• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

God Proof - Take 1

JCB

New Member
Hey, I'm new to this forum and I'd like to kick around some ideas. Not looking for a fight and I don't want to go down the rabbit hole of dogmatism, but if you help me sharpen some of my ideas, I would greatly appreciate it. Here's a proof that I accept for the existence of God. It's basically based on rationalism, as I understand it. If you see points of error or need for clarification, please share. Thanks!

Definition - God is the self-sufficient existence of general consistency
  1. Rational reason assumes all reality is generally consistent (with self and other reality)
  2. This means all of reality exists in a manner that respects general consistency
  3. Things exist (eg your thinking about this God proof)
  4. Things that exist have a nature that is either arbitrary (bounded by something other than itself) or non-arbitrary (bounded only by itself)
  5. All arbitrary things are ultimately contingent upon some non-arbitrary thing. This is because either
    1. An arbitrary thing has a finite number of arbitrary things in a chain of causes
    2. An arbitrary thing has an infinite number of arbitrary things in its chain of causes. This means the thing is defined as the consequence of its infinite chain of causes, thus the thing is equivalent to the infinite chain of causes in a generally consistent reality. This chain is not bounded by anything outside the chain and therefore is non-arbitrary. Thus the thing, which is the chain, is non-arbitrary.
  6. Since (1) some thing(s) exist, (2) all things are either arbitrary or non-arbitrary, (3) all arbitrary things are contingent upon some non-arbitrary thing, then there must exist some thing that is non-arbitrary.
  7. God is the non-arbitrary thing that is self sufficient (being non-arbitrary) and generally consistent.
 

nPeace

Veteran Member
Hey, I'm new to this forum and I'd like to kick around some ideas. Not looking for a fight and I don't want to go down the rabbit hole of dogmatism, but if you help me sharpen some of my ideas, I would greatly appreciate it. Here's a proof that I accept for the existence of God. It's basically based on rationalism, as I understand it. If you see points of error or need for clarification, please share. Thanks!

Definition - God is the self-sufficient existence of general consistency
  1. Rational reason assumes all reality is generally consistent (with self and other reality)
  2. This means all of reality exists in a manner that respects general consistency
  3. Things exist (eg your thinking about this God proof)
  4. Things that exist have a nature that is either arbitrary (bounded by something other than itself) or non-arbitrary (bounded only by itself)
  5. All arbitrary things are ultimately contingent upon some non-arbitrary thing. This is because either
    1. An arbitrary thing has a finite number of arbitrary things in a chain of causes
    2. An arbitrary thing has an infinite number of arbitrary things in its chain of causes. This means the thing is defined as the consequence of its infinite chain of causes, thus the thing is equivalent to the infinite chain of causes in a generally consistent reality. This chain is not bounded by anything outside the chain and therefore is non-arbitrary. Thus the thing, which is the chain, is non-arbitrary.
  6. Since (1) some thing(s) exist, (2) all things are either arbitrary or non-arbitrary, (3) all arbitrary things are contingent upon some non-arbitrary thing, then there must exist some thing that is non-arbitrary.
  7. God is the non-arbitrary thing that is self sufficient (being non-arbitrary) and generally consistent.
The second one (2) of number 5 got me :confused:
Other than that :sunglasses:
animated-smileys-signs-085.gif
 

Unveiled Artist

Veteran Member
Hey, I'm new to this forum and I'd like to kick around some ideas. Not looking for a fight and I don't want to go down the rabbit hole of dogmatism, but if you help me sharpen some of my ideas, I would greatly appreciate it. Here's a proof that I accept for the existence of God. It's basically based on rationalism, as I understand it. If you see points of error or need for clarification, please share. Thanks!

