Proving God existence
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
01-09-2014, 02:11 PM (This post was last modified: 01-09-2014 02:54 PM by Muslim.)
Proving God existence
Proving God existence is very simple

1- Space/Time cannot be infinite
Because if we assume it is, there will be a year in the past say N B.C.
where N-1 is infinity and N+1 is finite
Which means that N doesn't equal N, it leads to a logical paradox or contradiction
Actually this proves that nothing "real" can be of infinite number
It is not something new because science proved the big bang and the start of the universe

2- As the Universe had a beginning, a starter must initiated/created it
this is done by mapping the universe and existence into an equation that varies with time, then taking its limit at time =0
Or in simple words, the universe cannot start/change from nothing (or a static form) by nothing
Which leads to a creator who had a decision and power to create/start the universe (A deity)


3-The above mandates some attributes for this deity; which are:
Outside space/time
Single
One entity
Unique
Powerful
Creator
Planner (intelligent)
in-materialistic
Has no image or photo
No more attributes can be known or understood about him using logic alone
because he is outside/separate from the universe and not like anything we observe or know

You can also read a mathematical version of the proof at
Proving God existence

I suggest to move the discussion there, as it is already posted and discussed
and appreciate if you can read old answers (refutation trials) and select the best ones for discussion

(By the way it was presented to some experts and no flaw was found in it (part 1,2))
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-09-2014, 02:12 PM
RE: Proving God existence
(01-09-2014 02:11 PM)Muslim Wrote:  Proving God existence is very simple

1- Space/Time cannot be infinite
Because if we assume it is, there will be a year in the past say N B.C.
where N-1 is infinity and N+1 is finite
Which means that N doesn't equal N, it leads to a logical paradox or contradiction
Actually this proves that nothing "real" can be of infinite number
It is not something new because science proved the big bang and the start of the universe

2- As the Universe had a beginning, a starter must initiated/created it
this is done by mapping the universe and existence into an equation that varies with time, then taking its limit at time =0
Or in simple words, the universe cannot start/change from nothing (or a static form) by nothing
Which leads to a creator who had a decision and power to create/start the universe (A deity)


3-The above mandates some attributes for this deity; which are:
Outside space/time
Single
One entity
Unique
Powerful
Creator
Planner (intelligent)
in-materialistic
Has no image or photo
Cannot be imagined because he is not like anything we observe or know

You can also read a mathematical version of the proof at
Proving God existence

I suggest to move the discussion there, as it is already posted and discussed
and appreciate if you can read old answers (refutation trials) and select the best ones for discussion

(By the way it was presented to some experts and no flaw was found in it (part 1,2))

This has nothing to do with Islam.

Truth seeker.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like diddo97's post
01-09-2014, 02:27 PM
RE: Proving God existence
(01-09-2014 02:11 PM)Muslim Wrote:  Proving God existence is very simple

1- Space/Time cannot be infinite
Because if we assume it is, there will be a year in the past say N B.C.
where N-1 is infinity and N+1 is finite
Which means that N doesn't equal N, it leads to a logical paradox or contradiction

Do you even math? That is gobbledygook. "N-1" is never infinity.

Quote:Actually this proves that nothing "real" can be of infinite number
It is not something new because science proved the big bang and the start of the universe

There has been a finite time span since the Big Bang. That is all we can say; no inference about infinity can logically be made.

Quote:2- As the Universe had a beginning, a starter must initiated/created it
this is done by mapping the universe and existence into an equation that varies with time, then taking its limit at time =0
Or in simple words, the universe cannot start/change from nothing (or a static form) by nothing
Which leads to a creator who had a decision and power to create/start the universe (A deity)

Nope. There may be a natural cause. Just because you don't see that as a possibility doesn't rule it out.

Quote:3-The above mandates some attributes for this deity; which are:
Outside space/time
Single
One entity
Unique
Powerful
Creator
Planner (intelligent)
in-materialistic
Has no image or photo
Cannot be imagined because he is not like anything we observe or know

One big stinking pile of ad hoc, that.
Quote:You can also read a mathematical version of the proof at
Proving God existence

Your 'proof' is laughable. You have no mathematical skills to speak of.

Quote:I suggest to move the discussion there, as it is already posted and discussed
and appreciate if you can read old answers (refutation trials) and select the best ones for discussion

(By the way it was presented to some experts and no flaw was found in it (part 1,2))

I suggest you move your sorry, ignorant ass there. Go away, you annoying little man.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 13 users Like Chas's post
01-09-2014, 02:36 PM
RE: Proving God existence
So I guess we don't need Islam anymore? By "proving" your God, you take away faith, when you take away faith you take away religion. So why are you still religious? Btw none of this proves anything. What "experts" reviewed this? Names?

