• 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!

Help needed to improve style of this God-proof

questfortruth

Well-Known Member
I ask you for help to correct style-mistakes in order for me to submit paper to renown Philosophical Journals:

Dear referee, obviously the scientific scepticism pushes you to see a lot of mistakes, inconsistencies and questionable places in the paper. And now please write the notes you wrote, but only with a strong desire to confirm my case. If author says, that he has written proof, then a polite human considers it as proof. Did not you hear about the human factor - wishful thinking? Thanks to latter they did not throw the Charles Darwin out of the school curriculum, despite the protests of true scientists. Try to love me like Good Samarian does to a stranger and look not for refutations (if desired, everything can be refuted through imagination, trolling and lies), but look to confirm my article.

DEFINITION of God:

God is the Omniscient Being. To know everything means to answer it correctly, if you are asked what digit is in given place after the comma in the number of pi (pi = 3.14.....). For example: the examiner asks to name the second digit after the comma in pi, to which God replies: "4".

THEOREM: God exists because He knows everything.

PROOF:
Just to recall you basic manners of Christian Civilization: ``If author says, that he has written proof, then a polite human considers it as proof.''

At the moment, there are no people on the planet who will answer correctly and quickly about the billion billion billionth decimal in the number of pi (even with modern quick algorithms it is not possible yet). But such people would know about own existence. But it does not follow from this that they actually exist. Another thing is if you strive to know everything, any digit after the decimal point, and you got such a super-power (``Ask and it will be given to you; seek and you will find; knock and the door will be opened to you.'' Matthew 7:7) then it will be a miracle! You would be unicum! It is easy for you to walk on the water and not sink, because you found out everything about pi! And you still know that you exist. So, if you have all the fullness of knowledge, then among them will necessarily be the knowledge of the existence of the Omniscient Being - yourself. Therefore, God must necessarily exist and answer correctly, if you ask Him, about any digit in pi.

It follows, that only and solely the Omniscient Being knows for certain about own existence (and precisely through my proof), because no one knows own origin, ``except the Son, and to whom the Son wants to discover.'' Matt. 11:27. Without notion of Origin, there is Absolute Solipsism: Lauren Tousignant, The universe shouldn't exist, according to science, New York Post (October 25, 2017).

God does not require proof, not because there are none, but because God is infinitely obvious: a waste of time proving something that is absolutely obvious. But I will still prove: if there is knowledge that nobody among the people yet knows (like first trillion of trillions of digits in the Pi), then who knows this knowledge? Knowledge is defined as that, what someone knows. Therefore, there is the God who knows all knowledge: either it is hidden yet or already found.
 

Attachments

  • theologyScience.pdf
    123.8 KB · Views: 0
Last edited:

viole

Ontological Naturalist
Premium Member
I ask you for help to correct style-mistakes in order for me to submit paper to renown Philosophical Journals:

DEFINITION of God:

God is the Omniscient Being. To know everything means to answer it correctly, if you are asked what digit is in given place after the comma in the number of pi (pi = 3.14.....). For example: the examiner asks to name the second digit after the comma in pi, to which God replies: "4".

THEOREM: God exists because He knows everything.

PROOF:

At the moment, there are no people on the planet who will answer correctly and quickly about the billion billion billionth decimal in the number of pi (even with modern quick algorithms it is not possible yet). But such people would know about own existence. But it does not follow from this that they actually exist. Another thing is if you strive to know everything, any digit after the decimal point, and you got such a super-power (``Ask and it will be given to you; seek and you will find; knock and the door will be opened to you.'' Matthew 7:7) then it will be a miracle! You would be unicum! It is easy for you to walk on the water and not sink, because you found out everything about pi! And you still know that you exist. So, if you have all the fullness of knowledge, then among them will necessarily be the knowledge of the existence of the Omniscient Being - yourself. Therefore, God must necessarily exist and answer correctly, if you ask Him, about any digit in pi.

It follows, that only and solely the Omniscient Being knows for certain about own existence (and precisely through my proof), because no one knows own origin, ``except the Son, and to whom the Son wants to discover.'' Matt. 11:27. Without notion of Origin, there is Absolute Solipsim: Lauren Tousignant, The universe shouldn't exist, according to science, New York Post (October 25, 2017).

God does not require proof, not because there are none, but because God is infinitely obvious: a waste of time proving something that is absolutely obvious. But I will still prove: if there is knowledge that nobody among the people yet knows (like first trillion of trillions of digits in the Pi), then who knows this knowledge? Knowledge is defined as that, what someone knows. Therefore, there is the God who knows all knowledge: either it is hidden yet or already found.

You say that I have a lot of mistakes and inconsistencies, that I have a circular argument? And now please write everything you wrote, but only with a strong desire to confirm my case. Did not you hear about the human factor - wishful thinking? Thanks to latter they did not throw the Charles Darwin out of the school curriculum, despite the protests of true scientists. Try to love me like Jesus does to a stranger and look not for refutations (if desired, everything can be refuted through trolling and lies), but look to confirm my article.

What God proof?

Ciao

- viole
 

questfortruth

Well-Known Member
The problem is content, not style.
Improve the content and I give you a like. :) But do not change the aim of text: the aim of text is to mix Science and Religion! What a better world will it be without conflict between mind and heart!
 

whirlingmerc

Well-Known Member
You might want to post this somewhere other than a debate forum, @questfortruth .


In the end I don't think it would provide anyone a gut level satisfaction or consolation in a time of needing assurance.

I'm not sure it would be categorized as a proof. It starts with an assumed definition and doesn't carry it farther

What does "the second digit after the comma" mean. I got lost there. Seems contrived
 
Last edited:

SalixIncendium

अग्निविलोवनन्दः
Staff member
Premium Member
33j4yb.jpg
 

whirlingmerc

Well-Known Member
Can you move it? Please move the article to needed place.

Even though you say you need help with style. if content is weak a good style is not going to help.
I still think you need to step back regarding the content. My teacher used to say "nothing well said is still nothing" Content first. Style second.

Pi is abstract. Why not concern yourself with the vast complexities of the universe large and small? And maybe the purpose: Is it ultimately for us? for God? or maybe for both?
 

questfortruth

Well-Known Member
Even though you say you need help with style. if content is weak a good style is not going to help.
I still think you need to step back regarding the content. My teacher used to say "nothing well said is still nothing" Content first. Style second.

Pi is abstract. Why not concern yourself with the vast complexities of the universe large and small? And maybe the purpose: Is it ultimately for us? for God? or maybe for both?
The complexity is needed for Universe to be called Nature. There is will to create both natural world and spiritual. Natural world needs large resources to be natural.
 

Road Warrior

Seeking the middle path..
If author says, that he has written proof, then a polite human considers it as proof.
A polite human is just being nice. A logical person would say “WTFO?

As for your paper, if you receive anything above a “C”, I’d have second thoughts about the quality of the school in which you are paying money for an education.
 
Top