Scientific Proof of God, A New and Modern Bible, and Coexisting Relations of God and the Universe

Saturday, December 02, 2006

More on Atheism, I


Scientifically, the idea of atheism is the exact opposite of the idea of theism. So, any idea opposed to theism can be identified as an atheistic idea. Thus, if a theist desires to argue against atheism, the precise definition of theism must be known first. To define theism, one must identify the attributes of God with the symbols of our scientific language. The meanings of these symbols must be very precise, just as precise symbols are being used by physical scientists to find and identify the laws of physics. The law of gravity is an example of a physical law. I advise against the use of the symbols found in the ancient scriptures because the meanings of such symbols are often inconsistent with each other. Giving attributes to God is very difficult and is thus a scientific effort.

The scientific attributes that I have assigned to God to date are as follows: (1) one (2) monotheistic, (3) Trinitarian, (4) Dualistic, (5) infinite, (6) unlimited, (7) eternal, (8) active, (9) loving. (10) greatest, (11) absolute maximum, (12) absolute minimum, (13) forgives, (14)omnipotent, (15) omniscient, (16) wise, (17) spiritual, (18) creator and designer of all spirits and things, (19) savior or reincarnator of spirits, (20) good, (21) judge, (22) teacher, and (23) originator, of everything.

As you can see, I could argue that many people are atheists, even though they would say that they are theists. Further, I could argue that many religions are atheistic. Furthermore, I could argue that many Jews, Christians, and Muslims are atheistic. The point I make is that one must work hard to be a true theist. This is why I argue that in a nation under God, theists and atheists cannot coexist. Only one who is ignorant will say that a theocracy is slavery.

Today, although the USA was founded as a theocracy, which is mandated in the Declaration of Independence, the USA is a mixed nation of theists and atheists. The turn away from theocracy in the USA was not a separation of State and Religion. It was a turn away from Theology and the theory of G0d.

The pic is a reminder of how God was removed from the USA.

posted by George Shollenberger @ 9:17 AM  

10 Comments:

  • At 10:39 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    Theism, as a concept, is not limited to you. Theism is simply the presence of a belief in the existence of at least one god - not just "god" as you define the word. You don't get to proclaim that others are "really atheists" because they don't believe in god as you define it any more than they can proclaim that you are "really an atheist" because you don't believe in a god as they define it. That's what the Romans did to Christians: describe them as atheists because they didn't believe in or worship the "true" state gods of Rome.

    Polytheists are theists. Pantheists are theists. Monotheists are theists. Muslims are theists. Christians are theists. Everyone is a theist if they believe in some sort of god, even if you personally don't think that god (as they define it) exists.

    Everyone else is an atheist - atheism is just the absence of theism (any theism, not just your sort of theism). Atheism is not the "opposite" of theism, it's the *absence* of theism. Apolitical is not the opposite of political, it's the absence of political. Atonal is not the opposite of tone, it's the absence of tone.

    The founding document of the American *government* is the Constitution. If America were founded as a theocracy, it would be stated as such in that document. You wouldn't need to turn to the DoI; in doing so, you admit that you can't find what you need to support your claim in the Constitution.

     

  • At 7:53 PM, Blogger George Shollenberger said…

    Response to anonymous.

    Thanks. Your words are revealing an enduring language problem that too few people understand. This problem was well developed at the time of Socrates and when Plato was transforming Socrates' negative thoughts into positivism. Unfortunately, it was wrong for people to view Plato as a mystic, when he was simply a great mathematician and scientist.

    So, Aristotle, rather than Plato, would be selected to guide the Roman Church through the Middle Ages. The result of this selection is that Plato's work was lost until He was found in the Renaissance. This finding put Nicholas of Cusa to work. He perfected the Western world languages by limiting Aristotle's logic.

    Today, Western world man has entered into a new linguistic era when opposing ideas are given precise, rather than arbitrary, meaning. The development of symbolic languages is the key idea today and in my writings.

    In my scientific symbolic language, atheism and theism exist at their highest level , a one and infinite monotheistic God, who is the coincidence of all opposites. In my work, I am distinguishing theism from all other world theories and all other theories of God. To me polytheism, etc., are thus a form of atheism. A true theist cannot possess any attributes of atheism.

    I am a reader of the past but do not view the past as necessary truths. To find truths about the past, they must be consistent with, or be related to, today's truths.

    The symbols, God and Creator, in the DO tell me that the USA was conceived as a theocracy, but not a religion. Thus, I believe that the US government must govern us under the theory of God. I believe that knowledge of God's attributes give a nation its best knowledge of the theory on God. To me, our knowledge of God is always incomplete.

     

  • At 9:10 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    I think we're drastically misinterpreting the label "God" here...as a species, we seem to constantly assume that this "God" being is a separate entity.

    This belief is, of course, based on our own belief that we are separate from others and the rest of the universe. This belief is justified (or can be) because we "see" others around us, we have the perception of Time and Space. But assuming that Time or Space separates us does not seem to coincide with recent "scientific" findings...nor does it seem to truly follow the original concept behind this word "God".

    In science we are discovering that all matter is, essentially the same matter vibrating on different frequencies to form "reality"...we are also discovering that without the observer there would be no observed. Basically this means that without us here to see the world, there would be no world.