Definition - God is the self-sufficient existence of general consistency
  1. Rational reason assumes all reality is generally consistent (with self and other reality)
  2. This means all of reality exists in a manner that respects general consistency
  3. Things exist (eg your thinking about this God proof)
  4. Things that exist have a nature that is either arbitrary (bounded by something other than itself) or non-arbitrary (bounded only by itself)
  5. All arbitrary things are ultimately contingent upon some non-arbitrary thing. This is because either
    1. An arbitrary thing has a finite number of arbitrary things in a chain of causes
    2. An arbitrary thing has an infinite number of arbitrary things in its chain of causes. This means the thing is defined as the consequence of its infinite chain of causes, thus the thing is equivalent to the infinite chain of causes in a generally consistent reality. This chain is not bounded by anything outside the chain and therefore is non-arbitrary. Thus the thing, which is the chain, is non-arbitrary.
  6. Since (1) some thing(s) exist, (2) all things are either arbitrary or non-arbitrary, (3) all arbitrary things are contingent upon some non-arbitrary thing, then there must exist some thing that is non-arbitrary.
  7. God is the non-arbitrary thing that is self sufficient (being non-arbitrary) and generally consistent.

What I noticed when I think of spirituality, Im very specific and direct. Even though it makes sense to me, it helps to be less abstract or vague. In that sense, when we have something concrete its no longer subject to doubt and interpretation. Its more clear.

That said, a lot of what you listed is very abstract and mystical. If you want to tweak it more, makeit more distinct to the point where its just common sense.

For example:

  1. Since (1) some thing(s) exist, (2) all things are either arbitrary or non-arbitrary, (3) all arbitrary things are contingent upon some non-arbitrary thing, then there must exist some thing that is non-arbitrary.

What exactly does this mean?

Sometimes when we are puting together our spirituality or strengthening it we use vague discriptions (i.e. god is love) without being distinct in what love is and by what means does a god/deity mean love and not something else. The more concrete, the more personal.

If you see points of error or need for clarification, please share. Thanks!​

Another thing is, what does all of this mean to you?

For example, I do believe jesus is the eucharist. I do believe there is a eucharistic mystery. Yet, I do not believe in these things because they dont define my life. i.e. I know two and two is four but mathematics is not my favorite subject.

Can you explain what you believe vs. what you know is true?

Make these abstract things come alive. What exactly do you mean with these proofs of god?
 

Brickjectivity

Turned to Stone. Now I stretch daily.
Staff member
Premium Member
I do not think God should be proven, because that is the same as God being visible. That is where I am coming from, but with respect to your proof I have come up with some objections which you may find useful for improving it. I hope you like them.



This means all of reality exists in a manner that respects general consistency
I think I agree its at mostly consistent, and if it weren't would probably be disconnected from our experience, unreachable and untouchable.

Things exist (eg your thinking about this God proof)
That sounds like an assumption, and we seem a lot more like ghosts than truly existing entities. Relativity shows that we are all already dead in a future that already exists. We appear empty, much like the atom is empty. We appear to be patterns rather than solid forms. You could go either way with whether that is existence or form.

Things that exist have a nature that is either arbitrary (bounded by something other than itself) or non-arbitrary (bounded only by itself)
Context is a problem for logic, because it is supposedly impossible for any logical system to prove itself to be consistent. An outer context can show the system to be inconsistent or consistent. Is this what you are talking about? A logical system bounded only by itself cannot be guaranteed consistent, and that would extend to a 'Reality' probably.

Since (1) some thing(s) exist, (2) all things are either arbitrary or non-arbitrary, (3) all arbitrary things are contingent upon some non-arbitrary thing, then there must exist some thing that is non-arbitrary.
There could also be something in between arbitrary and non-arbitrary, as in the superposition of the two with the observable outcome determined by what is consistent yet with extra unobservable outcomes that are not. Then you have the appearance of consistency but not true consistency. In other words you have a consistent, observable reality and a fractured leftover reality of all of the outcomes which are not consistent. You could also have partially consistent universes.

God is the non-arbitrary thing that is self sufficient (being non-arbitrary) and generally consistent.
This still does not prove God exists, because you cannot prove the consistency of the system in which you exist.
 

sayak83

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
Hey, I'm new to this forum and I'd like to kick around some ideas. Not looking for a fight and I don't want to go down the rabbit hole of dogmatism, but if you help me sharpen some of my ideas, I would greatly appreciate it. Here's a proof that I accept for the existence of God. It's basically based on rationalism, as I understand it. If you see points of error or need for clarification, please share. Thanks!