"If you keep trying to better yourself that's enough for me. We don't decide which hand we are dealt in life, but we make the decision to play it or fold it" - Nishi Karano Kaze
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-09-2014, 02:39 PM (This post was last modified: 01-09-2014 02:56 PM by Muslim.)
RE: Proving God existence
(01-09-2014 02:27 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(01-09-2014 02:11 PM)Muslim Wrote:  Proving God existence is very simple

1- Space/Time cannot be infinite
Because if we assume it is, there will be a year in the past say N B.C.
where N-1 is infinity and N+1 is finite
Which means that N doesn't equal N, it leads to a logical paradox or contradiction

Do you even math? That is gobbledygook. "N-1" is never infinity.
This is exactly what I say

Quote:There has been a finite time span since the Big Bang. That is all we can say; no inference about infinity can logically be made.
You are contradicting with your statement above

Quote:Nope. There may be a natural cause. Just because you don't see that as a possibility doesn't rule it out.
You need to read it thoroughly
It is impossible to be a natural cause
simply because static is opposite to dynamic (contradiction or logical paradox)
For anything it is either; Static or Dynamic
Nothing can be static then decide by his own to start to change, it can only be changed from outside
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-09-2014, 02:41 PM
RE: Proving God existence
(01-09-2014 02:36 PM)JDog554 Wrote:  So I guess we don't need Islam anymore? By "proving" your God, you take away faith, when you take away faith you take away religion. So why are you still religious?
Proving Islam is another issue, this will come later

Quote:Btw none of this proves anything.
Do you mean that you believe so No


Quote:What "experts" reviewed this? Names?
It will be officially published after writing it properly, (this is a draft)
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-09-2014, 02:42 PM
RE: Proving God existence
(01-09-2014 02:11 PM)Muslim Wrote:  3-The above mandates some attributes for this deity; which are:
Outside space/time
Single
One entity
Unique
Powerful
Creator
Planner (intelligent)
in-materialistic
Has no image or photo
Cannot be imagined (OR KNOWN) because he is not like anything we observe or know

Note the parts in bold, they are what completely defeat the argument you are setting out to make.

The god you are trying to prove is an epistemological unknowable by your own admission. You can't mandate it any attributes if you have no basis or system to fall back upon for analysis. You can only analyze an entity or article according to principles that hold true within this universe for this universe is the only existence we know of. If it's outside of this spacial-temporal plane or is a product independent of anything from this existence (e.g., isn't an abstract of the human mind.), then no set of rules applicable within this realm are guaranteed to transfer.

You have undermined your own argument right in the middle of it. An epistemological unknowable is impossible to prove by definition.

[Image: giphy.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 10 users Like Tartarus Sauce's post
01-09-2014, 02:50 PM
RE: Proving God existence
(01-09-2014 02:42 PM)Tartarus Sauce Wrote:  
(01-09-2014 02:11 PM)Muslim Wrote:  3-The above mandates some attributes for this deity; which are:
Outside space/time
Single
One entity
Unique
Powerful
Creator
Planner (intelligent)
in-materialistic
Has no image or photo
Cannot be imagined (OR KNOWN) because he is not like anything we observe or know

Note the parts in bold, they are what completely defeat the argument you are setting out to make.

The god you are trying to prove is an epistemological unknowable by your own admission. You can't mandate it any attributes if you have no basis or system to fall back upon for analysis.
Maybe I missed the words
I mean Nothing "more" can be known about him using Logic alone
We can know more by messages/revelations

Quote:You can only analyze an entity or article according to principles that hold true within this universe for this universe is the only existence we know of. If it's outside of this spacial-temporal plane or is a product independent of anything from this existence (e.g., isn't an abstract of the human mind.), then no set of rules applicable within this realm are guaranteed to transfer.
Logic rules are how our brains understand things, there is no other way for us to understand anything without logic
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-09-2014, 02:54 PM
RE: Proving God existence
(01-09-2014 02:50 PM)Muslim Wrote:  I mean Nothing "more" can be known about him using Logic alone
We can know more by messages/revelations

Logic rules are how our brains understand things, there is no other way for us to understand anything without logic

Drinking Beverage

[Image: giphy.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Tartarus Sauce's post
01-09-2014, 03:06 PM (This post was last modified: 01-09-2014 03:16 PM by Reltzik.)
RE: Proving God existence
SO much wrong with this "proof". I'll confine myself to the math, since that's my area of expertise, and I'm sure everyone else will tear the other holes that need to be torn in this.

