How I know God exists by dividing existence into permanent existence and transient existence.

By permanent existence I mean an existence that cannot ever become extinct i.e. not exist anymore, there is only one example of permanent existence, namely, God.

By transient existence I mean an existence that has a beginning and an ending, for example, you and I, we have a beginning with our conception in our mother's womb, and an ending at our death.

How does transient existence lead to the existence of God?

Simple: Because transient existence inevitably implicates the existence of God, the permanent and self-existent agent.

Wherefore, my definition of God is the following: God is the creator and operator of man and the universe and everything transient.

a reply to: Pachomius
This seems to relate to the "unmoved mover" argument, which I remember from schooldays reading of Cicero (but I think he may have got it from Plato). I've got a feeling it's in Somnium Scipionis.

In summary; most things are not capable of moving themselves, and they have to be set in motion by something else. But if everything was like that, then the universe would eventually grind to a halt, because when the last thing stopped moving there would be nothing to set it going again. Indeed, movement would never get started in the first place.

Therefore there must be ONE thing, at least, capable of moving itself and therefore capable of setting other things in motion and keeping them going. That is God.

a reply to: DISRAELI

Thanks for your learned response.

a reply to: Pachomius

By permanent existence I mean an existence that cannot ever become extinct i.e. not exist anymore, there is only one example of permanent existence, namely, God.

No. Energy.
And energy isn't a mythical thing. It changes 'form' but it never gets lost. Laws of thermodynamics. One of the biggest observations a human mind ever made. Proven over and over.

By transient existence I mean an existence that has a beginning and an ending, for example, you and I, we have a beginning with our conception in our mother's womb, and an ending at our death.

I would say our body is and the awareness part of our existence.
I don't think death is the end for the you-essence, your soul if you will. Wouldn't you agree?
So imho another false statement.

How does transient existence lead to the existence of God?

Simple: Because transient existence inevitably implicates the existence of God, the permanent and self-existent agent.

Why? I can't imagine a single argument that supports your conclusion.

Wherefore, my definition of God is the following: God is the creator and operator of man and the universe and everything transient.

No. God isn't a 'creator'. God is an accidental byproduct of an information based, intelligent universe.
Welcome to 22

originally posted by: Pachomius
By permanent existence I mean an existence that cannot ever become extinct i.e. not exist anymore, there is only one example of permanent existence, namely, God.

Without recognition, nothing can exist.

God cannot be it's own viewpoint.

a reply to: Peeple

No. Energy.
And energy isn't a mythical thing. It changes 'form' but it never gets lost. Laws of thermodynamics. One of the biggest observations a human mind ever made. Proven over and over.

I don't understand how anyone can use words like "laws of thermodynamics", laws of physics, and laws of nature and think that a Creator didn't put those laws into place. To say that the universe is the intelligent one is like stating that planets, rocks, soil, rain, wind, energy, atoms, and everything else in the universe all have their own intelligence, critical thinking abilities, and coordination plan for operating the way it does without a manager. Does that really make sense to you? That doesn't make any sense to me whatsoever.

a reply to: nerbot

Without recognition, nothing can exist.

God cannot be it's own viewpoint.

Do you care to explain? That doesn't make any sense either. Your response reminds me of the saying about if a tree falls in a forest and no one sees or hears it fall, did it really happen.

a reply to: Deetermined

I don't think those laws needed to be organized. They're how things are when all the different 'things' in the universe interact.
From our Earth point of view.

To say that the universe is the intelligent one is like stating that planets, rocks, soil, rain, wind, energy, atoms, and everything else in the universe all have their own intelligence, critical thinking abilities, and coordination plan for operating the way it does without a manager.

Well how does one define 'intelligence'? That's the question.
Intelligence doesn't automatically imply critical thinking or planning. Just some form of awareness of your surroundings and the capability to make a decision.

originally posted by: nerbot


God cannot be it's own viewpoint.

Yet there are scriptures that indicate before creation, before deep universal space, before the earth ever was, before there was water, God was up to something. See if you can see what it was.

