn random and anything i term it "can" be energy

The latter again don't change side bro

Arius

The latter again don't change side bro

Wdym?