Definition - God is the self-sufficient existence of general consistency
  1. Rational reason assumes all reality is generally consistent (with self and other reality)
  2. This means all of reality exists in a manner that respects general consistency
  3. Things exist (eg your thinking about this God proof)
  4. Things that exist have a nature that is either arbitrary (bounded by something other than itself) or non-arbitrary (bounded only by itself)
  5. All arbitrary things are ultimately contingent upon some non-arbitrary thing. This is because either
    1. An arbitrary thing has a finite number of arbitrary things in a chain of causes
    2. An arbitrary thing has an infinite number of arbitrary things in its chain of causes. This means the thing is defined as the consequence of its infinite chain of causes, thus the thing is equivalent to the infinite chain of causes in a generally consistent reality. This chain is not bounded by anything outside the chain and therefore is non-arbitrary. Thus the thing, which is the chain, is non-arbitrary.
  6. Since (1) some thing(s) exist, (2) all things are either arbitrary or non-arbitrary, (3) all arbitrary things are contingent upon some non-arbitrary thing, then there must exist some thing that is non-arbitrary.
  7. God is the non-arbitrary thing that is self sufficient (being non-arbitrary) and generally consistent.
There may be many many non-arbitrary things.
What is the rationale beind calling the existences of any these non-arbitrary things as Gods?
 

Twilight Hue

Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
Hey, I'm new to this forum and I'd like to kick around some ideas. Not looking for a fight and I don't want to go down the rabbit hole of dogmatism, but if you help me sharpen some of my ideas, I would greatly appreciate it. Here's a proof that I accept for the existence of God. It's basically based on rationalism, as I understand it. If you see points of error or need for clarification, please share. Thanks!

Definition - God is the self-sufficient existence of general consistency
  1. Rational reason assumes all reality is generally consistent (with self and other reality)
  2. This means all of reality exists in a manner that respects general consistency
  3. Things exist (eg your thinking about this God proof)
  4. Things that exist have a nature that is either arbitrary (bounded by something other than itself) or non-arbitrary (bounded only by itself)
  5. All arbitrary things are ultimately contingent upon some non-arbitrary thing. This is because either
    1. An arbitrary thing has a finite number of arbitrary things in a chain of causes
    2. An arbitrary thing has an infinite number of arbitrary things in its chain of causes. This means the thing is defined as the consequence of its infinite chain of causes, thus the thing is equivalent to the infinite chain of causes in a generally consistent reality. This chain is not bounded by anything outside the chain and therefore is non-arbitrary. Thus the thing, which is the chain, is non-arbitrary.
  6. Since (1) some thing(s) exist, (2) all things are either arbitrary or non-arbitrary, (3) all arbitrary things are contingent upon some non-arbitrary thing, then there must exist some thing that is non-arbitrary.
  7. God is the non-arbitrary thing that is self sufficient (being non-arbitrary) and generally consistent.
Well they do say follow the money trail to get to its source.

No personal offense, but it looks like you just walked off a cliff with that, right off the get-go, and are flapping your arms to get back on solid ground.

Right at number 1, Does rational reasoning involve assumption?
 

questfortruth

Well-Known Member
I read it and realized proof is individual not fact and universal. This book is not magical. Gotta go beyond scripture.
The reading of the Bible (while reading the interpretation of the Church Fathers) makes good to people, it can heal their atheistic disorders. Why? Historians, Archeologians, Theologians, Physicists, and Philosophers, are all confirming the Bible authority.
 

Unveiled Artist

Veteran Member
The reading of the Bible (while reading the interpretation of the Church Fathers) makes good to people, it can heal their atheistic disorders. Why? Historians, Archeologians, Theologians, Physicists, and Philosophers, are all confirming the Bible authority.

atheistic disorders????

Is that the positive message the bible teaches?
 
Top