Proving God Existence

[Muslim Scholar]

But nothing is not static... didn't you watch the video?

Here's an alternate explanation for your observations, but this one is somewhat more grounded on current understanding of physics, even if it has some speculations involved:
Empty space has zero average energy, but locally it can have positive and negative energies.

Empty space stretches out to infinity... actually, it's spacetime that stretches out to infinity... plus and minus... and you can arbitrarily put the zero where you want. You can put the spatial zero where you want, as well as the temporal zero. It doesn't matter where you put the zero, but that doesn't mean that spaceTime starts at that zero that you defined.

The total energy content of this spacetime is zero.
But locally, it can fluctuate. On rare occasions, it fluctuates so much it generates a lot of energy (and corresponding anti-energy) and we call that a Universe. Since this spaceTime nothingness stretches out to infinity, there may be an infinite number of Universes out there... but we just can't know for sure.

We know there is negative energy, because we can detect it's influence. When anti-matter comes close to matter they annihilate each other and emit two photons. We can measure these photons, which are just light.

We like to think of ourselves as having positive energy, but, again, plus and minus is just a convention. There may be galaxies out there which are entirely composed of anti-matter, and we observe them just the same as if they were made of what we call normal matter. If anyone is alive there and wondering about these things, they will probably consider their matter the one with positive energy, and our with negative energy. It's arbitrary.
What counts is that, when you sum it all up, you arrive at a big round juicy ZERO.

Nothing, empty space, has zero energy..... on average.

Now, please, do tell me how do we require a divine entity to account for these fluctuations of empty space.
And then tell me where/how did this entity come from.

You forgot a very important point in my proof.
Scientific theories can be proved wrong or incomplete in the future,
My premises are much stronger (Actually nothing can be more strong than that)

By Logic we can prove that space-time is not infinite (Nothing can be infinite at all)

It is proved that events itself cannot be infinite, so there must be a first event.

You don't need to distract yourself with scientific theories, to refute the proof you need to find a flaw in it, or prove that its premises are false.

The premises are impossible to be false, as it is only an Axiom.

---

It seems that Muslim Scholar is using Aristotle's unmoved mover inappropriately. Aristotle had no problem with an eternal universe.

He was wrong

Aristotle was concerned with motion as it is now. My finger is moving toward the keyboard, the finger moves because there is an arm behind it. The arm moves because of the signals of the brain. The brain chooses because the soul is exercising its will. The end. Our souls are unmoved movers. Aristotle then looks at the stars rotating around. He thinks, "same process?". Stars have motion because something is giving them motion, no infinite regress, ergo God. However this proof is absolutely terrible. If Aristotle's physics wasn't so off perhaps he could have made a different proof or something, but friction or lack thereof really wasn't understood yet.

Cause and effect is a characteristic of the universe, what is outside the universe can be something different, we don't know!