    The original concept of God is not too far from this discovery. When I say the "original concept" I mean that "God" was not always believed to be a separate entity...in fact, most religious belief is based on characters (buddha, christ, etc) who specifically said that this consciousness/entity/creator is within. But who created this concept of "God"? We did.

    Knowing this, isn't it possible that "god" has been used as an escape from our own role as the creator of our own reality? What I'm saying is that when you abandon the idea that there is a creator outside of yourself you are left with one thing...you're left with yourself creating your reality....would this not make YOU god?

    Think about it...all energy is the same energy and it is focussed by the mind to create what we see as "reality". This is the very definition of God..the creator of reality. Perhaps it is only our own need to pass off responsibility for our lives and choices that has brought us so willingly to the worship of a separate entity...

    Perhaps Time and Space do not apply as we seem to think they do...Isn't it entirely possible that we are ALL the same consciousness existing in different "stories" in the exact same place and time? I realize that our own belief in personal limitation goes exactly against this belief. "I could not possibly do that many things at once, I'm not advanced enough"...but who can say that other than yourself? If you can "imagine" anything/anywhere then perhaps you have no limitations...after all, we may call it "imagination" but to the mind, it is completely real (just as a dream is real to the dreamer when dreaming).

    Perhaps we focus too much on what "others" see instead of focussing on what we ourselves are "creating"...maybe it's just too easy to pass the buck to this concept we call "God".

    A Forgetful God

     

  • At 1:07 PM, Blogger George Shollenberger said…

    Response to Forgetful God.

    In my recent book on ‘The First Scientific Proof of God,’ I prove that God and the universe are one, without beginning and end. God and the universe differ only functionally because God is infinite and the universe is finite: To me, the name of a one and infinite God is not possible because we can’t measure God as we measure things in the universe. I believe that all religions have missed this unity because for thousands of years they assumed that God lived among the stars they saw in the sky. When religions amplify the usefulness of their ancient scriptures, religions seem to increase their own ignorance.

    I am not sure about the concepts of space and time. At this time, I cannot say much about it yet. Since God and the universe have no beginning or end, time seems to have been created by man so we can understand local areas that support life.

    My concept of matter is new. I use the indivisible monads of Gottfried Leibniz and change them to ‘spiritual atoms.’ Set theory must be used because the set of all spiritual atoms will form a set of all uncompleted subsets, which we know of as wholes or things. The energy (E= mc2) of the universe appears in the subsets, not the set. So, my ‘matter’ is defined by the spiritual atoms, which are immortal and are thus reincarnated. The uncompleted wholes or things are mortal. The universe thus exists only because we have always been here.

    We don’t create God. God and humans are creators. God can create wholes or things. We can only improve them. I do not see us as a god. I see us as godly things. Some people choose to be more godly than other people. This is the purpose of our freedom.

    I argue that reincarnation works only on the same planet. Since planets die, life must appear on newly born planets. I define resurrection as the means of seeding life on a new planet. Resurrection must seed life at higher and higher levels of consciousness. Otherwise, mankind must start over. The pair of opposites, discontinuous and continuous, are an important pair to study. An unending world indicates that consciousness grows continually. The discontinuities merely shift the stages of life from planet to planet.

    Self knowledge is something that all people must accept as a natural form of life.

     

  • At 7:36 PM, Blogger Rev. BigDumbChimp said…

    More Schollenberger babble. I see things haven;t changed much around here.

     

  • At 10:48 PM, Blogger George Shollenberger said…

    Response to bigdumbchimp.

    You remain to be a very boring debater.

     

  • At 11:04 PM, Blogger Rev. BigDumbChimp said…

    And you remain a greedy old man.

     

  • At 9:19 AM, Blogger George Shollenberger said…

    Response to bigdumbchimp.

    To you, everyone who publishes a book is greedy. Your mind is lost in some dream world. The first books were created by man to expand the communications among people. This purpose has never changed.

     

  • At 10:18 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    I have a question regarding the posting at 1:07 wherein Mr. Shollenberger states in the first paragraph that the difference between God and the universe is that God is infinite and the universe is finite. He then goes on to say in the next paragraph that God and the universe have no beginning or end. Which is it?

    "now I'm really confused"

     

  • At 4:40 PM, Blogger George Shollenberger said…

    response to anonymous,

    God unifies all true opposites. When I soeak of true opposites in God, I use caps.

    So, in God, Beginning and End are one because God has no parts.

    In the universe, I do not use caps. So in the universe, I say that beginning and end exist because the universe has parts. The parts in the universe are the things that God creates.

    In the universe, all things have a beginning and end. But the universe has no beginning or end because, like God, the universe always is. Only things in the universe have beginnings and ends.

    The universe exists always because the Spirits are immortal. The Spirits are equivalent to my spiritual atoms. If the Spirits had no beginning and end, they would be in God as one.

    Spirits have beginnings and ends by continually shedding one body for a new body. There is nothing like the last death to any Spirit.

    I separate caps from non caps so I am able to keep my thoughts clear.

    When one uses the same words to talk about God or talk about the universe, most people become confused.

    These words might get rid of yout confusion.
    George

     

Post a Comment

<< Home