Proving God Existence

[Surgenator]

3. S1 is finite & S2≠ɸ
False: it means that Set 1 has a last point where next points are away by an infinite time/seconds, but as the next point is separated by an extra 1 second, that point does not exist

Wrong, your inability to grasp an infinite regression doesn't mean an infinite regresssion is impossible.

In fact, I can prove to you that you don't buy this argument. You believe God has states that change (if you don't, you haven't read your Koran). A change in state is time according to your definition. So following your logic here, God has a beginning. Opps, I just found an internal contradiction in the Koran. I wonder what that could mean.

Part II
Then to prove the necessity for a creator
Assuming that Existence E=U+G where U is the universe and G is another object/deity (which can be 0 )
(E = Existence, U=Known Universe, G=something external to the universe)
According to Axiom 1; the universe states are dynamic not constant
As the universe is part of the existence (or all of it) then Existence is dynamic as well (i.e. can be represented by a function)
E(t)=U(t)+G

In addition as proved time itself had a start which means that that the universe state U(0) was not a function at all it was either nothing or a constant; taking Limit as t-->0 U=C or U= 0
As U(0) was constant then G must exist

Wrong, the U(0) can be birth of the universe without G. Right here, you're inserting that old argument that the universe existence must have a cause. The creation of the universe can be spontaneous, i.e. no cause necessary. We see plenty of things in our universe that are uncaused, e.g. virtual particles, fission, etc... Is it that much of a stretch that the universe can be uncaused?

and be dynamic as well G≠0 Ʌ G=G(p)
The correct formula should be E(t,p)=T U(t)+G(p); p is another parameter that changes the states of G

A change is state is defined by time, why should god get a different variable?

A complete Universe function must include another parameter to change from constant to dynamic at t=0 E(0,p)=C+G(p)

Nope. Just imagine E(0,0)=C+G(0)=C+G. Do I have to add a Super God to explain how God can become dynamic?

If you say yes, then I have to explain the existence of the Super God with a Super Super God. And repeat this process ad infinitum.
If you say no, because God always existed. Then your part 1 is false.
If you say no, because God can create himself. Then there is nothing stopping the universe having the same property, as i mentioned earlier.

3. G has actions (p)
4. G is outside time, G must be one unit as if there are more than one entity time can be related to each other, but as time did not exist, then G is one UN-separated self-dependent unit
(The Eternal, The one, The self sufficient)

Actions require a change in states, which require time. Hense, these two contradict. You cannot be outside of time and perform actions.

5. G is outside and separate from the Universe

i) If God is seperate from the universe, he cannot interact with it. God and our universe have to share something for God to interact with us.
ii) You'll need a bigger universe where at corner A we have our universe, and corner B we have God. How are you gonna explain the existence of the bigger universe.

6. G has a will; as if he didn’t then creating/starting the universe must be initiated from an external source which contradicts with the (proved) non-existence of time.

Using G(p) instead of G(t), doesn't mean God isn't affected by time. Changing variable names doesn't change the their definitions. You can have two different time references, but they are still time.

7. As G is unique and not similar to matter in the universe, he doesn’t have an image (an image is a reflection of light from objects; objects are constructed from molecules and atoms)
Any religion that claims an image for God is a false religion by default

How would you know that he isn't similiar to matter? He can be created by different matter. Your image definition is just wrong. Image is a representation of the external form. You don't need light to bounce off it. I can draw a representation of a black hole and light doesn't bounce off it.

So I count 9 things that I have found with your arguments. There are probabily more that I missed. Nevertheless, you didn't prove the existence of God or Islam. In fact, you showed contradictions in Islam if you take your arguments one step further.