Scientists use mathematical calculations to PROVE the existence of God

[Reggie Miller]

Your statement
certainly is claiming that "probability" is a good reason to believe in God. Stop over-reaching.

I don't believe in God because of that. I believe in Him because it's obvious He exists:

Romans 1:20
For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities--his eternal power and divine nature--have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse.

 

[beenherebeforeagain]

I don't believe in God because of that. I believe in Him because it's obvious He exists:

Romans 1:20
For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities--his eternal power and divine nature--have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse.

Okay, it may be "obvious He exists" to you; it is not to me.

I really have no problem with you believing in God, based on faith (which to me includes God being "obvious").

But when you turn to arguments, such as God is Necessary, or God is Probable, or any of the other classic arguments for God (or for that matter, the classical arguments against God), that is looking for proof, whether to convince yourself, or to convince others...it really isn't worth the effort.

Now then, if God created the universe, and wanted it to be obvious that he did, I'm sure he could have set it up that way. Likewise, I'm sure that if he wanted to hide his involvement, so that people had to take his existence on faith, he could also have done that. But that latter universe would be identical to a universe in which God does not exist.

I am curious as to what exactly the passage you quote refers to: how exactly do invisible qualities get clearly seen? Which clearly seen parts of the universe are these invisible qualities?

 

[james bond]

Explain what?

Godel never proved god. It's very basic logic 101 that when you make a claim, the burden of proof is squarely on your shoulders. Godel never furnishes this evidence to prove god.

There is the math, but no proof. That is why I brought up Einsteing. He had the numbers, but needed very specific circumstances to actually prove them. Godel simply did not prove god.

Not knowing what an ad hominem is and basing victory on it is most foolish. You look bad enough without tarnishing your credibility further. And ad hominem would be for me to do nothing more than question your skill and logic, or just call Godel an idiot who was just as desperate of a theist as Pascal without offering any real debate or counterpoints. Pointing out he never proved god is most certainly not an attack on Godel's character or motive.

Only comment I'll make is Einstein and will bid you good day. In Einstein's TOR calculations, his intent was not prove with his math. He used it to explain and formulate his theory. OTOH Godel's purpose was to prove God's existence.

Kurt Gödel's philosophical viewpoint, and his proof of the existence of God. | Philosophical Explorations

 

[james bond]

[I'm not sure that's enough, though...]

So, in a culture that has been dominated by Christianity for the last roughly 1700 years, people heavily influenced by the dominance of Christianity through their culture, and in the business of selling Bibles almost entirely to Christians, choose to say that the Bible is nonfiction...

'k.

But if you study folklore and mythology and the like, you'll find that the Bible and related texts are just the same as all the other mythology and folklore out there from all other cultures...except that it's YOUR CHOSEN RELIGION, and therefore you assume it's true! How surprising!

I would state that you're facepalming in front of a mirror of you ignorance.

The Guinness Book of World Records says so.

 

[beenherebeforeagain]

I would state that you're facepalming in front of a mirror of you ignorance.

The Guinness Book of World Records says so.

Heh heh! You just go with that...

 

[Reggie Miller]

Okay, it may be "obvious He exists" to you; it is not to me.

I really have no problem with you believing in God, based on faith (which to me includes God being "obvious").

But when you turn to arguments, such as God is Necessary, or God is Probable, or any of the other classic arguments for God (or for that matter, the classical arguments against God), that is looking for proof, whether to convince yourself, or to convince others...it really isn't worth the effort.

Now then, if God created the universe, and wanted it to be obvious that he did, I'm sure he could have set it up that way. Likewise, I'm sure that if he wanted to hide his involvement, so that people had to take his existence on faith, he could also have done that. But that latter universe would be identical to a universe in which God does not exist.

I am curious as to what exactly the passage you quote refers to: how exactly do invisible qualities get clearly seen? Which clearly seen parts of the universe are these invisible qualities?

Sounds like you have some research to do - if you really want your questions answered. I'm confident you won't believe anything I say on the matter, anyway, so I'll let you have at it.

 

[beenherebeforeagain]

Sounds like you have some research to do - if you really want your questions answered. I'm confident you won't believe anything I say on the matter, anyway, so I'll let you have at it.

Yes, I do; have been doing it all my life, and expect to continue doing it for the remainder. I've become very suspicious of answers, especially those that can't be questioned...

As to whether or not I'll BELIEVE anything you might say, I'll at least consider it.

You, on the other hand, seem to have found the answer, and so don't bother asking questions...

 

[james bond]

Please demonstrate to me how to mathematically identify something as "holy".
I can't find out how to do it on the internet, or from your article.

The believers think "mathematical truth" was created by God and humans received it. Thus, we attribute mathematics to people (who had the brainstorm), but it is also discovered in nature.

You'll have to do some work to find out where you fit in.

"First, math somehow underlies the physical world, generates it. Or second, math is a human description of how we describe certain regularities in nature, and because there is so much possible mathematics, some equations are bound to fit.

As for the essence of mathematics, there are four possibilities. Only one is really true. Math could be: physical, in the real world, actually existing; mental, in the mind, only a human construct; Platonic, nonphysical, nonmental abstract objects; or fictional, anti-realist, utterly made up. Math is physical or mental or Platonic or fictional. Choose only one.

In peering down the dark well of deep reality, mathematics brings us closer to truth."

Is Mathematics Invented or Discovered? - Science and Religion Today

 

[Reggie Miller]

Yes, I do; have been doing it all my life, and expect to continue doing it for the remainder. I've become very suspicious of answers, especially those that can't be questioned...