Proverbs 8:22-24 The LORD possessed me in the beginning of his way, before his works of old. I was set up from everlasting, from the beginning, or ever the earth was. When there were no depths, I was brought forth; when there were no fountains abounding with water.

a reply to: Peeple

There is a difference between INSTINCT and INTELLIGENCE.

Instinct is natural response to the environment around you. i.e. taking cover when it rains, looking for food when you are hungry this is all instinct.

Intelligence goes beyond instinct, intelligence seeks to improve on the natural and make life easier. instead of looking for food, the intelligent man will grow the food near by so he doesn't have to look for it but can harvest it. Whether it be farming or animal husbandry all of that is all part of intelligence.

It has always intrigued me as to why the first thing Cain did was build a city. The easy lesson is he is rebelling against God's decree he would be a vagabond in the earth in Genesis chapter 4, so by building a city he could claim God was wrong and really meant something else. The more advance understanding to Cains building a city, I believe is much deeper than that. There are a few things about Cains early life after being sent east away from Adam and the rest of them, that are important and caused mankind to leap and bound in Technology of the day even up until today.

1) Cain builds a city
2) Cains sons somehow learned how to do metallurgy and were artificers of brass and Iron (the latter is often said could not be iron 6,000 years ago). And were teaching other men how to do it.
3) Cains sons Somehow learned how to make musical instruments i.e. harp and organ

Up until this day no city was made by any man. What went on before Gen 1:2 is not fully revealed in scriptures but you can get the picture if you look into Job 38, Ezekiel 28 and Isa 14:12-15. Remember he was exalting a throne and we all know thrones are protected by building a city. We'll stop there as it gets into conjecture, but conjecture based on scriptures.

OK so a city, look at what Joseph did during the famine

Gen 47:21 And as for the people, he removed them to cities from one end of the borders of Egypt even to the other end thereof.

Cities were centers for laborers. It became an ECONOMIC CENTER of the day, complete with markets for food, And then there is ENTERTAINMENT, well if harps and organs are not representative of musical entertainment then it has to do with worship of some kind. We saw outside the city there are farming and the development of herding animals, Cain's sons perfected cattle herding. So you see Can Created the first Economic system ran by man and that system is still going to day. the system has all that a man could want Wine, Women and song as well as work and technical trade.

The real question is Why?

a reply to: ChesterJohn

lol
You need intelligence to have instinct.

originally posted by: Peeple
a reply to: ChesterJohn

lol
You need intelligence to have instinct.

Scientifically not true. Instinct is a natural function of the brain for physical survival, intelligence goes beyond the natural function. Insects don't have intelligence,they can't count to five, everything they do is instinctual, passed on via their DNA everything from building their nests to communication is all instinctual and hive minded. Intelligence is the development of the brain that allows a man to go beyond natural instinct making him individually different. This intelligence God wanted man to have but not in the way they got it.

a reply to: ChesterJohn

Scientifically mainly in biology intelligence refers to the ability of an organism to adapt to its environment through learning and through shaping the environment, the organism employing its cognitive abilities to do so.
Insects absolutely are intelligent.

I admit my personal definition as the ability to process information is in comparison a little loose, but basically going in the same direction.

Soooo....

The concept you propose is a double-edged sword

If it exists beyond us, then how can we ever speak to such things as being absolute? Or the sum of all creation?

What is beyond it?

And ... Is it even worth considering such things, when they cannot be answered?

All you are saying is "We exist. So something beyond us, must have created us"

Within the mysteries, this is the basis of the primary truth. Yes

Where it gets tricky, is when you define such this in terms or possessive labels like "God"

If it is beyond definition. Then how (and why) could you put terms on such things?

It is not your, or any others, place to decide such things in this world

You are referring to what I call "The conundrum of absolutes"

It actually disapproves conceptualized "God", when you look at it from the other side of what you propose

Basically, it says:

"If God is absolute
You are absolutely God

If God is not absolute
Then they are absolutely not God"

But it goes further into the the responsibility of ones "God" if such a concept is to exist

Not so much through the ineffable, or its creative source. But through the responsibilities of those who would claim to be the purveyors of such things in this world

It basically boils down to the impossible burden which need come along with presenting yourself as having the answers to things, which others know (as well as they know themselves) are unanswerable by nature

It is a redundant loop, that is internationally destructive to those who would try answer what cannot be answered

Meaning none who "seek God" can or will ever actually find them, because, they are looking. Because the answer is actually within knowing the question cannot be answered. So why are you trying?

