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

Saturday, September 29, 2007

Things-in-Themselves That Have Received the Gift of Self Knowledge From God

As I started to write this blog, I felt sad, for instance, for those humans who have lost or never found God; those gay humans who are destroying San Francisco; those suicide bombers who are killing themselves and others; criminals who must live in a prison for life; mathematicians and scientists who think without considering God; those religions who believe that scriptures alone are needed to know; those wealthy humans who still build castles; those five atheists who judged my book poorly on and those humans who produce, sell, or use drugs. This sadness began to develop as I was concluding that the work of Hegel and my work are very similar. Hegel’s work becomes identical to mine when Hegel tells his readers that they must obey God’s primary commandment to ‘know thyself.’

When God creates things-in-themselves out of nothing, God does not create polytheism, a belief that God is to be found in all things-in-themselves. An infinite God is indivisible. So, only the acts of God will be found all things-in-themselves. Accordingly, all created things-in themselves are purposive (or functional). And each created thing-in-itself is thus an act of, or a gift from, God.

It is important for us to know that only human things-in-themselves are aware of these acts of God. We know this because we can build knowledge of all creations. This is why we can thus build knowledge of stones, trees, plants, our pets, etc. However, many people are not building knowledge about themselves. Without building this knowledge, how can people learn the purpose of their life?

Although I have not completed my research on Hegel, both of our works say that the opposites, beginning and ending, are unified by God. Thus, in a created world, all beginnings and ends are never final. This means every human life is formed by an infinite series of ‘beginnings and ends.’ Currently, I do not accept the teachings of today’s religions on the nature of life. But, I do accept the theory of reincarnation. Thus, if one obeys God’s commandment to ‘know thyself,’ I conclude that higher stages of life exist in the universe. It thus saddens me to know that many people have lost, or never knew, God.

Friday, September 28, 2007

Things-in-Themselves That Have a Beginning, Middle, and End

Logical opposites have been used for thousands of years and are spoken today as ‘excluded middle opposites’ or ‘either/or opposites.’ Two new forms of opposites emerged with the modern world. One form is known as thesis, antithesis, and synthesis. This form is used to search for higher ideas when the thesis and antithesis coexist. The second form is becoming known as ‘included middle opposites.’ For instance, the ‘temperature’ of a thing-in-itself had only two symbols, hot/cold. As time passed, other symbols, such as warm, cool, and tepid, were added in the ‘middle’, that is, in between the hot/cold opposites. Today, the temperature of a thing-in-itself is numbered with a thermometer.

With the fall of empires and the rise of free nations and their sub-organizations, included middle opposites are starting to define and discuss the new symbol known as ‘development.’ To the pair of opposites, beginning/end, a middle region was added. To my knowledge, the beginning-middle-end was used first by Germany’s Friedrich Hegel. The next personality was Karl Marx. To them, development applies to ‘organized things-in-themselves.’

Hegel and Marx became very different because Hegel follows Plato and thus distinguishes an absolute thing-in-itself (God) from all relativistic things-in-themselves in the universe. On the other hand, Marx follows Heraclitus and the godless philosophy of relativism. Since Marx is without a god who can unify all opposites, I do not know how Marx can use dialectical thinking to identify the unchanging opposites.

However, Hegel and Marx seem to agree that negation is the engine of development. Thus, in all things-in-themselves, one will find a series of ‘moments’ (or phases) of development. For instance, in a rose, development is initiated and produces buds. Then, the production of the bud is negated so that blooms are produced. Then, the blooms are negated so that seeds are produced. Every human develops the same way.

Since the development of things-in-themselves are producing new phenomena in the universe continually, it is wrong to say that man’s mind is an image of phenomenally-generated sensations of our brain. Atheism cannot be true. In Chapter 24 of Matthew (KJV of the Bible), Jesus Christ tells us that ’development’ is found in the fig tree (see verse 32). In verse 33, Jesus says that our knowledge of the fig tree will help us learn how the sun darkens.