From when you spammed this (I'm assuming it was you, even if the username was slightly different) on the linked Atheist Forums thread:

Quote:3. Assuming that time is infinite t ɛ { -∞, -∞+1, ……, 0, 1, 2, 3, … ,∞-1,∞}

It looks like you're using the extended integers -- that is, positive and negative infinity as well as all the integers. That's fine, though I have to wonder why you wouldn't use the reals or rationals, since "half a second" should probably be an option. Please note that under extended integer arithmetic, -∞+1=-∞ and ∞-1=∞. This does not undermine your proof yet, but it's the first warning bell (other than that you're trying to prove God with Maths, which is absurd) that you don't know what you're doing.

Quote:4. Defining two sets of the Universe states in the past

Set 1: All Statuses separated from (1/1/2000 00:00:00) by a finite number of seconds
Set 2: All Statuses separated from (1/1/2000 00:00:00) by an infinite number of seconds
S1= {U(1), U(2), ….}, S2={U(-∞), U(-∞+1), U(-∞+2),….}

Each set can have (Finite, Infinite or 0) number of members
So the options are:
1. S1 = ɸ (i.e. it is empty)
False, as it contradicts with the ability to measure (time/seconds)

2. S1 has infinite no. of elements
False, as it contradicts with the definition of Set 1; it has only Statuses separated by a finite number of seconds so it must have a finite No. of elements.

Okay, you're dividing your set of universe states into two mutually-exclusive (possibly empty) subsets and examining them. Fine. I'll even give you option 1 being false.

Your analysis of option 2 proves that you don't have the first freaking clue how to do math with infinites.

That's fine. Most people don't know how to do that.

What's damning is that you PRETEND that you do.

Let's go with your idea of a set mapping to a subset of the integers... meaning, for everything in S1, there's a uniquely-corresponding integer. S1 can still be of infinite cardinality. Here's how.

For something to have infinite value, we merely need to show that there is no upper limit (bound) to its value. That is to say, for every number that might be proposed as a bound, we have to show that it is not in fact an upper bound and that the value is higher than that. So for example, let's say we're arguing about whether the integers are infinite. I'm arguing that they are, and you're arguing that they're not. This argument is won when either you demonstrate an upper bound, or I demonstrate that no such upper bound can exist. Here's what that conversation might look like.

You: "Okay, what about 2000. Let's say that's the upper bound. There can't be more than 2000 integers."
Me: "What about all the integers from 1 to 2001? That's 2001 integers."

You: "Oh, right. How about 1 million."
Me: "All the integers from 1 through 1 million and 1."

You: "Right. How about..."

So far neither of us has won. All we've shown is that you're very bad at guessing what the bound is, not whether such a bound exists. But then I cut you off:

"Look. Whatever number you're thinking of? Let's call that k. Take all the integers from 1, to k+1. That's k+1 integers, and its cardinality is larger than the bound, k, that you've just named. Therefore, any value you name cannot be the upper bound, because for any cardinality that you've decided is the upper bound, I've given you a very easy method for finding a group of integers that is of higher cardinality."

At THAT point, I've proven that the integers are infinite, because I've proven that an upper bound on their number cannot exist.

But here's the interesting thing. While I've proven that there are infinitely many integers? EVERY ONE OF THOSE INTEGERS IS FINITE. They all look like 3, or -27, or 284021934. Finite numbers. Every. Last. One. Of. Them.

This is the mistake you've made. Just because there are infinitely many numbers in a set, does not prevent all of those numbers from being finite.

This is basic, BASIC to understanding infinities and doing math involving infinites. As in, fundamental. As in, the example that the teacher opens the lesson with will have this in it.

And you don't know it.

And you don't know that you don't know it, and don't for a moment have the humility to ask, hey, why are there atheist mathematicians, and you don't say, hey, this is kinda confusing, maybe I should have a better grasp of it before I make a fool of myself by publicly claiming that I can PROVE GOD with it.

Oh, and you did the whole freak-show "come on, come on, see the wondrous proof of God, show starts in 1 month" thing just to build up an audience for your inevitable screw-up.

Something is very wrong with your standard for what constitutes proof and evidence. That something has led you to make a mistake here... the mistake of thinking that something is a proof, when it isn't. I suspect that this something is at work in the rest of your reasoning, and that it has also led you to make all the other mistakes in this "proof" (which others, I'm sure, will point out to you, and if they don't in the next few days, I'll come back to highlight them). But regardless of whether it's responsible for the rest, it's responsible here. Your logic is faulty. Your logic has failed you. Your logic has led you astray, into an embarrassingly false position. Your logic has a fault in it, and until you ADDRESS that fault, your logic will continue to fail you, and lead you to make a fool of yourself.

((HINT: It's confirmation bias, coupled with a bit of I-wanna-be-an-expert-but-I-don't-want-to-work-for-it lazy pride.))

"If I ignore the alternatives, the only option is God; I ignore them; therefore God." -- The Syllogism of Fail
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 8 users Like Reltzik's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: