• 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!

questfortruth

Well-Known Member
The proof is promising, if it can save atheists. Is this promising:

There is open and hidden knowledge. Much that is now hidden will be discovered by people. If in 2022 AD you will ask a question: "Does someone know today's hidden knowledge?". Then over time, the only confirming answers will be coming. Hence, being in 2022 AD, we understand that there is someone who knows the hidden knowledge. God.

Published in:
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/356587583_RIEMANN_HYPOTHESIS_AND_BASIS_OF_KNOWLEDGE

That converted me.
But what about this:

All-knowing one would know about own existence as well. Hence, he does exist.

Superman exists too, since I am sure he knows of his own existence, too.
Atheists reply that one could replace the word ``God" in the proof with Harry Potter, satan, or Zeus. I have proof of Omniscient Being. You have suggested what His name might be. It is additional information to be proven, but the basic one is already proven: He exists.

With what apparatus does God "know?"
God is Spirit. The spirit of a thing is the very notion of this thing. Definition. Spirit of Love, Spirit of Knowledge am God. Therefore, God is Science Himself.
 
Last edited:

viole

Ontological Naturalist
Premium Member
There is open and hidden knowledge. Much that is now hidden will be discovered by people. If in 2022 AD you will ask a question: "Does someone know today's hidden knowledge?". Then over time, the only confirming answers will be coming. Hence, being in 2022 AD, we understand that there is someone who knows the hidden knowledge. God.
Wow. never heard a more convincing argument. We do not know everything, therefore God exists because She knows what we do not know. That converted me. Hallelujah.

Ciao

- viole
 

viole

Ontological Naturalist
Premium Member
But what about this:

All-knowing one would know about own existence as well. Hence, he does exist.
Well, that is even more convincing. Superman exists too, since I am sure he knows of his own existence, too.

Ciao

- viole
 

questfortruth

Well-Known Member
Superman exists too, since I am sure he knows of his own existence, too.
Atheists reply that one could replace the word ``God" in the proof with Harry Potter, satan, or Zeus. I have proof of Omniscient Being. You have suggested what His name might be. It is additional information to be proven, but the basic one is already proven: He exists.
 

Ashoka

श्री कृष्णा शरणं मम
Why are Christians so obsessed with whether or not their God exists? I really couldn't care less if someone disbelieved in my God. Religion and spirituality are personal things. This just reeks of proselytizing.
 

Spirit of Light

Be who ever you want
With what apparatus does God "know?"
I-mac
Atheists reply that one could replace the word ``God" in the proof with Harry Potter, satan, or Zeus. I have proof of Omniscient Being. You have suggested what His name might be. It is additional information to be proven, but the basic one is already proven: He exists.
For at least 6-8 OP you made with the exact same content, just written in different ways, used different words.

You have not proven anything (except for your personal belief in God)

If you trying to prove Gods existence it will be from your personal belief and understanding.
Other people has different understanding and proof to them selves that their belief in God is right to them.

It is not just one way, one answer to understanding God.
Each one who seek God will realise different answers to the truth, according to what level of understanding and wisdom they reach.
 

It Aint Necessarily So

Veteran Member
Premium Member
No, I disagree. I am not doing it. I am simply socializing, but I get it: I am gone too far.

Of course you're proselytizing. You began with, "The proof is promising, if it can save atheists." You stated your purpose in trying yet again to prove the existence of your God. Who does that except people trying to convince unbelievers?

RF doesn't approve, but I personally don't mind. I say let the believers make their best cases for their beliefs. I make my best case for agnostic atheism, antitheism, and secular humanism, so why not let the theists do the same? It's the only time I rebut them. Like most unbelievers here, I've never started a thread trying to disprove God, or explaining the benefit of critical thinking, or why somebody should become a secular humanist, or explaining why evolution is correct and creationism wrong, etc., but I do like making those arguments in response to a believer's claim.

Also, this is me maintaining an open mind, meaning that I will dispassionately evaluate any evidence and argument presented and decide case-by-case, especially when I can do it without having to read an article or view a video, since that's usually unproductive, and too frequently the OP doesn't understand what he's linked to. Much better if the argument appears explicitly in the OP. I looked at your link, which contained nothing in support of your hypothesis.