Thursday, September 27, 2007

Things-in-Themselves Cannot Be Known Without Sensations and a Self-Developing Mind

One of the things-in-themselves is the human mind. Good believers in God, such as Nicholas of Cusa, say that the mind is the first thing unfolded by God because man must measure all other things. In my book, my mind says that all things are originated by an infinite thing, which is an attribute of God who unifies all opposites. So, in my mind, one will find a mental image of God, mental images of all opposites I know, and mental images of the finite things I know.

But, atheists, evolutionists, logicians, Marxists, etc., say that sensations are images of the eternal world. They say that these images exist in our brain and exist also in our mind, since they view mind as a shadow of the brain. Clearly, sensations cannot develop knowledge about things-in-themselves unless mind is an independent thing, self-develops its contents, and refutes this atheistic theory of sensations, brain, and mind. Since this atheistic theory is popular in the physical and life sciences, we can see why many Americans have found no reason to develop dialectical thinking and knowledge of opposites such as beginning/ending, true/false, identity/difference, one/many, light/dark, .....etc. Using my own independent mind, I cannot assemble any lines of reasoning in my mind that can confirm this silly atheistic theory of sensations, brain, and mind.

Unless physical and life scientists reconsider God, accept my proof of God, develop dialectical reasoning, and reject the atheistic theory of mind above, I believe that medical care will be limited eventually to mechanical procedures such as surgery. It is time to deal with and solve the really tough medical problems, such as cancer, diabetes, autism, mental illness, etc., differently.

Wednesday, September 26, 2007


As I mentioned in my last blog, the Marxists say that man cannot know the essences of things. If one watches a child touch objects and asks Mother for its name, one might conclude that the Marxists know this hidden truth. Yet, today’s atheistic scientists are hoping to find these essences by defining ‘matter’ as the stuff that underlies all things in the universe. But, the ancient Atomists failed. John Locke’s physical atoms were never found. And Ernst Mach’s elements were never found. The latest atheistic effort to define matter with string theories is also failing. It is thus becoming clear that any mathematical and scientific research, which does not consider a creator God, is doomed to failure.

If one considers a creator God, things-in-themselves must become the target of mathematical and scientific thoughts. For instance, can’t we harness the energy in things-in-themselves such as hurricanes, lightening, and tornados, be more important to humans than trying to define a ‘spiritual matter,’ which, by necessity, must underlie all things-in-themselves? In my book on the proof of God, I say that real matter of the universe is spiritual. I refer to this matter as ‘spiritual atoms.’ But, just as sensations are neither true nor false, spiritual matter is also neither true nor false. Thus, truths and falsities or knowledge will be found only in things-in-themselves.

If all things-in-themselves are finite, I say in my book that a creator God must be infinite, must be perfect, and must unify all opposites. So, the universe was created based on an intelligent design. This intelligent design is thus a design of many independent and imperfect things-in-themselves. Since all things-in-themselves are independent and imperfect, every thing -in-itself has both ‘necessary’ and ‘contingent’ contents. Accordingly, we can say that every thing-in-itself will have positive and negative contents. Our function in the universe is to think dialectically (continually refute and assert) so that we can distinguish and manage the positives and negatives associated with our lives. This is how cancer and all other medical problems can be managed properly. Our mind is thus a perfecting thing-in-itself and is not a shadow of the brain.

So, I urge people to stop living as if the world was coming to an end. Instead, people must turn to God and to the real life that God gave us.

Monday, September 24, 2007

A Thing-In-Itself (e.g., Kant’s Ding an sich)

When the mind imposes its own structure upon the sensual data of experience, a thing-in-itself can be formed in which all sensual data are one. I sought a thing-in-itself when I took all finite things-in-themselves and found that their oneness (or origin) is one infinite thing-in-itself. And when I made a higher structure consisting of this infinite thing-in-itself and all finite things-in-themselves, a higher thing-in-itself emerged as a oneness that unifies all real opposites. This higher structure reveals God.

