Mathematical Proof of God

in #steemchurch5 years ago

Lisa Havens made a video about this, about the proof of God, that is found in the design of creation, but also in how the axle and spin of the earth coincided with the borders, the changes, of the nation of Israel, for the past 5,000 years, or so.

Want proof that God Exists? Well, you might have it after today’s report. In the video below I reveal how a scientist, Saul Kullook, claims he has mathematically proved that God exists. I also reveal a former scientist from 1978, named Kurt Godel, who also left behind a series of equations that he believes proves the existence of God. But in the end, the decision is yours, do you believe these men proved God’s existence?

Bill Nye the Science Guy vs Ken Ham

2014-02-04 Tuesday - Ken Ham, of Answers In Genesis, debated with Bill Nye, of Bill Nye the Science Guy, in this video on creation & evolution.

Mathematical Proof of God

By Joey Arnold

Oatmeal Joey Arnold

Add me on Facebook, Gab, Minds, Twitter, YouTube, etc.
Art, Articles, Videos, Websites, Work

Written in July of 2018

2018-07-16 Monday 10:19 AM LMS - Mathematical Proof of God
Published at 11:19 AM


How does the theory that there might exist alternate universes or places so far away from our limited reach of comprehension where things we consider to be the most basic laws of nature and existence do not apply?

What would a world where 1 + 1 would equal 3 be?

If there are alternative universes, than were do they come from? If 1+1=3 somewhere, in another dimension, timeline, universe, then it would simply mean that the terms are different as seen in Algebra. X+X=A here but X+X=B in another place because X = 1 here and X = 9 there. Plus, the plus sign (+) may mean multiplications or maybe something very complex or very simple. Same thing goes with words when different people define words differently.

An alternate universe, assuming it exists, would probably come from the same or a similar place as ours. And as I said, the very idea of an universe existing where the very laws of nature we take as natural and granted would be turned ad absurdum is something that we simply could not comprehend.

You are saying that a place where 1 + 1 = 3 would just be a matter of nomen culture, in a sense, but that's the point I made about comprehension. Maybe there are places in the universe where what we do hold as dear and omnipresent truths simply are not true anymore.

It's an awkward thing to think about, but it is interesting nontheless.

That creates more questions than answers. It generates more problems over solutions. We can talk about this universe. But you bring up other universes. It is like talking about a broken car. I say, my car is broken. You say, there are other broken cars, too. So, likewise, I can say that our universe is broken or perfect or whatever.

One Thing at a Time

But then you can say that other universes are out there. Yeah, there may or may not be other universes that may or may not be broken, perfect, good, bad, different combinations of an infinite amount of variables.


My priority is first upon my own universe. Yeah, it is awesome and interesting to think about other universes like it is interesting to think about other kids and families if you are a parent. But will you neglect your own kids maybe too much and too often while thinking and while spending time with other kids, family, or will you focus first on your own family and universe and community and nation? I believe in trying to get to the root of it all.

What is the root?

That is the crux of it.

I have had an interesting topic with a friend of mine recently about focusing on things.In general, we have two ways of looking at things. Subjectively and objectively. I like to use the words "close" and "distanced" in here as well. Most people seem to be very subjective when it comes to problems and topics, they look at things from their close and narrow point of view. And there are advantages to this. A lot of people need highly delicate thinking, observations and movements in order to figure things out.

Meanwhile I have been more of an objective kind of observer. Instead of taking sides, I analyse a problem at hand from a distance that allows me to see the entire topic as a whole in order to make sense of it, usually with success.

When it comes to "the universe" or "finding the root", I think that in general, doing so with a distanced stance is the better way to go, especially because the universes, hell, even our own universes reach far. At the same time, I think that one still has to be able to focus on aspects of life in order to make sense out of them.

So if what I say is right, in order to reach the level of understanding, a being has to reach a point of achieving unlimited distance and perfect focus towards a topic in order to grasp the entire meaning of it.


everyone has his own free will! and everyone will have to respond in his own time! of course, there is undoubtedly a supreme being! king of kings and lord of lords! our lord Jesus Christ! mathematician! physics, mechanic! in the same way, he is and always will be the same!
Excellent your publication! Congratulations!

I am a fan of freewill. That is what life is all about. It is not forced upon us. We can choose, we can have faith, we can feel, think, believe, and do, a whole lot. We are not robots. That is what love is all about. The meaning of life is love and the meaning of love is life.

If that's the way it is! You're so right!

Coin Marketplace

STEEM 0.26
TRX 0.10
JST 0.033
BTC 43422.42
ETH 2362.67
USDT 1.00
SBD 5.27