This is a deep subject about the true nature of the True Creator God, which I was arguing for on another forum for the past several hours. Here is a copy and past of my argument, which I call the "Set Theory argument for God's existence".

====

Okay, so the set Nothing{P} cannot exist, because Nothing{} is an empty set.

The past-finite universe (big bang model) could not come from Nothing{}, because Nothing{} does not contain any members, therefore there is not a creative process, P, in the set Nothing{}, in fact, no matter how many layers of reality exist, there can't have been a set "Nothing{P}", because Nothing{} is always a reference to an empty set.

Thus the past- finite universe must have been created by something which somehow preceded said past finite universe and is not nothing.

The only thing which meets this description is Logos{P, ...}.

Chaos cannot meet this description, because Chaos turns out to be a unique member of the set "Logos{P, ...}", and not the other way around.

In Hawkings equation, "1 + (-1) = 0," therefore, he claims, postive energy and negative energy cancel so everything can come from nothing. No it can't. Matter does not have "negative mass" just because it is moving in the opposite direction. Even if it did, guess what? He cant' escape this...

Wait a minute, the equation "1+(-1) = 0" happens to be a sub-set of "Logos{P,...}", so even if Hawking's equation worked, which it does not work, but even if it did work, it would require an eternal creator to exist....Logos{P, ...}

If I have five apples and you take away 5 apples, I don't have zero apples, I have nothing at all, because zero apples is not a counting number. In fact, the entire negative number system is a misnomer. There can be a negative sign denoting a vector's direction, but there are not negative counting numbers, just as zero apples is not a counting number. There is a hole in every graph at zero, which is not taught properly in mathematics courses. Negative numbers do not exist in reality. The negative sign denotes a vector direction, nothing more. There is no "negative mass" in the Universe, even Anti-Matter does not have "negative mass". So Hawking was dead wrong when he made up this silly argument.

Hawking's equation is a sub-set of Logos{P,...}, therefore Logos{P,...} must exist, but Chaos{P} cannot exist, but Logos{Chaos{}, P, ...} need not exist either, because we don't see true chaos in the universe, however, just in case I am wrong and chaos does exist, chaos turns out to be a sub-set of Logos{P, ...}.

So "Logos" explains everything, while "Nothing" explains nothing, and "Chaos" explains nothing.

I had a hard time proving that Chaos was a subset of Logos, but it turns out to be as simple as this:

Every sentence which makes sense is a subset of Logos.

Actually, every sentence is a subset of Logos even if it does not make sense.

Therefore Chaos is a subset of Logos.

Therefore Logos{P,...} precedes Chaos{}, because Logos can describe Chaos, but Chaos is not guaranteed to describe Logos{P,...}, and meanwhile the set "Nothing{}" has never existed in reality, else Nothing{} would continue to exist..."From Nothing comes nothing."

Wade • an hour ago

Now String Theory turns out to be a sub-set of Logos, and not the other way around. Else how do they "know" there is any sense in String Theory? It is a mere extension of the logic they observe in this universe, so they extend it to roughly 10^500 additional universes.

And let us not confuse the term "Logos{P,...}" with our logic alone. I'm using the term "Logos" as the Greeks defined Logos, or the word translated "Word" in John 1:1 ("In the beginning was the Logos and the Logos was with God and the Logos was God"). I.E. "The Rational Principal which governs reality".

But I believe I have shown that if you admit that Nothing{P} certain can't exist, and Nothing{} appears never to have been the case, then the Creator must be the set "Logos{P, ...}".

Then the only question that remains is, "Is the Creator a mind or is the creator a mindless event-like entity?"

The Creator, Logos{P,...} must have had the mind-potential, else we would not have minds.

Therefore the Creator must be a mind, because it has mind-potential, and this Creator has had an eternity to reach its potential, so if it has mind potential which created our minds, then the mind potential should have created its own mind in that eternal existence by now...

Therefore the Creator is both a mind and almighty; Logos{P,...} governs all conceivable realities.

Therefore Logos{P, ...} is the greatest conceivable Being in every conceivable world. ("The Heaven and The Heaven of Heavens cannot contain Thee"). Which is Transcendence; But the Logos{P,...} observed in String Theory is assumed to be Transcendent, which is why they use the same laws as the universe we observe to try to describe all conceivable universes, and to try to explain Gravity better.

Therefore Logos{P, ...} is the same as God, the same God the Biblical authors, flawed as they be, tried to inform you of.