Because Karl Marx says that man cannot know the essences of things, Marx says that man can transform unknown things-in-themselves into known things-in-themselves. According to Marx, the known things-in-themselves are a necessity-for -us. To bring these known things-in-themselves into existence, Marx recommended social capitalism for the economy of the Soviet Union but rejected Ayn Rand’s laissez-faire capitalism.

Since an infinite God creates the universe with spiritual atoms, I say that we cannot know the essences of the things that are formed by the spiritual atoms, so I agree with Marx that man must transform unknown things-in-themselves into known things-in-themselves. I also agree with Marx on his social capitalism. Unfortunately, Alan Greenspan agreed with Ayn Rand. But, Greenspan’s theory of a laissez-faire capital economy has worked only for the rich class.

Things-in-themselves are abstractions made by the structure of the mind. Since all created things are uncompleted (or bad) infinities, all things-in-themselves in the universe will never be completed realities. Hegel also views a thing-in-itself as an abstraction of the mind's structure. Thus, it turns out that the only real thing-in-itself is God.

Sunday, September 23, 2007

I Am Also a Hegelian

I have studied the works of Friedrich Hegel far enough to say that his work is aligned to the work of the major personalities I discuss in my book, The First Scientific Proof of God. This means that my book is not awful, as atheists say in their book reviews of my book on Instead, my book will become a very important tool for the intellectual people in all nations.

The key to this alignment is the method of dialectical thinking used by all but one of the modern personalities I use. The exception is the mathematical work of Georg Cantor on transfinite numbers. Thus, since American scientists are not trained in dialectical thinking, a major effort must be made by the US government to retrain those current scientists who want to be retrained and to train all new scientists properly. At the same time, all Western religions must adapt to the newness I bring with Hegel and my book.

Although I view Hegel’s work as a connection to the work of Nicholas of Cusa, the writings of Hegel do not tell the reader of this connection. I believe that Hegel does not make this connection so that potential problems between the Protestant and Catholic churches are minimized. Since my book discusses the work of Nicholas, the reader of my book will recognize immediately the connections between Nicholas and Hegel. The book "Hegel: The Essential Writings by Frederick G. Weiss" is thus recommended by me.

Essentially, science has become lost today because its scientists are not developing the human mind with dialectics. This is why I have spoken often about ‘the ugly English language’ on my website. To hold on to something as they move into the unknown, modern scientists accepted empiricism and rejected with metaphysics. But as I said in Part I of my book, there was no winner between the empiricists and the rationalists at the time of Kant. Kant could not reconcile them because the meanings of Aristotle’s categories were not developed dialectically. However, today’s scientists did not take heed to the announcement in Part I of my book on the linguistic discovery in the 1920s. This discovery says ‘that sensual data are primarily symbolic.’ The discoveries of many laws of physics already are thus not mysteries.

Mind is not an image of sensations. Like all things, the mind is a thing in itself. As I say, the mind is the first thing unfolded by God so that it can measure all other things. So, my use of spiritual atoms is appropriate. Mind begins to develop and seeks the goal of pure reasoning by continually refuting negative or bad reasoning. This goal has no end because the opposites --- beginning and ending --- coincide in God. For the same reason, we cannot create or destroy energy.

Saturday, September 22, 2007

My Return to Research

Because of the intensity and many issues related to on the Iraq War, many Americans are losing their awareness of many newly developing domestic US problem. Three of these problems exist in the fields of mathematics, logic, and science. Unfortunately, as many new students enter the higher educational institutions to study these fields of thought, these new entrants will learn only how to to repeat the current problems in mathematics, logic, and science. This higher ecucational policies must be reformed before the USA develops a second civil war.

I consider these problem to be serious and affect the security and unity of the USA. Because of these problems and their potential negative affects, I have decided to return to research. This means that I will not make postings as frequently as I have been making. Look forward to my new blogging efforts tomorrow. It will deal with very basic thoughts.

