2 grammar and breaking into paragraphs for clarity
source | link

Based on the causal arguments for the existence of God --, all we know must have a cause (you. You can't create something out of nothing) and infinite causal chains don't make sense, meaning. That means that there must be a first cause, which is called God. --, we

We come to the conclusion God is a necessary being instead of a contingent, i.e being. That is, God is a being that must exist and is itself not subject to causes, since itGod was the originator of causal chains to begin with. ItGod being a necessary being, meaning means being free from causes and not contingent on anything, it. God can only be one, since the existence of two of them would mean that the distinction between both would be contingent on eachthe other, making them not necessary anymore.

If I remember correctly, this argument was first formulated as such by Avicenna (muslimMuslim), although Christianity borrowed the concept through Aquinas I think, and. Hinduism also believes that there is a God that unifies the others, if you will.

See the following thread: Why can there only be one necessary being, as opposed to two or thirty seven? .

Based on the causal arguments for the existence of God -- all we know must have a cause (you can't create something out of nothing) and infinite causal chains don't make sense, meaning that there must be a first cause, which is called God --, we come to the conclusion God is a necessary being instead of contingent, i.e. a being that must exist and is itself not subject to causes, since it was the originator of causal chains to begin with. It being a necessary being, meaning free from causes and not contingent on anything, it can only be one, since the existence of two of them would mean that the distinction between both would be contingent on each other, making them not necessary anymore.

If I remember correctly, this argument was first formulated as such by Avicenna (muslim), although Christianity borrowed the concept through Aquinas I think, and Hinduism also believes that there is a God that unifies the others, if you will.

See the following thread: Why can there only be one necessary being, as opposed to two or thirty seven? .

Based on the causal arguments for the existence of God, all we know must have a cause. You can't create something out of nothing and infinite causal chains don't make sense. That means that there must be a first cause which is called God.

We come to the conclusion God is a necessary being instead of a contingent being. That is, God is a being that must exist and is itself not subject to causes since God was the originator of causal chains to begin with. God being a necessary being means being free from causes and not contingent on anything. God can only be one, since the existence of two of them would mean that the distinction between both would be contingent on the other making them not necessary anymore.

If I remember correctly, this argument was first formulated as such by Avicenna (Muslim), although Christianity borrowed the concept through Aquinas. Hinduism also believes that there is a God that unifies the others, if you will.

See the following thread: Why can there only be one necessary being, as opposed to two or thirty seven? .

1
source | link

Based on the causal arguments for the existence of God -- all we know must have a cause (you can't create something out of nothing) and infinite causal chains don't make sense, meaning that there must be a first cause, which is called God --, we come to the conclusion God is a necessary being instead of contingent, i.e. a being that must exist and is itself not subject to causes, since it was the originator of causal chains to begin with. It being a necessary being, meaning free from causes and not contingent on anything, it can only be one, since the existence of two of them would mean that the distinction between both would be contingent on each other, making them not necessary anymore.

If I remember correctly, this argument was first formulated as such by Avicenna (muslim), although Christianity borrowed the concept through Aquinas I think, and Hinduism also believes that there is a God that unifies the others, if you will.

See the following thread: Why can there only be one necessary being, as opposed to two or thirty seven? .