Proof of the existence of God

Discussion in 'Religion' started by Jason.Marshall, Jan 16, 2015.

  1. Jan Ardena OM!!! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,968
    So why the harsh response which triggered this conversation?

    My views are consistent. Why would you believe otherwise?

    jan.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Sarkus Hippomonstrosesquippedalo phobe Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,548
    Harsh? I merely pointed out that you had moved your position, from claiming an initial cause to have been proven (per the BVG theorem) to one of "could"; and secondly pointing out that proofs (the subject of this thread) do not stem from "could".
    Why on earth would you find that harsh?
    I know otherwise: when you move from a position of certainty to one of possibility, that is being inconsistent. Not to mention the other instances of hypocrisy already identified that litter your posts. Your views seem only to be consistent in their inconsistency, Jan.
    Oh, sorry, is that being harsh?

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Jan Ardena OM!!! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,968
    Firstly, I only asserted the findings and the conclusion to those findings, by Vilenka. Secondly I am utilising that conclusion to discover how such an event could have taken place before time and space came into existence. Using the definition of time given by Write4u, would it be possible that space existed before time.

    Maybe you don't comprehend the range of what you term my consistency.

    jan.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Sarkus Hippomonstrosesquippedalo phobe Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,548
    That does not stop it from being your position. You don't abdicate responsibility for your position by simply declaring that you copied the conclusion from someone else. If you hand the homework in, you are claiming it as yours (unless there are clear disclaimers).
    So you are accepting that space may have always existed, yet cried foul in claiming that noone could possibly imagine anything eternal.

    But an argument against your position is as follows:
    Splitting time from space (as Write4u does with his definition) is somewhat non-classical with regard space-time, which would mean the BVG theorem is moot - as it uses classical spacetime (e.g. a space-time continuum as understood by Einstein etc). I'm not sure the conclusion of that theorem can be used in any relevant way in cases where such assumptions/premises simply do not hold.
    If time and space are separate, the whole notion of the need for any original cause might simply disappear.
    The only thing you are consistent in is your inconsistency... so do I understand the range of your inconsistent behaviour? No, I doubt I truly do. I might only spot a small percentage of what you get away with.
     
  8. Dywyddyr Penguinaciously duckalicious. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    19,227
    Jan's consistency comprises one single stance - that "god" undeniably exists.
    To maintain this stance he will divert, obfuscate, lie, twist and deflect.
    It's utterly futile engaging him because he is incapable of entertaining even the possibility that "god" doesn't exist, and will do everything to preserve his unthinking belief.
     
    Daecon likes this.
  9. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,612
    Actually, unification (greatest satisfaction) is achieved when the balls come to rest at their lowest point closest to the center of the earth. The patterns created from the different string lengths while in motion is proof of the mathematical function.
     
  10. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,612
    It"s just a word.
     
  11. Jan Ardena OM!!! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,968
    oops!
     
    Last edited: Sep 5, 2015
  12. Jan Ardena OM!!! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,968
    So is ''mathematics''.

    jan.
     
  13. BrianHarwarespecialist We shall Ionize!i Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    813
    Yes.
     
  14. BrianHarwarespecialist We shall Ionize!i Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    813
    I see no contradictions throught my eyes sorry, the art work of God is magnificent, wondrous, beautiful.

    Even the good and the bad.

    It's romantic...
     
  15. BrianHarwarespecialist We shall Ionize!i Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    813
    As the evolution of spacetime matures things as such will become more apparent.
     
  16. BrianHarwarespecialist We shall Ionize!i Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    813
    For the living pain must be felt to bore a hole, killing the ego.
     
  17. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,612
    Jan, you must have misunderstood my argument. I claimed that time does not exist unless there is change. IOW, before the creation of (our) universal space there was only a timeless metaphysical condition (s = 0), (t = 0).

    During the creation of space, time (duration) was created and was inextricably associated with the chronology of spacetime from that point on (st = 1).

    I based this opinion on the deBroglie-Bohm Pilot wave theory, which is accepted theory. I also feel intuitively that CDT (causal dynamical triangulation) is the mathematical function in the evolution of spacetime.

    Actually, you might have used this proposition to your advantage by claiming that this timeless metaphysical (pre)condition is God.

    I would have countered that, in view of the unknowable properties of this timeless metaphysical condition, you can use any word you like, but it does not define a sentient God in any way. Certainly not a God which could be influenced by prayer.
     
    Last edited: Sep 5, 2015
  18. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,612
    The difference is that I can demonstrate the mathematical function, whereas you cannot claim that God is purely a mathematical function. That would negate your own argument.
     
  19. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,612
    Thank you for that affirmation, but are you proposing that God is a mathematical function?

    p.s. I fully empathize with your feeling of wonder and awe for the incredible complexity and artistic beauty of the universe. But, alas, that is not proof of an intentional God, but of the incredible power of mathematical functions, such as the fractal function.


    And here is the result of the fractal function, LIFE!
    https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn6162-fractal-patterns-of-early-life-revealed/#.UeNyZbfn-Hk
     
    Last edited: Sep 5, 2015
  20. BrianHarwarespecialist We shall Ionize!i Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    813
    No I am affirming that God is the creator. He can have a signature, such as a fibbanaci sequence, or if you like fractals. This is just His work... Things that appear seperate are unified on higher dimensions.
     
  21. BrianHarwarespecialist We shall Ionize!i Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    813
    My thoughts on God are too complex to describe I simply see no contradictions, all of your mutually inconsistent or consistent point of views can co-exist, and in no way affect any of my views on God at all.
     
  22. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,612
    Like Bohm's "Wholeness and the Implicate order"?
    I agree with the concept of a hierarchical ordering, as it was explained by David Bohm in his "Wholeness and the Implicate Order"
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wholeness_and_the_Implicate_Order

    p.s. minor correction: It is the Fibonacci Sequence and it is purely mathematical, and the function existed long before Fibonacci was born. He did not invent it, he discovered it.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fibonacci_number
     
    Last edited: Sep 5, 2015
  23. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,612
    As atheist, I do not discriminate against "believers". I judge people by their actions.
    So far, belief in God has not been an unqualified success in action. History is witness to that.
     
    Last edited: Sep 5, 2015

Share This Page