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

Friday, November 16, 2007

Spiritual Atoms Distinguish My Thoughts From the Thoughts of Charles Fillmore

In my 11/13/07 blog I noticed two points of difference between my thought and the thoughts of Charles Fillmore in his book on "Atom Smashing Power of Mind" This difference is caused by Fillmore’s belief in Ch. XI that only one mind exists, the Mind of God, and that we can tap into it in order to gain intuitions. This belief suggests that a mediating world exists in between God and the universe. This mediating world, which is known as the celestial world, allows devils, angels, demons, etc. of the mediating world to also tap into the Mind of God to gain clues about God’s ideas. This single mind explains why Fillmore says that mind is not language.

Since I say that an infinite God is the origin of all finite things, a mediating world cannot exist in between an infinite thing and finite things. Thus, when God creates, God must create atoms first because they are needed to form all finite things. Since these atoms are neither zero nor finite in size, they exist as infinitesimals. An infinitesimal atom can be seen only by the eye of our mind. Today, we model an infinitesimal atom with a 3-D geometrical point. I discuss them in Part IV of my book and call them spiritual atoms.

Spiritual atoms combine with each other lawfully so that the different things required in God’s intelligent design are formed. Since all spiritual atoms can be destroyed only by God, they are always functioning and are never free. To determine God’s intelligent design, humans must develop symbolic languages. These languages must model every thing that exists in this intelligent design. Thus, it is only with the development of symbolic language the human mind will develop. So, I say that the human mind is language.

The existence of underdeveloped human minds in any nation is thus morally wrong and is a sign of slavery.


  • At 4:50 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    1. So what are 'angels' made of? Is there a mathematical quantification humans can put forth to signify an angel's existence via logical abstraction - this being mathematics?

    2. Where is the celestial world? Which physical dimension does it belong to? What physical qualities does it have that we can use to mathematically quantify? I mean, if you believe that 2 realms exist simultaneously, one being the cause of the other, then what are they similarities?

    3. Response is required to what seems very likely to be a discrepancy: You say that God is infinite, and thus implying that by this nature God is not effected nor caused. Yet, is it not true that by saying so, you have refuted the ver law of cause-and-effect, that an existence does not necessitate a cause? Then why not simply say energy and matter has always existed - since this is MUCH simpler due to the fact that we humans are able to both qualify and quantify them? It also simpler because you (which I believe to be so, and which is typical of most theologians I know)cannot even conceive of an image of God, let alone quantify it, since God having an image means to be of inferior quality to perfection.

    4. What did you mean exactly by "...atoms are neither zero nor finite in size"? If you claimed to have a degree in engineering, then should you not have seen the periodic table numerous times?

  • At 9:30 AM, Blogger George Shollenberger said…

    response to anonymous,

    1. I say, if there are angels, they are created and live among us.

    2. I say, there is no mediating world between God and created things. So, there is no celestial world. Dimensions exist only among created things. The cause (God) and the effect (many created things) exist simultaneously. God's completed infinity places God is a higher world than the finite world of all created things.

    3. God's infinity is is the only completed infinity. All other infinities are incompleted and exist amony all created things.. Physical energy does not exist unless God creates finite things from nothing. We can't compare any finite thing with an infinite thing. This is why finite things are are only images --- just as a finger print is only an image f a finger.

    4. The calculus of Gottfried Leibniz uses infinitesimals. In his calculas, for exmple, the differential, dy/dx, is defined by the ratio, 'delta y' divided by 'delta x' and delta x is allowed to approach, but never becomes, zero.


  • At 5:02 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    Q1 You did not understand what I am asking. What are angels? Analogy 1: Air is composed of Nitrogen, Oxygen, Carbon Dioxide, Water vapor etc Analogy 2: Cells are made of phospholipids, carbohydrate and cholesterol molecules and other various molecules. Analogy 3: Water is made up of 2 Hydrogen ions and 1 Oxygen. So my question again, what are angels??

    Q2. Your statement that both a cause and an effect exist simultaneously begs these questions : Do you mean ever since creation? If so, have you not violated the logic of cause-and-effect as a chronological sequence?

    Q3. You say that finite things with infinite things, yet this statement refutes itself, for in order for there to be infinite things, there must be finite things, for if there does not exist finite things, then infinite things are not infinite.

    Q4. You assume that any given value as its decimal places infinite then? How do you know that?

  • At 9:45 AM, Blogger George Shollenberger said…

    response to anonymous,

    Q1. Angels are humans

    Q2.God does not function in time. Thus God creates all things "all at once." In mathematics, the 'all at once' function is known as a 'impulse function.' Ccause and effect applies only in our world.

    Q3. The oxymoron concept 'finite infinities' is a reality. remember that our symbolic languages are never completed so that we know exactness. No finite thing can ever become the infinity of God.

    Q4. What you can't see with your senses does not mean that the eye of you mind can't.

  • At 8:49 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    Q1. Is your assertion based upon a mathematical certainty that is based on empirical studies?

    Q2. If God does not function with time, how do we then know if anything has even happened before time? As in Einstein's space-time continuum, if an object is in a specific location in space, we only know that a change in that location of the object has occurred only if there exists a time frame between 2 locations. As in the foregoing, if there exists, but no time frame is referred to, then we do not know any meaningful information about what exists in respect to others. In mathematics, the number 'pie' is considered irrational because it is not considered in relation to anything, while fractions are rational since the the number of interest (the numerator) in considered in respect to the overall picture of things (the denominator).

