Can Math Prove God's Existence?

Submitted by: fancylad 4 months ago in Science


Can math stop the debate over God's Existence? Let's crunch the numbers and find out!
There are 49 comments:
Male 3,562
~groan~ This video is a more modern version of calculating the number of angels that fit on the head of a pin.
0
Reply
Male 5,342
How can we prove the existence of God when we can't prove our own?
0
Reply
Male 4,096
thezigrat 

We can via the Cogito.

0
Reply
Male 5,342
richanddead can't see pic, even wit all 3 eyes open
0
Reply
Male 4,096
thezigrat

Damn, I know I can't see gifs on here when I use firefox but I can when I use chrome. It was just a gif of Descartes winking, but if you try using a different browser, you might be able to see a lot more images on here.

0
Reply
Male 5,342
richanddead I had one philsophy class that studied the subject of Ontology and for our final the professor walked in, set a can of soda on his desk and said write an essay on proving the can's existence.
0
Reply
Male 241
thezigrat did someone pick up the can, open it, spill it on his/her paper and turn that in?
0
Reply
Male 5,342
skeeter01 Now Skeeter, we don't pick fights with soda cans and intentionally spill them
0
Reply
Male 5,342
richanddead 

i can't see my animated gifs I tried to post on here. I used too but now, Nada
btw LOL at the firefox gif
0
Reply
Male 370
Math is a language used to attempt to describe reality.  Like any language, it can be used to say anything.  That doesn't mean that everything an equation shows is reality.
0
Reply
Male 2,480
'Can god create a rock so heavy, even he can't lift it?'

The existence of a truly omnipotent being is not logical.
0
Reply
Male 4,096
jaysingrimm 

It's only logical if you take the definition of omnipotent to be of unlimited or infinite power and you take the view that God changes. Omnipotent can also mean of supreme or great power and this seems, generally speaking, to be what religious scholars mean when they use the term omnipotent. This definition of omnipotence is generally understood to be compatible with certain limitations or restrictions. St. Thomas Aquinas attempted to clarify this when he said that God was limited by his own will. Basically, if you have a being that exists everywhere, at all times, and has a supreme power to bring whatever he wants into being, then that Gods power doesn't pass through successive stages before the effect of it's power is accomplished. Think of it this way, where as we perceive time and change like watching a movie, from beginning to end, this version of god experiences a sort of eternal present, he has every frame of the movie laid out in front of him all at once. Now he can choose to add a heavy rock in one frame, but then that rock is there because it's his will that it should be there. If he wills it to lift in the next frame, then it was always lifted at that frame in time and God was not contradicting his own will. If God created the rock in the puzzle, the weight is unimportant, the point of contention is that he willed something to go against his will while never changing his will. The answer to the puzzle is no, because it would require God to be simultaneously willing something against his own will, which would be absurd.

That being said the idea that God is omniscient, omnipresent, and omnibenevolent is usually attributed to God by religious scholars and not the religious text. As far as I know the religious text often claims that God is simply unknowable. Job 36:26 states "Look, God is exalted and unknowable; the number of his years is beyond counting." Although Job 11:7 could be taken to hint that God may have limitations "Can you discover the depths of God? Can you discover the limits of the Almighty?" Yet I think what it is saying is "can you fully understand god," rather than saying "God has limitations can you guess what they are."
1
Reply
Male 2,480
richanddead
Thank you for such a well reasoned response.

Interesting that some view the term "omnipotent" differently, and it's application to a deity.

"The answer to the puzzle is no, because it would require God to be simultaneously willing something against his own will, which would be absurd."

A paradox, but that's the point.
0
Reply
Male 3,031
jaysingrimm actually, your riddle is not logical, but nonsense.

It's like asking "Can God’s infinite power overwhelm His infinite power?" or "Can God beat Himself in a fist fight" or “Can God think up a mathematical equation too difficult for Him to solve”. It's not logical because you’re basically asking if a being of unlimited power can produce something to limit Him. But His unlimited power, by definition, rules out that possibility. An unlimited being cannot create limits for Himself. So the riddle is sheer nonsense, God cannot create square circles, married bachelors, one ended sticks etc. (as far as i know at least.. maybe He can in some way that is far beyond what any human can fathom at this time).

C.S Lewis once said “Nonsense is still nonsense even when we speak it about God.”
0
Reply
Male 2,480
Thanks for sharing your opinion, but as pointed out, it's a valid logic puzzle.

Understand, I'm not criticizing those that choose to have faith, just call it what it is.

0
Reply
Male 3,031
jaysingrimm i understand you think it's a valid logic puzzle, however it's easily, and frequently, exposed as nonsense.
0
Reply
Male 2,480
Actually, it's a paradox. Your confusion isn't surprising.
0
Reply
Male 3,031
jaysingrimm it's only a paradox to those with confusion or misunderstanding about the nature of God, and a common mistake I see among people riling against God online.  Like you, many of them also assert it's a valid and logical argument, but again, it's only a paradox to those with confusion or misunderstanding about the nature of God.
0
Reply
Male 2,480
monkwarrior "it's only a paradox to those with confusion or misunderstanding about the nature of God...but again, it's only a paradox to those with confusion or misunderstanding about the nature of God."