Thursday, September 20, 2007

Security and the Future of the United States

Based on yesterday’s blog, our godless mathematicians and scientists align to Marxism and the Enlightenment. The exception is that US mathematicians and scientists are not trained in dialectics whereas most Marxists are dialecticians. This is why US scientists do not understand my proof of God. However, US economic scientists and mathematicians also seem to differ from a Marxist economy because they do not limit the accumulation of private property of a few US citizens called the ‘rich class.’

Today, many US mathematicians and scientists state that they can do their work without considering God. However, they haven’t proven their statement. So, for a long time, they have been making an assumption that God does not exist. This assumption has been challenged by religions. But, the existence of God has been proven scientifically by me and my use of dialectical thinking. This proof became public in June 2006. However, my proof has not been evaluated by scientists because dialectical thinking is not common in the USA.

Since the Eastern Christians, who are followers of Plato, live in Moscow, I assume that Eastern Christians, Russian dialecticians, and international intelligence agents are already aware of my proof of God. I made this assumption because my proof is on the Internet. In my book, I say that the laws of nature are not made by nature. Instead, I show that the laws of nature found already by science are merely part of God’s intelligent design of the universe.

I do not expect wise mathematicians and scientists outside of the United States to make public their thoughts about the existence and God’s intelligent design. So I conclude that the security and future of the United States are respectively becoming increasingly vulnerable and confused.

Wednesday, September 19, 2007

Dialectical Thinking Led to the 'Negative' and the 'Negation of Negation'

According to Karl Marx ‘dialectical thinking’ is "nothing more than the science of the general laws of motion and development of nature, human society, and thought." [See Reader in Marxist Philosophy, Howard Selsam & Harry Martel, International Publishers (1963) ps. 153-157.]

Plato recognized ‘the negative’ when he said that "When we speak of ‘that which is not,’ it seems that we do not mean something contrary to what exists but only something that is different." [See Sophist at 257b.] In his Parmenides, Plato uses the negative to define the truth about a ‘pure one,’ which has no parts. He negates the lone existence of a pure one and shows that a pure one exists only if ‘other things’ also exist. If God is a ‘pure one, Plato concludes that God is a creator.

Friedrich Hegel spoke ‘the negative’ when he says that negativity exists in all finite things and defines and preserves the experiences we have in the world we live. [See Hegel: The Essential Writings, Frederick Weiss, Harper &Row, (1974), p. 8] According to Marx, Hegel was the first to formulate the ‘negation of negation’ when he used a triad to define the process we speak of as ‘development’ (aufheben). Hegel speaks of the ‘negation of negation’ as the ‘double negation’.

Hegel’s concept of development has three related moments of thought: (1) to cancel or suspend, (2) to raise up, and (3) to preserve or maintain. Of importance to Hegel is the negativity of the finite, a fact that defines and preserves the experiences we have in the world we live. These three moments resolve themselves into a twofold negation. The finite is itself the first negation. The second negation is the canceling or abrogating this finite negativity. The third negation is the absolute negativity of God, which is the opposite of God’s absolute positivity. Hegel says that the finite is not the truth but is a transition and emergence to something higher and to change. [See Hegel: The Essential Writings.]

In his theory of ideas, Plato used the negation of negation when he said that higher ideas can be developed from known ideas. [ See Republic at 511c.] Hegel used the negation of negation to show how a person can be redeemed if that person has fallen away from God. [See Hegel: The Essential Writings, p.8] Marx used the negation of negation to correct an economy in which private property was being accumulated only by a few citizens. [See Reader in Marxist Philosophy, ps. 153-157]. I used the negation of negation to develop the origin of all finite things in the universe. [See The First Scientific Proof of God, Part I, Ch. 1]

As seen, the concept of ‘development’ has a history. But, I do not believe that many Americans know this history. Isn’t it time for American scientists to become dialecticians? Further, isn’t the private property accumulations of some US citizens creating too many poor people?