You are saying that there are still things yet to be discovered, some answers coming in over time, then claim that because this is 2022, there must be somebody who already knows what man hasn't discovered, and call that God. OK. I considered your argument, and quickly rejected it. Your claim that there must be somebody that knows everything does not follow from the fact that there is as yet unknown knowledge.

Your argument is flawed in the same way that Craig's Kalam Cosmological Argument is, which concludes that since the universe had a beginning, it's cause must be his God, whose qualities he describes in considerable detail.

Like him, you have a belief supported by your will to believe it without sufficient evidentiary support (faith), that you wish to make appear to be the inevitable conclusion of sound reasoning by front loading it with a specious argument back-engineered for this purpose, but such arguments are generally very easy to evaluate as fallacious. It's remarkable that you think that what you presented would convince anybody of anything.

One more point: What I just did there is considered closed-mindedness by many of the faithful, but it is exactly the opposite. I admitted the argument into my mind for impartial consideration using the laws of reason, and rejected it. What the believer means by closed-mindedness is the unwillingness to relax my standards for belief.
 

sealchan

Well-Known Member
The proof is promising, if it can save atheists. Is this promising:

There is open and hidden knowledge. Much that is now hidden will be discovered by people. If in 2022 AD you will ask a question: "Does someone know today's hidden knowledge?". Then over time, the only confirming answers will be coming. Hence, being in 2022 AD, we understand that there is someone who knows the hidden knowledge. God.

Published in:
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/356587583_RIEMANN_HYPOTHESIS_AND_BASIS_OF_KNOWLEDGE


But what about this:

All-knowing one would know about own existence as well. Hence, he does exist.


Atheists reply that one could replace the word ``God" in the proof with Harry Potter, satan, or Zeus. I have proof of Omniscient Being. You have suggested what His name might be. It is additional information to be proven, but the basic one is already proven: He exists.


God is Spirit. The spirit of a thing is the very notion of this thing. Definition. Spirit of Love, Spirit of Knowledge am God. Therefore, God is Science Himself.

I was inspired to craft a story of God as the Nothing Yet of Infinite Potential. In my story It started creating things but realized right away that It had no way of knowing whether what It created was an hallucination or not. That issue was only "resolved" (dropped really) when something that It did not create suddenly spoke.

Hidden knowledge is only knowledge that is not evident...and the hope that it will be in the future is its only proof. Hope is a good thing...but it is not proof.
 

Sheldon

Veteran Member
The proof is promising, if it can save atheists. Is this promising:

There is open and hidden knowledge. Much that is now hidden will be discovered by people. If in 2022 AD you will ask a question: "Does someone know today's hidden knowledge?". Then over time, the only confirming answers will be coming. Hence, being in 2022 AD, we understand that there is someone who knows the hidden knowledge. God.

Published in:
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/356587583_RIEMANN_HYPOTHESIS_AND_BASIS_OF_KNOWLEDGE


But what about this:

All-knowing one would know about own existence as well. Hence, he does exist.


Atheists reply that one could replace the word ``God" in the proof with Harry Potter, satan, or Zeus. I have proof of Omniscient Being. You have suggested what His name might be. It is additional information to be proven, but the basic one is already proven: He exists.


God is Spirit. The spirit of a thing is the very notion of this thing. Definition. Spirit of Love, Spirit of Knowledge am God. Therefore, God is Science Himself.

Another thread, making another claim for "proof", and of course offering absolutely nothing beyond vague claims and bare assertions, to possess some hidden esoteric truth. I've seen it all too many times before.

I don't need saving. The idea I'm at risk of anything after I die is not supported by a shred of any objective evidence, so I am not remotely concerned about the claim, I worry far more about climate change, and with good reason.
 

Sheldon

Veteran Member
Atheists reply that one could replace the word ``God" in the proof with Harry Potter, satan, or Zeus. I have proof of Omniscient Being. You have suggested what His name might be. It is additional information to be proven, but the basic one is already proven: He exists.
Which is it, do you have proof, or have you already proved it? So far neither claim is true?
 
Top