    Q3. You assume that are symbolic languages are not completed, as that this be the conclusion of all things. Yet is this understanding of yours not based only on current knowledge and understanding of things? Is this not an argument from ignorance - a logical fallacy?

    Q4. If I cannot see pink spotted winged elephants with my sensory organs, but I see them with my 'mind' then does that mean they exist?!

  • At 8:31 AM, Blogger George Shollenberger said…

    response to anonymous,

    Q. 1All of my assertions are based on mathematics, reasoning and empirical data.

    Q2.God never changes and thus does noy exist in time. Butwhat has been created is always changing. We make time so that we can measure things and their relative changes.

    Q3. Man did not realize that empirical data are primarily symbolic until the 1920s. Thus, every symbol must be given a meaning. Unfortunately, Aristotle's concept definition and leither/or ogic caused problems for man's mind for over the last 2000 years.

    Q 4. What a person can see with the mind is developing and will require the development of dialectical thinking. Study my book and you will learn the dialecticians I favor. I am currently adding the writings ofg Friedrich Hegel and Rudolph Steiner to my mind.

  • At 12:45 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    Q1. The assertion that which I was referring to regarding whether it had empirical and mathematical foundation was your claim that angels are humans. Please always review your previous answer before posting your answer.

    Q2. Your explanation begs 1 question. If God 'never changes', then what 'caused' him to decide all of a sudden to create the universe, and thus all of humankind? If you say that he does not change, then nothing literally will happen before and forever. Yet there exists the universe. So, I guess God is not a creator, since this is wrong by contradiction, and thus only a designer?

    Q3 & Q4. (These are satisfactory for now, but I must go read into some of the topics mentioned in them. Thank you.)

    Please answer Q1 Q2 nevertheless...

  • At 5:14 PM, Blogger George Shollenberger said…

    response to anonymous,

    Q.1 I thought I answered the question when I said that anels are humans. They are not made any different than us.

    Q 2. God does not change when he creates. Only what God creates changes. God is a thing-in-itself that never changes. Any thing-in-itself in a created world changes continually. A created world is not part of God because God is a whole that has no parts.

    You better throw your logical reasoning away when you deal with God. Your guesses are not good ones.

  • At 6:17 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    Q1. What I meant was that can you empirically and mathematically (and therefore scientifically) prove that angels are indeed humans?

    Q2. So what the notion of 'change' pertain to then? When God makes a decision to create the universe, does he not make a change in his trend of constancy?

  • At 10:34 AM, Blogger George Shollenberger said…

    response to anonymous,

    Q 1. If angels exist, I can prove that they are humans.

    Q 2. If a thing changes, that thing must exist is a world that changes. If a thing creates a changing thing, the thing that creates cannot be changing.

    You are getting confused because you are following those scientists who do not think as a dialectician thinks. Scientists make one-sided worlds every day.

    "What underlies change is permanence." Or, "in a hot thing, what is not-hot is the hot thing."

    world, how can God be a changingHow can God exist in a world that is changingchangesBut God is a thingcreator and creates a world that changes

  • At 2:14 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    Q1.Prove to me that angels are humans right now!

    Q2. Are you saying that making a decision to create a universe is not a change in itself? Are you trying to refute all the foundations of psychology and neurology?

  • At 3:47 PM, Blogger George Shollenberger said…

    response to anonymous,

    Q 1. I, and no one that I know,can prove that angels exist. At this time the existence of angels is a theory.

    Q 2. In God, creating a universe is simultaneously a thought, decision, and act of of God. Thus, the creation had no beginning and will have no end. The plurality, finitude, and relations of all finite things in the creation have their origin in an unchanging and infinite monotheistic God.

    The words we develop must be used very carefully when we talk about God.

    The infinity of God is completed and does not change.

  • At 12:12 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    Q1. I am ashamed that you have a degree in engineering and yet show NOT ONE BIT of understanding of the difference between a theory and a hypothesis. A Theory is the combination of laws, principles, a set of hypotheses, and facts. A Hypothesis is simply a speculation that is independent of facts, laws or principles. The existence of angels is a hypothesis that is bounded not to theological principles, but have no mathematical nor empirical laws and principles in it. Scientifically, a theological statement such as that made in Q1 and Q2 is a scientific hypothesis, but a theological 'theory'. Maybe you ought to revise the VERY FOUNDATIONS of science itself.

  • At 12:15 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    Q2 Your explanation is philosophically satisfactory, but scientifically unsatisfactory - since it does not yield any testable hypotheses to work with (also known as scientifically ad-hoc).

  • At 10:21 AM, Blogger George Shollenberger said…

    response to anonymous,

    I know the difference between theories and hypotheaes. You merely don't understand theology.

    The theory of angels is part of the theory of panentheism, which is part of the theory of the infinite. If you have studied the mathematical work of Georg Cantor and the theological work of Nicholas of Cusa, you will understand my theories.


  • At 10:36 AM, Blogger George Shollenberger said…

    response to anonymous,

    In my book I prove scientifically that God exists. No one will ever prove the contents of God. A theory of angels will stay as part of the function theory of all created things until someone finds a way to test the functional theory.

    The Big Bang theory has the same testing problem.

    Learn to live with some degree of faith.



Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home