>>13461263this is much worse than thomist, and I say that as a christian.
the real problem here is his definition of god is so useless.
it doesn't even approach the lvl of saying god = deist
its easy, but pointless, to prove "god" if you just define god to be all positive properties things.
Btw this sort of logic has been roundly refuted but I can't be bothered drunk.
also look look into the difference between having potential, and having capacity