Just who are you trying to convince?
0
Reply
Male 3,031
jaysingrimm pointing out nonsense.
0
Reply
Female 357
monkwarrior It's a logic puzzle. There are only two possibilities. Either God can create a rock he can't lift or he can't. If he can then there's something he can't do (lift the rock), but if he can't, then there's something he can't do (create the rock). Either way, his power cannot be unlimited.
0
Reply
Male 5,920
DrCribbens "Either way, his power..."
Are you assuming gender?
0
Reply
Female 357
broizfam Most definitely. PMS and leg waxing prove that God is not female.
0
Reply
Male 3,562
DrCribbens LOL! ~Squrlz awards the Golden Acorn for best comment in thread to the good doctor~
0
Reply
Male 3,031
DrCribbens Again, it's not logical, but nonsense. But I understand if people think it's logical, as I've run into a number of people like that online who assert it's logical.  IMHO it's nonsense, on par with the logic of a square circle.  I find people may assert this due to their lack of understanding (or misunderstanding) about the nature of God.
0
Reply
Female 357
monkwarrior It's not on a par with a square circle. It's more on a par with Schrodinger's cat. What are your thoughts on that?
0
Reply
Male 3,031
DrCribbens The cat is a thought experiment to help understand quantum states, agreed upon by those who study quantum physics.  It's quite unlike the nonsense riddle here which was likely thought up by someone whose understanding of God is based on assumptions, or poor understanding of God.  While i agree it may once have been considered a 'thought experiment', it hasn't been for quite some time.
0
Reply
Male 370
monkwarrior I agree.  It is nonsense meant to try to disprove the existence of God.  I love the C.S Lewis Quote.
0
Reply
Male 3,031
“The more I study science, the more I believe in God.”
Albert Einstein said this, but it's a common report among life-long scientists.  I'm pretty sure some people have found God through math already.
0
Reply
Male 5,920
Okay, so, this pretty much shows that the answer is "No, you can't use math to prove the existence of God(s)." The reverse, that you can't prove the non-existence with math, is then, presumably, also true. So the real question is...what was the point of this?
0
Reply
Male 1,060
I'd like to know why Something exists at all, the natural state should be nothingness, whether a god exists or not in this "somethingness" is pretty much irrelevant.
0
Reply
Male 221
I'm more interested in WHY humans have this need for a spiritual dimension in their lives. Modern humans (Homo Sapiens) seem to have developed this very early on and I understand that there is evidence that Neanderthals also had some sort of understanding of the 'other'. Perhaps also the other humanoids that have co-existed with us in the past too?
More recently, the Soviet system tried to impose atheism on their population but when the Soviet system collapsed there were not only people in their 80's and 90's who had maintained their Christian beliefs but also people in their 30's, 20's and teens who had been raised in an 'underground' Christianity.
Belief in God(s) is tenacious.
0
Reply
Male 422
mikesex Fear of death and a promise of an ever lasting afterlife are pretty strong motivators these days. I think it's the sole reason why people follow religion/god.
0
Reply
Male 38,989
Long winded, isn't he. Kurt Gödel came up with a math formula that proved God. He did it to prove you can prove anything you want to with math, like the existence of god , unicorns, open minded liberals.  Here it is


“Ax. 1. {P(φ)∧
∀x[φ(x)→ψ(x)]} →P(ψ)Ax. 2.P(¬φ)↔¬P(φ)Th. 1.P(φ)→◊∃x[φ(x)]Df.
1.G(x)⟺∀φ[P(φ)→φ(x)]Ax. 3.P(G)Th. 2.◊∃xG(x)Df.
2.φ ess x⟺φ(x)∧∀ψ{ψ(x)→
∀y[φ(y)→ψ(y)]}Ax. 4.P(φ)→
P(φ)Th. 3.G(x)→G ess xDf. 3.E(x)⟺∀φ[φ ess x→
∃yφ(y)]Ax. 5.P(E)Th.
4.
∃xG(x)”.
Pretty simple ... .huh
-1
Reply
Male 5,920
Gerry1of1 "He did it to prove you can prove anything you want to with math, like the existence of god , unicorns, open minded liberals."
I notice you didn't say "open minded conservatives." I guess that means they can't exist.
0
Reply
Male 5,342
broizfam Having an open mind can be messy with all that CS fluid leaking about
0
Reply
Male 38,989
broizfam Conservatives don't have to have an open mind, We'are already right. 

get it ?


0
Reply
Male 1,435
Gerry1of1 looks like Greek to me
1
Reply
Male 38,989
casaledana do you like greek ?
0
Reply
Male 3,633
casaledana Haha!
0
Reply
Male 5,342
~Solving the equation for Godhood~
1
Reply
Male 205
Did I miss the math? That was just some guy assigning probabilities arbitrarily.
0
Reply
Male 2,569
toetagmodel2 "assigning probabilities arbitrarily"

Isn't that how religion works?
3
Reply
Male 2,569
Isn't this the plot to π
0
Reply
Male 5,342
kalron27 In this equation find X.
 Answer It's right after the word Find :-)
0
Reply
Male 2,569
thezigrat yep :)
0
Reply
Male 5,342
kalron27 The answer to Life, the Universe and Everything is 42 but what is the question?
0
Reply
Male 2,569
thezigrat I'm still waiting for the Vogons to come and put me out of my misery ;)
0
Reply
Male 466
kalron27 So am I, but now I'm on my 3rd Pan Galactic Gargle Blaster and I don't have bronchial pneumonia. If this doesn't work, I am reaching for the poetry.
0
Reply