A NEW PROOF OF GOD
-
John J. Bannan
- Posts: 21
- Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2014 10:24 pm
A NEW PROOF OF GOD
THE DOUBLE DICHOTOMY PROOF OF GOD
1) A metaphysical dichotomy between the set of all possible all inclusive states of existence and no states of existence proves that no states of existence cannot be the case, because our universe is real.
2) A metaphysical dichotomy between the set of all possible all inclusive states of existence that can become real and the set of all possible all inclusive states of existence that cannot become real being those possible all inclusive states of existence that contain two logically possible but contradictory states proves that the set of all possible all inclusive states of existence that cannot become real cannot be the case, because our universe is real.
3) Because our universe had a beginning and does not need to be real, and because something must be real without our universe being real due to the fact that no states of existence cannot be real, then there must be something real without our universe being real proving that all inclusive states of existence that can become real must be possible in reality.
4) Because the set of all possible all inclusive states of existence that can become real is infinite because one can imagine any given universe with the addition of just one more thing ad infinitum, then there cannot be a probability for any given universe because the set is infinite.
5) But because the universe is real, then there must be something real which determines what becomes real among the infinite set of all possible all inclusive states of existence where said determination is not based on probability or random chance.
6) Because something can be real and our universe not be real, then there must be a power to create the real such as our universe, and as there is a power to create the real, then there must be a power to determine what is real based on an order of preference.
7) Because the set of all possible all inclusive states of existence that can become real is not inherently ordered, and because it is possible to determine based on preference which possible all inclusive states of existence come into reality, then there must be a real eternal constraint that determines through will and intellect to allow any or all of these possible all inclusive states of existence to become real.
8] Because the actualization of any or all possible all inclusive states of existence that can become real requires the constraint to actualize them, then the constraint cannot be made and therefore must be infinite pure act without moving parts.
9) Said constraint must have power over all possible all inclusive states of existence that can become real being omnipotent and omnipresent.
10) Said constraint must have knowledge of all possible all inclusive states of existence that can become real being omniscient.
11) Because the mind of the constraint is omnipresent and hence within all of us, our minds are contained within the mind of the constraint which calls all of us to be Sons of the constraint.
12) Hence, a single being exists who is eternal, omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent, is not made, and has a will and intellect and we call this being God.
1) A metaphysical dichotomy between the set of all possible all inclusive states of existence and no states of existence proves that no states of existence cannot be the case, because our universe is real.
2) A metaphysical dichotomy between the set of all possible all inclusive states of existence that can become real and the set of all possible all inclusive states of existence that cannot become real being those possible all inclusive states of existence that contain two logically possible but contradictory states proves that the set of all possible all inclusive states of existence that cannot become real cannot be the case, because our universe is real.
3) Because our universe had a beginning and does not need to be real, and because something must be real without our universe being real due to the fact that no states of existence cannot be real, then there must be something real without our universe being real proving that all inclusive states of existence that can become real must be possible in reality.
4) Because the set of all possible all inclusive states of existence that can become real is infinite because one can imagine any given universe with the addition of just one more thing ad infinitum, then there cannot be a probability for any given universe because the set is infinite.
5) But because the universe is real, then there must be something real which determines what becomes real among the infinite set of all possible all inclusive states of existence where said determination is not based on probability or random chance.
6) Because something can be real and our universe not be real, then there must be a power to create the real such as our universe, and as there is a power to create the real, then there must be a power to determine what is real based on an order of preference.
7) Because the set of all possible all inclusive states of existence that can become real is not inherently ordered, and because it is possible to determine based on preference which possible all inclusive states of existence come into reality, then there must be a real eternal constraint that determines through will and intellect to allow any or all of these possible all inclusive states of existence to become real.
8] Because the actualization of any or all possible all inclusive states of existence that can become real requires the constraint to actualize them, then the constraint cannot be made and therefore must be infinite pure act without moving parts.
9) Said constraint must have power over all possible all inclusive states of existence that can become real being omnipotent and omnipresent.
10) Said constraint must have knowledge of all possible all inclusive states of existence that can become real being omniscient.
11) Because the mind of the constraint is omnipresent and hence within all of us, our minds are contained within the mind of the constraint which calls all of us to be Sons of the constraint.
12) Hence, a single being exists who is eternal, omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent, is not made, and has a will and intellect and we call this being God.
Last edited by John J. Bannan on Sun Nov 09, 2014 4:07 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Re: A NEW PROOF OF GOD
No it doesn't. It's a false dichotomy; the only certainty is that there is at least one state of existence.John J. Bannan wrote:A NEW PROOF OF GOD
1) A metaphysical dichotomy between the set of all possible states of existence and no states of existence proves that the set of all possible states of existence happens to be the case...
-
John J. Bannan
- Posts: 21
- Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2014 10:24 pm
Re: A NEW PROOF OF GOD
@uwot
A metaphysical dichotomy is not a statement of reality. It can't be falsified by reality.
Rather, I think your beef is with #2.
However, then let me ask you this - can a multiverse be real?