As to whether or not I'll BELIEVE anything you might say, I'll at least consider it.

You, on the other hand, seem to have found the answer, and so don't bother asking questions...

Yes, Jesus Christ is the answer.

And I'll ask whatever I please, but thank you very much.

 

[beenherebeforeagain]

The believers think "mathematical truth" was created by God and humans received it. Thus, we attribute mathematics to people (who had the brainstorm), but it is also discovered in nature.

You'll have to do some work to find out where you fit in.

"First, math somehow underlies the physical world, generates it. Or second, math is a human description of how we describe certain regularities in nature, and because there is so much possible mathematics, some equations are bound to fit.

As for the essence of mathematics, there are four possibilities. Only one is really true. Math could be: physical, in the real world, actually existing; mental, in the mind, only a human construct; Platonic, nonphysical, nonmental abstract objects; or fictional, anti-realist, utterly made up. Math is physical or mental or Platonic or fictional. Choose only one.

In peering down the dark well of deep reality, mathematics brings us closer to truth."

Is Mathematics Invented or Discovered? - Science and Religion Today

Interesting article! Thanks for providing the link. I'll have to go over it in more detail sometime when I can devote more resources to it.

However, just because one philosopher (hell, even if MOST or ALL of them) says that there are only four possibilities, and that it can be ONLY ONE of those, does not mean it is so.

And a truly intelligent mind would be able to hold all four of those ideas, to study, compare and contrast, etc., without having to pick one, or any, of them as true. I think your "choose only one" is a false dichotomy (or quadotomy...).

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Only comment I'll make is Einstein and will bid you good day. In Einstein's TOR calculations, his intent was not prove with his math. He used it to explain and formulate his theory. OTOH Godel's purpose was to prove God's existence.

Einstein was out to do science. He set out to discover, and Relativity could be calculated, but it could not be proven until later on. Godel has not proven, and throughout this entire thread no one has been able to offer any evidence outside of Godel's model as evidence.

 

[james bond]

Interesting article! Thanks for providing the link. I'll have to go over it in more detail sometime when I can devote more resources to it.

However, just because one philosopher (hell, even if MOST or ALL of them) says that there are only four possibilities, and that it can be ONLY ONE of those, does not mean it is so.

And a truly intelligent mind would be able to hold all four of those ideas, to study, compare and contrast, etc., without having to pick one, or any, of them as true. I think your "choose only one" is a false dichotomy (or quadotomy...).

If you

Interesting article! Thanks for providing the link. I'll have to go over it in more detail sometime when I can devote more resources to it.

However, just because one philosopher (hell, even if MOST or ALL of them) says that there are only four possibilities, and that it can be ONLY ONE of those, does not mean it is so.

And a truly intelligent mind would be able to hold all four of those ideas, to study, compare and contrast, etc., without having to pick one, or any, of them as true. I think your "choose only one" is a false dichotomy (or quadotomy...).

The guy who said that is a Nobel Laureate, so would meet your qualifications. You can demonstrate using a truth table. Label anyone statement as T and see what you get. You should get the rest F.

 

[beenherebeforeagain]

If you


The guy who said that is a Nobel Laureate, so would meet your qualifications. You can demonstrate using a truth table. Label anyone statement as T and see what you get. You should get the rest F.

Ohhhh! An appeal to authority! And yes, you can stick all kinds of statements into truth tables--garbage in will still result in garbage out. You have to be very careful when using logic, and you have to make sure that your input is in the correct form for the logic process...and you still have to think outside the box. The four "choices" put up are not necessarily totally exclusive, nor do they necessarily cover all of the alternatives that could be conceived, and therefore only picking one would be an incorrect choice, for example.

 

[Milton Platt]

Two computer scientists say they proved that there is a holy supreme force after confirming the equations.

In 1978, mathematician Kurt Gödel died and left behind a long and complex theory based on modal logic.

Dr Gödel’s model uses mathematical equations that are extremely complicated, but the essence is that no greater power than God can be conceived, and if he or she is believed as a concept then he or she can exist in reality.

Scientists use mathematical calculations to PROVE the existence of God

Discuss.

I fail to see how that just because someone can conceive of a god, that means it can exist. That does not even make sense. And even if one were to concede that point, you have no way to go from can exist to does exist.Tolkien conceived of Middle Earth, Elves, Ogres, and Hobbits. Do they therefore exist? Does Harry Potter exist?

 

[Shadow Wolf]

I fail to see how that just because someone can conceive of a god, that means it can exist. That does not even make sense. And even if one were to concede that point, you have no way to go from can exist to does exist.Tolkien conceived of Middle Earth, Elves, Ogres, and Hobbits. Do they therefore exist? Does Harry Potter exist?

Now that you mentioned it, after a friend and I watched the Number 23, we had some fun at the expense of the lame plot by making every number personal to us and around us equal 23.
Now that I remember that, and how you can use math to do all sorts of "tricks," it makes me suspect this Godel fellow either stumbled upon or "forced" an equation to match what he was looking for.

 

[FunctionalAtheist]

Two computer scientists say they proved that there is a holy supreme force after confirming the equations.

In 1978, mathematician Kurt Gödel died and left behind a long and complex theory based on modal logic.

Dr Gödel’s model uses mathematical equations that are extremely complicated, but the essence is that no greater power than God can be conceived, and if he or she is believed as a concept then he or she can exist in reality.

Scientists use mathematical calculations to PROVE the existence of God

Discuss.

LOL!