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

Tuesday, May 15, 2007

A History of the God-Universe System

The God-Universe System is hardly known today. Yet, this system has been developing for more than three thousand years ago. So, I decided to describe this system in a book after I found the first scientific proof of God. I believe I made an error when I titled the book as "The First Scientific Proof of God." I should have titled it as "A History of the God-Universe System." If I ever make a second edition, I will certainly use the God-Universe title. To correct this error immediately, I will describe the God-Universe system using blogs in this website.

The God-Universe System began to emerge with the work of Abraham. I conclude that his work was augmented primarily by the new works of Moses, Plato, Jesus Christ, Constantine, Nicholas of Cusa, Gottfried Leibniz, and Georg Cantor. My work is the latest work that will augment the works of these personalities. Certainly, other names can be added to this list. However, I view the works of these personalities as significant contributions to the development of the God-Universe system. Further, I argue that the works of these personalities are not arbitrary works. Instead, I say that these works are (1) necessary work, (2) godly works, and (3) being influenced by God in different ways. For instance, I know that my contributions are highly influenced by the divine teachings of Jesus Christ.

The God-Universe System replaced polytheism, a belief that God created all things in the universe by placing Himself in each thing. So, polytheists thought that God actually transformed Himself into the Universe. This polytheistic thought was rejected by Abraham. With Abraham, God and the Universe coexist (exist together) and the God-Universe System is born.

Following Abraham, the work of Moses is centered on God’s creation of the universe. His work is found in the Genesis of the Old Testament. The work of Plato is centered on the God-Universe System as a Being and Becoming union. Being is God and Becoming is the Universe. His work is found in his Timaeus dialogue. The work of Jesus Christ is that of a teacher and deals with many new ideas about God and the Universe. The work of Constantine is centered on God as a Trinity. The work of Nicholas of Cusa is centered on (1) incomprehensive truths, (2) negative theology, (3) God as an ‘identity’ and Universe as ‘difference, and. (4) symbolism. The work of Leibniz is centered on the Universe as a set of spiritual atoms and bodies in motion, which are understood by the infinitesimal calculus. The work of Cantor is centered on God as an absolute infinity and the Universe as set of finite infinities counted by transfinite numbers. My work is centered on (1) the scientific proof of God, (2) the unification of God and the Universe scientifically and with a single symbolic language, and (3) the unification of all people and all nations.
The pic above represents the future of people and how they can work together to build knowledge of the God-Universe System. In the next blog, I will describe those negative forces that have tried to stop the development of this system.

posted by George Shollenberger @ 10:13 AM  

18 Comments:

  • At 11:04 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    George,

    Great minds have always been able to explain their theories or proofs, no matter how complicated in appearance, in no more than 10 short logical steps. Could you do likewise?

     

  • At 11:25 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    "I know that my contributions are highly influenced by the divine teachings of Jesus Christ."

    Since you use the words 'scientific' and 'proof' a whole lot, could you provide a scientific proof of this claim of yours?

     

  • At 12:14 PM, Blogger George Shollenberger said…

    steve perry,

    In my next blog, I will show that logicians have been one of the negative forces that is working against the development of the God-Universe System by limiting thoughts to logical reasoning.

    One cannot use logical steps to prove a system that lies ourside of logical reasoning. Plato was the first to move above logic. He spoke of it as ideas leading to higher ideas. The Germans also did this with the concepts ---thesis, antithesis and synthesis.

    Above logic, I believe that proofs will be reveales in less than 10 steps.

     

  • At 12:31 PM, Blogger George Shollenberger said…

    karen d. avery,

    No, because my knowledge on this statement is empirical. However, I believe that my data is sound because my interpretations of Jesus are somewhat new. Since the God-Universe System is an open system, because God is absolutely infinite, my mind goes in little steps.

     

  • At 3:38 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    You wrote:

    "One cannot use logical steps to prove a system that lies ourside of logical reasoning"

    If you didn't take logical steps in your proof, what kind of steps did you take? And how do you know those steps are valid, i.e. reflect reality? Please take one specific step of your proof to answer my question.

     

  • At 3:48 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    "my knowledge on this statement is empirical"

    This means you have gathered data. What kind of data?