A metaphysical dichotomy is not a statement of reality. It can't be falsified by reality.
Rather, I think your beef is with #2.
However, then let me ask you this - can a multiverse be real?
Re: A NEW PROOF OF GOD
I see. So we must choose between something for which there is no conceivable evidence, and something else for which there is no conceivable evidence.John J. Bannan wrote:@uwot
A metaphysical dichotomy is not a statement of reality. It can't be falsified by reality.
If we ever get there...John J. Bannan wrote:Rather, I think your beef is with #2.
It rather depends open what you mean by multiverse: Could there be more than one absolutely everything? No. Could the visible universe be part of a larger structure? Yes. Is that structure therefore infinite? (I may be wrong, but in anticipation.) No.John J. Bannan wrote:However, then let me ask you this - can a multiverse be real?
-
mickthinks
- Posts: 1816
- Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2007 1:10 am
- Location: Augsburg
Re: A NEW PROOF OF GOD
Bannan: A metaphysical dichotomy ... proves that the set of all possible states of existence happens to be the case.
Bannan: A metaphysical dichotomy is not a statement of reality.
These two ideas seem to me to contradict each other. I take it that by "the case" you mean "reality". How then can a statement which is not about reality come to entail a statement which is about reality?
Bannan: A metaphysical dichotomy is not a statement of reality.
These two ideas seem to me to contradict each other. I take it that by "the case" you mean "reality". How then can a statement which is not about reality come to entail a statement which is about reality?
Re: A NEW PROOF OF GOD
OP ..this isn't proof, it's merely wishful thinking, no more ..no less.
Re: A NEW PROOF OF GOD
It's contradictory to say that "all states of possible existence" occur but then say there are constraints on which states occur. If you are limiting yourself to a dichotomy then either you have them all or you do not!1) A metaphysical dichotomy between the set of all possible states of existence and no states of existence proves that the set of all possible states of existence happens to be the case, which includes a constraint on all possible states of existence because said constraint is logically possible.
-
John J. Bannan
- Posts: 21
- Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2014 10:24 pm
Re: A NEW PROOF OF GOD
@uwot
If you believe a multiverse is possible, then you should understand my proof.
If you believe a multiverse is possible, then you should understand my proof.
-
John J. Bannan
- Posts: 21
- Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2014 10:24 pm
Re: A NEW PROOF OF GOD
@mickthinks
No. A metaphysical dichotomy is not about reality. It is a metaphysical proof. The constraint is about reality. Read #2.
No. A metaphysical dichotomy is not about reality. It is a metaphysical proof. The constraint is about reality. Read #2.
-
John J. Bannan
- Posts: 21
- Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2014 10:24 pm
Re: A NEW PROOF OF GOD
@HexHammer. It is a proof. Read #2. Do you believe a multiverse is possible?
Re: A NEW PROOF OF GOD
Which version of multiverse do I need to believe possible to understand your proof? Why does follow that I therefore should?John J. Bannan wrote:@uwot
If you believe a multiverse is possible, then you should understand my proof.
-
John J. Bannan
- Posts: 21
- Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2014 10:24 pm
Re: A NEW PROOF OF GOD
@uwot
It doesn't matter which version. The point is that a multiverse would mean that in actuality more than one state of existence is real. That supports my metaphysical dichotomy.
It doesn't matter which version. The point is that a multiverse would mean that in actuality more than one state of existence is real. That supports my metaphysical dichotomy.
Re: A NEW PROOF OF GOD
That is still not a proof, but still wishful thinking.John J. Bannan wrote:@HexHammer. It is a proof. Read #2. Do you believe a multiverse is possible?
Re: A NEW PROOF OF GOD
John J. Bannan wrote:A NEW PROOF OF GOD
1) A metaphysical dichotomy between the set of all possible states of existence and no states of existence proves that the set of all possible states of existence happens to be the case, which includes a constraint on all possible states of existence because said constraint is logically possible.
2) Because reality does not contain all possible states of existence, then there must be a real eternal constraint on all possible states of existence that permits any or all possible states of existence to actualize into reality if the constraint allows it.
3) Because the actualization of any or all possible states of existence requires the constraint to actualize, then the constraint cannot be made.
4) Said constraint must have power over all states of existence being omnipotent and omnipresent.
5) Said constraint must have knowledge of all states of existence being omniscient.
6) Because the mind of the constraint is omnipresent and hence within all of us, our minds are contained within the mind of the constraint which calls all of us to be Sons of God.
7) Hence, a single being exists who is unmade, eternal, omnipotent, omniscient and omnipresent and we call this being God.
Number 1. appears to a statement in terms of a set of all sets that do no contain themselves. On that basis you might have to think how this impacts on the rest.
Re: A NEW PROOF OF GOD
For the reason mickthinks has already given, no it doesn't.John J. Bannan wrote:@uwot
It doesn't matter which version. The point is that a multiverse would mean that in actuality more than one state of existence is real. That supports my metaphysical dichotomy.
Anyway; you think my beef might be with #2:
What is your evidence for this?John J. Bannan wrote:2) Because reality does not contain all possible states of existence,