Monday, September 17, 2007

What Becomes First, the Chicken or the Egg?

People who do not consider God in their thoughts say that this question cannot be answered. However, people who do believe in God can answer such questions. If one believes in God, that person says that God creates all things in the universes based on an intelligent design. Since this intelligent design must define all wholes before creation occurs, wholes must exist actuality prior to its parts. Since the chicken egg is a part of the chicken, it is clear that the chicken must exist actually in God before the egg exists.

Recently, I listened to a discussion on a research project that dealt with the relation between human loneliness and specific physical sicknesses. The research personnel pointed out that these two human problems are related. But, they did not identify whether loneliness or these physical sicknesses came first. I believe that the cause and effect of these two factors can be determined eventually.

In my book, I deal with the cause of crime. Knowing that mind is a part of a human whole, I concluded that a criminal mind is made by the criminal. This means that criminals are not born. Since a human mind is made by using symbolic languages, I concluded that criminals are made by the symbolic languages that criminals use. Although mind is prior to the development of a person’s languages, the causes of crime are the developments of a person’s mind and the flawed symbolic languages a person uses.

For over a year, logicians and physicists have rejected my book and the scientific statement ‘all finite things are originated by an infinite thing.’ Their rejection is based on their theory that all finite things, including all living things, are originated by a finite and energetic physical particle. However, their theory cannot be proven or falsified.

It is illogical to say that all finite things must be originated by one of the finite things, the energetic physical particle. However, it is logical to say that all finite things must be originated by something that is not finite. This not finite thing must also be real (or positive). This real thing is God, not because God’s infinity creates the finitude in all finite things. This real thing is God also because God is the coincidence of all opposites and creates all finite things with many qualities other than the quality, finitude. Since all finite things are parts of the universe and God is not partible, it is clear that God created the universe and created all things in the universe out of nothing.

As seen, the proof of God by me is not differennt than proving any scientific theory.

Sunday, September 16, 2007

Religious Mysteries Come and Go

In my hometown, Pine Grove, PA, going to a church every Sunday was an important event. By age 15, I had twelve years of perfect attendance, studied Jesus Christ, and became a member of a Lutheran church. After taking an academic course and gained honors in basketball in Pennsylvania, I enlisted in the Army Security Agency in 1947. After three years, I was discharged and began studies in physics at Gettysburg, a college of the Lutheran church. In the first year, I took a required course on the Life of Jesus Christ.

Since the Pennsylvania Power and Light company was interested in me as an employee, I left the field of physics to become an electrical engineer. At Johns Hopkins University (JHU), I earned a degree of Bachelor of Science in Engineering. With this degree, I concluded that religious mysteries can be solved. With solutions, I say that new religious mysteries will come to us continuously but that old religious mysteries will be solved and go away. So, for the rest of my life, I treated religion as a science and religious mysteries as scientific ‘unknowns.’

I studied mysteries throughout my working career and continued these studies after retirement. In 2006, I decided that it was time to report my life’s work on the unification of Religion and Science. I reported this work in the book titled ‘The First Scientific Proof of God.’

Today, I believe that at least one religion is beginning to break down the current separation between Religion and Science. This religion is the Catholic Church. To break this separation, Pope John Paul II apologized for Galileo’s imprisonment. The initial work of Pope Benedict seems to be a continuation of John Paul’s work. If other religions join this effort, I believe that all wars will be stopped and a permanent world peace will emerge.

Friday, September 14, 2007

How Spiritual Atoms Would Form All Things Needed for the Universe

When I published my book in 2006, I included the spiritual atoms in God’s intelligent design of the universe. But, I had not included many developmental ideas about them. At that time, I merely wanted to present the monads that Leibniz had offered to his future generations. Leibniz’s followers tried to propagate the monads but the Western world was not ready because the completed infinity of God was still unknown. Today, God’s true infinity is known. So, the world of today is ready for the spiritual atoms. Below, I present my latest thinking on them.

