Proving God Existence

[Muslim Scholar]

If you want to say something exists, then it must be locatable in some dimension or framework.

Can you prove that?

However, anything so locatable must be a CHILD to the framework which contains it. Forget time, even your special variant of it. If God preceeds all frameworks, of all types, then in what sense does He exist? Will you say "God is the one special entity which can exist independent of any framework?" If so, I read this statement as "God is the one special entity which can exist without existing."

His existence is proved by proving the impossibility of his non-existence, that is why there is no need for all of that
The trick is that proving God existence directly will need such conditions, also If God exist he must outside the Universe, i.e. UN-imaginable because we can know only things similar to what we see in the Universe, so I turned around the problem by proving the fallacy of his non-existence

I can proceed with a bunch of condradictory terms to complement his non-existence existence:
-He is the light which is so bright it cannot be seen.
-He is the alpha which is also the omega (thanks Bible).
-He is the manifestation of all that which cannot be manifested.

Irrelevant as all of these are paradoxes and cannot exist.

But the problem is this: playing with words in this way doesn't do anything but stimulate pot sales.

Now, you are playing with words, I used every word for its precise meaning not more not less.

---

Your premise: S1 is finite.

Your derivation: S1 is not empty, S1 is not infinite.

Your conclusion: therefore S1 is finite.

You can't get more circular than that.

The proposition that S1 is finite is just option of may, I didn't assert that
The main conclusion is that S2= ɸ i.e. S2 is empty.

Isn't it that God is eternal (existed an infinite time in the past, will exist an infinite time in the future)? Isn't he infinitely powerful? Infinitely knowledgeable? Infinitely beneficent?

No, god created time so he didn't exist an infinite time before time, because this will be non-sense

He will not exist for an infinite time in the future, because at any point of time we can say he existed for N number of years!

---

If there are more than one G, then events of one can be related to the other
For example G2 will think when G1 did U, which contradicts with the conclusion, so G must be one.

You don't know what G2 is so how can you know G2 will think when G1 does U.

I didn't mean that.
I mean that events of G1 can be related to G2 and vice versa
i.e. there will exist related events which is proved false.

[paulpablo]

I didn't mean that.
I mean that events of G1 can be related to G2 and vice versa
i.e. there will exist related events which is proved false.

How can you conclude that there will be related events between G1 and G2? Why does what G1 does have to effect G2?

[little_monkey]

Your premise: S1 is finite.

Your derivation: S1 is not empty, S1 is not infinite.

Your conclusion: therefore S1 is finite.

You can't get more circular than that.

The proposition that S1 is finite is just option of may, I didn't assert that
The main conclusion is that S2= ɸ i.e. S2 is empty.

You've started with S1 is finite, then conclude S1 is finite, that's like starting with x=5 to conclude that x=5.

Your conclusion for S2 is likewise circular: you started with S2 is infinite, but then say S1 contradicts it, so it must be the empty set.

Your grasp of logic must be dysmal if you can't see that obvious error.

Isn't it that God is eternal (existed an infinite time in the past, will exist an infinite time in the future)? Isn't he infinitely powerful? Infinitely knowledgeable? Infinitely beneficent?

No, god created time so he didn't exist an infinite time before time, because this will be non-sense

He will not exist for an infinite time in the future, because at any point of time we can say he existed for N number of years!

So if God does not exist for an infinite amount of time, he will cease to exist, that is, he will die? What kind of God do you believe in? Do you know that in your religion this is heresy and you could be executed under a fatwa?

[downbeatplumb]

[quote='bennyboy' pid='451039' dateline='1369748269']
If you want to say something exists, then it must be locatable in some dimension or framework.

Can you prove that?

Are you really asking for proof!

Oh the irony.

[Baalzebutt]

He will not exist for an infinite time in the future, because at any point of time we can say he existed for N number of years!

Ok, let me ask you a more direct question:

Did gods existence have a beginning? If so, when? If not, does this not constitute an infinite existence?

Will gods existence have an end? If so, when? If not, does this not constitute an infinite existence?