Therefore John 1:1 is correct. In the Beginning was the Logos and the Logos was God.

====

Okay, so the set Nothing{P} cannot exist, because Nothing{} is an empty set.

The past-finite universe (big bang model) could not come from Nothing{}, because Nothing{} does not contain any members, therefore there is not a creative process, P, in the set Nothing{}, in fact, no matter how many layers of reality exist, there can't have been a set "Nothing{P}", because Nothing{} is always a reference to an empty set.

Thus the past- finite universe must have been created by something which somehow preceded said past finite universe and is not nothing.

The only thing which meets this description is Logos{P, ...}.

Chaos cannot meet this description, because Chaos turns out to be a unique member of the set "Logos{P, ...}", and not the other way around.

In Hawkings equation, "1 + (-1) = 0," therefore, he claims, postive energy and negative energy cancel so everything can come from nothing. No it can't. Matter does not have "negative mass" just because it is moving in the opposite direction. Even if it did, guess what? He cant' escape this...

Wait a minute, the equation "1+(-1) = 0" happens to be a sub-set of "Logos{P,...}", so even if Hawking's equation worked, which it does not work, but even if it did work, it would require an eternal creator to exist....Logos{P, ...}

If I have five apples and you take away 5 apples, I don't have zero apples, I have nothing at all, because zero apples is not a counting number. In fact, the entire negative number system is a misnomer. There can be a negative sign denoting a vector's direction, but there are not negative counting numbers, just as zero apples is not a counting number. There is a hole in every graph at zero, which is not taught properly in mathematics courses. Negative numbers do not exist in reality. The negative sign denotes a vector direction, nothing more. There is no "negative mass" in the Universe, even Anti-Matter does not have "negative mass". So Hawking was dead wrong when he made up this silly argument.

Hawking's equation is a sub-set of Logos{P,...}, therefore Logos{P,...} must exist, but Chaos{P} cannot exist, but Logos{Chaos{}, P, ...} need not exist either, because we don't see true chaos in the universe, however, just in case I am wrong and chaos does exist, chaos turns out to be a sub-set of Logos{P, ...}.

So "Logos" explains everything, while "Nothing" explains nothing, and "Chaos" explains nothing.

I had a hard time proving that Chaos was a subset of Logos, but it turns out to be as simple as this:

Every sentence which makes sense is a subset of Logos.

Actually, every sentence is a subset of Logos even if it does not make sense.

Therefore Chaos is a subset of Logos.

Therefore Logos{P,...} precedes Chaos{}, because Logos can describe Chaos, but Chaos is not guaranteed to describe Logos{P,...}, and meanwhile the set "Nothing{}" has never existed in reality, else Nothing{} would continue to exist..."From Nothing comes nothing."

Wade • an hour ago

Now String Theory turns out to be a sub-set of Logos, and not the other way around. Else how do they "know" there is any sense in String Theory? It is a mere extension of the logic they observe in this universe, so they extend it to roughly 10^500 additional universes.

And let us not confuse the term "Logos{P,...}" with our logic alone. I'm using the term "Logos" as the Greeks defined Logos, or the word translated "Word" in John 1:1 ("In the beginning was the Logos and the Logos was with God and the Logos was God"). I.E. "The Rational Principal which governs reality".

But I believe I have shown that if you admit that Nothing{P} certain can't exist, and Nothing{} appears never to have been the case, then the Creator must be the set "Logos{P, ...}".

Then the only question that remains is, "Is the Creator a mind or is the creator a mindless event-like entity?"

The Creator, Logos{P,...} must have had the mind-potential, else we would not have minds.

Therefore the Creator must be a mind, because it has mind-potential, and this Creator has had an eternity to reach its potential, so if it has mind potential which created our minds, then the mind potential should have created its own mind in that eternal existence by now...

Therefore the Creator is both a mind and almighty; Logos{P,...} governs all conceivable realities.

Therefore Logos{P, ...} is the greatest conceivable Being in every conceivable world. ("The Heaven and The Heaven of Heavens cannot contain Thee"). Which is Transcendence; But the Logos{P,...} observed in String Theory is assumed to be Transcendent, which is why they use the same laws as the universe we observe to try to describe all conceivable universes, and to try to explain Gravity better.

Therefore Logos{P, ...} is the same as God, the same God the Biblical authors, flawed as they be, tried to inform you of.

Therefore John 1:1 is correct. In the Beginning was the Logos and the Logos was God.

## Comment