Spiritual atoms are modeled by geometrical points. However, the points are not ordered by a Euclidean structure. These points form a highly complex non-Euclidean structure of bodily things. The things become known with fields that connect all spiritual atoms in each thing and connect all things so that no spiritual atom is ever free. All things are infinite sets, which are uncompleted (or bad) infinities. So, all created things by God are imperfect. As imperfect things, they contain both essential attributes and accidents. The accidents create negativity in all created things. Thus, medical care should improve if we know why some people are healthy whereas other people have unhealthy problems.

All things are formed by a continuum of different organizing principles. For instance, organizing principles exist for all humans, all trees, all suns, all planets, etc. The prime numbers might be ordering these principles.

The concept of environment must be reconsidered because the universe has only things and has no vacuums. Further, since God cannot be exhausted, entropy seems to be an attribute of local regions of the universe. Thus, I see growth in the universe but no end.

Thursday, September 13, 2007

A New Alternative for All Sciences

The field of physics, with its philosophy of reductionism, is not finding the ‘physical matter’ that underlies all things in the universe. Since many fields of thought waited for this new information, the progress of all sciences is now confused. Had physical matter been found, reductionism would be true, beliefs in God would fade away, and atheism would have won its battle against God. In retrenching, most physicists are recommending a return to the ‘basics.’ I say that an alternative is a return to God.

The alternative of returning to God is a reality today because scientific proofs of God are appearing. My own scientific proof is a general proof because it considers all finite things in the universe and says that they originate from (or are caused by) an infinite thing, which is God. Further, this proof also reveals the ‘real matter’ that underlies all things in the universe. As expected, I found that the real matter of the universe is spiritual, not physical. However, this proof does not mean that all finite things can be reduced to God because finite and infinite are incomparable.

Other scientific proofs of God are based on particular things in the universe and can be found in a Google and yahoo searches.

Wednesday, September 12, 2007

Trickle-up vs. Trickle-down Economics

Earlier this month, I listened to an interesting paper on economics at the Torch Club. The paper compared the trickle-down economy with the trickle-up economy.

In a trickle-down economy, the US government increases its debt to give people in the rich class money to stimulate the US economy. This method was used by presidents Reagan, Bush (father), and Bush (son). The trickle-up economy, the US government increases its debt to create work for the poor class to stimulate the US economy. This method was used by presidents Franklin Roosevelt and Clinton. At the Torch Club, I learned that the trickle-up economy was developed by England’s John Keynes (1852-1849).

When I wrote my book on my proof of God, I was unaware that a trickle-down economy was opposed by a trickle-up economy. But, I was aware of the depression my family suffered in the 1930s. However, I was aware of the economic failures of presidents Reagan and Bush (father) and discussed these failures in my book in detail. (See Part I) However, now that I have become enlightened on the field of economics, I expect another economic failure as a result of President George W. Bush’s new debt of the US government for his trickle-down economy. Clearly, widening the rich and poor class with the trickle-down economy is of no use to a nation under God.

During the Torch Club presentation, a book on economics by Kevin Phillips was mentioned, The title is "American Theocracy: The Peril and Politics of Radical Religion, Oil, and Borrowed Money in the 21st Century." (click)

Tuesday, September 11, 2007

Current Book Prices in Selected Book Stores

This book contains a scientific proof of God's existence and many discussions of the consequences of this proof. It also includes 165 citations. Most citations are on other books. The book citations will save the reader thousands of dollars.

authorhouse (click)
hardcover: $18.95
paperback: $14.95

Barnes&Noble (click)
hardcover: $27.95
paperback ($22.95) (20.65 member)

Amazon (click)
hardcover: $27.95
paperback: $22.95

Saturday, September 08, 2007

A New Degree of Freedom

In yesterday’s blog, I found the limit of logical reasoning. I should have discovered this limit earlier because I had distinguished the talk and scientific languages in my book. This discovery frees man from the shackles of logic and allows us to search for new ideas with any lines of reasoning we choose. But, once a new idea is found, logical reasoning must be used to prove the new idea. So, you can now become a little creator of God. With this new freedom, we can flex the muscles of our minds and become the kind of human God created.