Please remember, infinity can have a starting point. In other words, something can begin and then extend infinitely from that point. That also means that something could extend infinitely backwards starting from our current time.

One other question: At this specific point in time, how many years has god existed?

[whatever76]

I'll just deal with your summary rather than the whole proof:

I'll summarize it in very few words

1- If time is infinite, there must be a time in the past where infinite numbers of seconds passed which is not, so time & universe had a start.

Not if time is a circle. A circle does not have a beginning and has an infinite number of points. If the circle expands or contracts, the number of points does not increase or decrease because they are infinite.

2- As the universe was nothing or something static, something (else) must have started it to be time sensitive, we will call it G.

Your argument is basically "How did we get something from nothing?" Your answer is that we got something from another something called God. So then the question is "How did we get another something that created this something from nothing?" Which is to say that you haven't really answered the first question.

3- G must have some attributes, those attributes are not by choice but by logic, so they define G.

G's attributes matches God in Islam

I think that the attributes you suggest for God are entirely by your own preference to fit your explanation.

[downbeatplumb]

Your argument is basically "How did we get something from nothing?" Your answer is that we got something from another something called God. So then the question is "How did we get another something that created this something from nothing?" Which is to say that you haven't really answered the first question.

.

This is what we have been trying to say but well all along.

[Zarith]

Set 1: All Statuses separated from (1/1/2000 00:00:00) by a finite number of seconds
Set 2: All Statuses separated from (1/1/2000 00:00:00) by an infinite number of seconds
S1= {U(1), U(2), ….}, S2={U(-∞), U(-∞+1), U(-∞+2),….}

2. S1 has infinite no. of elements
False, as it contradicts with the definition of Set 1; it has only Statuses separated by a finite number of seconds so it must have a finite No. of elements.

I read through some of this, but there's 34 pages here, so sorry if this has already been cleared up.

The definition of S1 is to me ambiguous. Either you are saying that:
1) S1 contains all states which are separated in time from 1/1/2000 00:00:00 by an amount that is smaller than some arbitrarily chosen fixed constant number T1, or ...
2) S1 contains all states which are separated in time from 1/1/2000 00:00:00 by some finite number, this number being different for different members of S1

If you mean definition (1), then S1 contains a finite number of elements and S2 contains an infinite number of elements.
If you mean definition (2), then S1 contains an infinite number of elements and S2 is empty.

To see why (2) entails an infinite S1, note that given any member of S1 at time T0, a new member of S1 can be generated at T1=T0+1. T0 is finite therefore T1 is too.

This should have been obvious, since you can't start with a set containing an infinite number of elements (the integers), split it, and end up with a finite number of elements in the union of the 2 resulting sets.

I stopped reading after this.

[Muslim Scholar]

The definition of S1 is to me ambiguous. Either you are saying that:
1) S1 contains all states which are separated in time from 1/1/2000 00:00:00 by an amount that is smaller than some arbitrarily chosen fixed constant number T1, or ...
2) S1 contains all states which are separated in time from 1/1/2000 00:00:00 by some finite number, this number being different for different members of S1

If you mean definition (1), then S1 contains a finite number of elements and S2 contains an infinite number of elements.
If you mean definition (2), then S1 contains an infinite number of elements and S2 is empty.

To see why (2) entails an infinite S1, note that given any member of S1 at time T0, a new member of S1 can be generated at T1=T0+1. T0 is finite therefore T1 is too.

This should have been obvious, since you can't start with a set containing an infinite number of elements (the integers), split it, and end up with a finite number of elements in the union of the 2 resulting sets.

The point is that we assumed that infinite number of elements can exist, so we can define (hypothetically) a set with infinite number of elements

If we start by an infinite number of events, then splitting it can either result in 2 infinite sets or one finite and the other is infinite.

then prove that an infinite number of elements is impossible.

[Something completely different]

lol

you are still desperatly trying to sell your worthless snakeoil.




Do you still aprove of slavery and equate not being a muslim to being a criminal offence?