It does not NEED to be answered. Everything you could ever know, you are born with

You exist. Something put you here. You know this intrinsically. So, you know them

You know yourself, you know God

That is all you need

Love. And be loved. That is God

It is really that simple

Everything else is speculation and opinion, which is the waters you pour from the pot, or which are poured upon you

They are made to be experienced. Not understood. Because seeking to understand them, ruins the experience

I wrote a letter to the Vatican about this very topic and they, of course, ignored it. As they do with anything they cannot answer

Because such ignorance, is the only possible solution to the conundrum

Which in turn, ironically, serves to prove the point of the apostolic impotence in all things they claim to represent

The redundancy itself, though, is rooted in the very fabric of our existence

The more they allow "evil" to be perceived, within their position, the more they become that evil

The more it has to be them

If we are to accept their claim, that they repent the source of what is the creation of all things, then by their own admission, they must be the root of all evil. For such things can only possibly come through them

This is the problem with absolutes

You cannot pick and choose which parts are yours

You must wear it all

Which becomes a big problem in this world, when there are those awakened to see and know such things, who would hold you accountable to/on such things

Which compounds and becomes worse, when they refuse to answer on such things

Because it makes them more and more the problem

Religion itself becomes those who fell on their own sword, simply to prove it sharp

There is a difference between knowing, and believing you know

And this is the important distinction they need admit within this world

Because it is within the distinction between these two things that we exist

That we are allowed to experience life

And within a personal belief of all things absolute, you restrict what "could be" for others

And so religion becomes an opposition, blockage and stumbling block, to all who do, could or would know more. All who would know better

A contradiction to itself

The devil of its own purportedly infallible design

AboveTopSecret - The Conundrum Of Absolutes - Compendium Epistle To The Vatican

Here is a link to my more detailed epistle to the Vatican, which also addresses the redundancy and limitations within prophecy (for those who see), and also contains another relevant journal entry I wrote on the topic

Though, there are parts of this letter which may not make as much sense to others reading it, as those it was intended for

Thanks everyone for all your erudite responses in my thread.

Should we all concur that there has always been existence, and it is never ever going to become extinct, and it never had a beginning, so it is permanent as opposite to transient.

This permanent existence is the source of all transient existences.

a reply to: Peeple

I don't think those laws needed to be organized. They're how things are when all the different 'things' in the universe interact.

I don't think you understand how silly that sounds. How do all of the different "things" in the universe know how to interact with each other? Something put that in motion because the universe does not have the intelligence to do that all by itself, unless once again, you want to declare that rocks have intelligence and I think MOST of us know better.

a reply to: Deetermined

Electromagnetic fields, gravity f.e., the forces in large parts at the root of things decide how things interact.
But the point is they didn't need to be told 'those are the laws now act accordingly'.
What we call laws are human concepts, interpretations of observations how things are. And they are the way they are precisely because they don't have a choice given the circumstances.

Please, everyone, may I just request us all to focus on this issue:
"Should we all concur that there has always been existence, and it is never ever going to become extinct, and it never had a beginning, so it is permanent as opposite to transient.
This permanent existence is the source of all transient existences."

originally posted by: Deetermined
a reply to: Peeple

I don't think those laws needed to be organized. They're how things are when all the different 'things' in the universe interact.

I don't think you understand how silly that sounds. How do all of the different "things" in the universe know how to interact with each other? Something put that in motion because the universe does not have the intelligence to do that all by itself, unless once again, you want to declare that rocks have intelligence and I think MOST of us know better.

a reply to: Peeple

So, now you claim that electromagnetic fields and gravity have intelligence? How did they "decide" how things interact? Laws are not human concepts. There's a reason why gravity keeps us here on this earth instead of floating around in space.

a reply to: Deetermined

No.
Why would you think that?
The laws are absolutely human concepts. People observed things, made the abstract interpretation of those observations in maths and those are the laws.
That's what intelligence does.
Not matter, not energy, not the forces, intelligence processes information.