    "I believe that my data is sound because my interpretations of Jesus are somewhat new."

    Lesson in logic: please explain why this is a non sequitur. (Hint: do new interpretations necessarily lead to sound data?)

    "God is absolutely infinite."

    This means you are a pantheist. If God is absolutely infinite, then nothing can exist outside of him.

     

  • At 3:52 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    Mr. Shollenberger,

    The Atheist Resistance Army is not kidding. Who are the people helping you to spread the word of your latest report? We need names, birth dates, addresses and professional activities.

     

  • At 5:52 PM, Blogger George Shollenberger said…

    steve perry,

    You can't use logical steps in a domain of intelligence. The exact opposite it true. In an intelligent domain, you only hope to identify new logical relations that cn be used daily.

    So when your mind is working in an intelligent domain, the steps you make are 'intelligent and logical steps.' in the intelligent domain, the mind is in a middle domain between God's wisdom and the logical certainties of daily life.

    To feel the intelligent domain, you must be with Plato and other Platonists.

     

  • At 6:04 PM, Blogger George Shollenberger said…

    karen d. avery.

    The empirical data comes from the New Testament and the words spoken by Jesus Christ.

    I am sorry> But I am tired of answering logical question when my mind is working in an intelligent domain of thought. When I interpret the words of jJsus Christ, I do not think literally. Instead, I think metaphorically, literally, logically, etc. A divine thinker is not teching with a single linguistic language.


    I am a panentheist, not a pantheist.

     

  • At 6:08 PM, Blogger George Shollenberger said…

    matthew ford,

    I do not know you or your organization. You can't make such demands on people.

     

  • At 4:11 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    "But I am tired of answering logical question when my mind is working in an intelligent domain of thought."

    "You can't use logical steps in a domain of intelligence."

    Your way of thinking never ceases to amaze me. In these two quotes you actually assert that logic and intelligence are mutually exclusive!

    Two questions (and it would be nice if for once you would address the questions people ask you instead of just making incoherent remarks about your 'proof'):

    1. If you didn't use logic to deliver your proof, how do you know it is valid? And more importantly, how do your readers know it is valid? Why should we believe you?

    2. Your mind, which according to you is working in an intelligent domain of thought, concludes that there is a God. My mind, also working in an intelligent domain of thought, concludes that the existence of God is highly improbable. Without logic, which parameters are there to decide who of us is right?

     

  • At 4:24 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    So far I have read two reviews of your book: one at the GMBM website that was very negative, and one at your website (that included some fair criticism of your character and your book, but that you decided to delete). Your book was published almost a year ago, and if it is as important as you claim it is, there have to be many more reviews out there. Am I not looking in the right places?

     

  • At 3:39 PM, Blogger George Shollenberger said…

    steve perry,

    Let me get more general. Maybe my detail explanations are poor.

    The intellectual domain beyond logic is a specific domain of the human mind. But it must be developed by you before it comes into existence and is maintained by cells in the brain. There it becomes like a habit such as smoking.

    A person who develops his or her intellectual domain has become a seeker of new ideas. Widely accepted ideas must obey logical reasoning. However, new ideas are not found only with logic. A new idea emerges slowly and uses mamy different kinds of thoughts. For instance, one's interest is always important. Consistenct with other ideas are also important. Thus, metaphors might be used. Sometime a day dream can be helpful.

    We do not know how to structure the intelligent domain yet and willnever know fully how this domain works because God gave us this domain. But, we know that logic become more important as a new idea forms.

    I am having problems with logicians because they are poor creators of new ideas. They view logic as the highest form of thought. This is why logicians made Georg Cantor sick and are making me tired of their assassinations of my character. They just do not understand God.

     

  • At 4:35 PM, Blogger George Shollenberger said…

    hank wynette,

    The review of my book by the good math, bad math web ws done by Mark Chu-Carroll. his book review was not a review at all. One comment said that Carroll is a lousy book reviewer. Caroll Mark did not even review my works because he would have never understiod. Hhe is a mathematician, not a scientist.

    One of Carroll's purposes was to assassinate my character so that people would not read my book.

    Two new book reviews of my book are on Amazon.com. They are from the same group of atheists. However, these reviews are also no good. They never address my works. So, they are really not reviews. These reviews have another purpose --- to save the evolutionary theory and save the American Museum of Natural History in NYC.

    Obviously, my book includes a scientific proof of God. Thus, it has enemies --- the atheists.

    But, how can atheism act to stop the development of new religious knowledge in the USA, when the USA was founded under God. I believe that these acts against the field of religion are either unconstitutional or are unlawful crimes. I will give this question to the lawyers. I can't stop the atheists. I need help from people and justice so they can be limited.

    My book is a major breakthrough and impacts most fields of thought. Why would any Americans want to eliminate this kind of US progress?

    Atheism has a problem because my work is connected to the works of a series of famous personalities reaching to Abraham. My enemies are not taking time to study the works of these personalities They need to do this to compare and understand my works. It took me 25 years to study the works of these personalities. Further, it seems that some PHDs are ealous because I do not have a PHD. America is really changing.

     

  • At 2:41 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    George,

    There are actually three reviews of your book on the amazon website. I don't understand why you say that their true purpose is to save the American Museum of Natural History in NYC. None of the reviews even mentions this museum.

    Most of the atheists I know are good, law abiding people who just think religion is a pile of rubbish. What is wrong with that?

    One more thing: why don't you have a PhD?

     

  • At 3:02 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    "However, new ideas are not found only with logic. A new idea emerges slowly and uses mamy different kinds of thoughts."

    Fair enough, new ideas may be found by sudden flashes of genius. But after such a flash the new idea has to be underpinned by logic. That's what Einstein did. That's what Darwin did. That's what Galileo did

    Without logic anything goes. In a sudden flash, moving in the intelligent domain, I might 'see' that the master of the universe is not God, but a flying teapot in orbit around the moon. How can you prove me wrong without logic?

    Einstein most probably saw the solution in a moment of genius, his mind wandering about in what you call the intelligent domain. But after that he was able to underpin his solution using very specific logical steps. That's what a proof is all about. And that is what you should do too.

     

  • At 7:03 AM, Blogger George Shollenberger said…

    hank wynette,

    The American Museum of Natural History is an institution of Darwin's evolution theory. The evolutionists (or naturalists)do not believe in God. I do believe in God and contribute to the evelopment of knowledge about God and the universe. The evolutionists simply do not want my book to be read by anyone because my book says that evolutionary theory is flse. What has happened to 'free speech?'

    Look at the scienceblogs and good math, bad math websites and you will see the connection of mathematic and science to the museum.

    I and people I know do not care whether people are atheists and call religion a pile of rubbish. But I and these people do care when the pile of rubbish is being wiped away and is replaced with scientific evidence that God and a creted universe are true. My work moves the field of religion into a science.

    My book describes my ontributions (and the contributions of many personalities) to the development of the God-Universe System, which began over 3000 years ago with Abraham. The Darwinians want to destroy this system by destroying by charater and my book. They are also trying to destroy the Discovery Institute in Seattle. What is happening to my free speech.

    I believe that the evolutionists are treading on constitutional rights because my works apply to the field of religion. The constitution protects religious freedom just as it protects your freedom and my freedom.

    I never had to get a PhD because I was one of the first students who was taught how to use complex variablesin the field of electrical engineering in the 1950s at Johns Jopkins. At Lockheed Martin (on the spece program) PhDs were reporting to me because their education was out-dated. So, I had to retrained PhD and Masters.

     

  • At 7:31 AM, Blogger George Shollenberger said…

    steve perry,

    You understand better what I am saying. One must distinguish proven ideas, which meet logical reasoning, from new ideas. But, you seem believe that the new ideas are only coming from a 'spark of thought.' Sparks apply mostly to simple ideas and inventions like a mousetrap.

    When one seeks new ideas about God and the Universe, a spark alone is insufficient. We only know that the new ideas about God and the Universe will be found in a domain of thought that is beyond logical reasoning. The contributers to the God-Universe System are breaking the wall, bit by bit, that is hiding these new ideas.

    I believe that my scientific proof of God was rather simple. But, I also believe that God can be known only with simple ideas. And, I believe that the Universe can be known, bit by bit,but can never be known completely. Only God is completed.

     

Post a Comment

<< Home