With this new degree of freedom, I will move my interest forward and into some of the teachings of Jesus Christ and the work of Germany’s Friedrich Hegel. One particular teaching of Jesus interests me because I believe that Jesus is saying that the universe is eternal and thus has no end. It also implies that a reincarnation theory could be true. This teaching also confirms my use of the opposing concepts, permanence and change. I have used this pair of opposites often and used them again in yesterday’s blog.

This interesting teaching of Jesus is found in the KJV at Ch. 24 of Matthew. There, Jesus speaks of the darkening of the sun (verse 29). At that time, people were taught that earth is at the center of the universe and that the sun rotates around the earth. However, modern science found that earth rotates around the sun. Jesus thus had knowledge that no one else had at his time. Because Jesus offers lots of new knowledge for his time, I concluded that his teachings are of divine origin. Modern science also confirms the saying of Jesus that the sun darkens. But, this darkening will not occur for a few billion years. So, I don’t believe that Christ will return to planet earth for many, many, many, .... etc. years.

Based of this single teaching of Jesus, I conclude all humans must learn how to live together. And, wars must become the last resort to any human social problem.

Friday, September 07, 2007

The World’s Logicians Have Misinterpreted My Book

Since the publishing of my book in late June 2006, logicians have been commenting on the website I use to teach complex subjects of my book. Unfortunately, they have also used my website to judge my book rather than reading it. In yesterday’s blog on a critique of positivism, I was told for the nth time that I cannot use non sequiturs. This time, I decided to challenge the charge that I misuse non sequiturs. After considerable thought, I concluded that this charge is not true. Let me explain my conclusion.

In the first chapter of my book, I present the first and only proof I offer in this book. This proof of God’s existence is made with one statement on page 6. The statement says --- all finite things are originated by an infinite thing. No other proofs are presented in the book. In the rest of the book, I identify and discuss the many thoughts that emerge as a result of this proof of God.

Based on my website writings alone, logicians are concluding somehow that I use non sequiturs in my book. This conclusion is false. If they read my book, they would learn quickly that only one proof is being claimed by me. All of my other writings in the book deal with the possible consequences of this single proof.

The error that logicians have been making on my book is due first to their non belief in God and second due to their ignorance of the difference between Scientific Languages and Talk Languages. The misuse of non sequiturs can occur only in a Scientific Language where a proof is being presented with fixed procedures. However, it is not possible to find a non sequitur in a Talk Language. They cannot be found in Talk languages because a Scientific Language and a Talk language are separated forever. These two symbolic languages cannot be unified in a world that has no end. The Talk Languages function as the world’s engine of change. It is thus futuristic. On the other hand, the Scientific Languages is not futuristic and functions only to identify the permanence of the world.

After I present my single proof on Page 6, my writing style changes from a Scientific Language to many different Talk Languages. The Talk Languages differ because many different fields of thought are impacted by a proof of God. My book can thus be called a book in philosophy. A philosopher will use many different ways to communicate philosophical material to other people. The author of a book uses many words in a Talk language so he or she can communicate to particular audiences. Jesus Christ, for instance, used many different Talk Languages to communicate to us.

Since logicians will not find any non sequiturs in my book or on my website, they have misled many Americans and impeded the flow of new ideas to America. Should logicians admit their error to all Americans? My answer is ‘yes’ because the ultimate king of the world must be God rather than man or logic. In a nation under God, admitting an error is important.

Thursday, September 06, 2007

A Short Critique of Positivism

In the blog of 9/04/07, I discussed a brief history of positivism. I show that its focus is on sensual data. Thus, it rejects metaphysics. Positivism developed empiricism, which developed a major debate with rationalists such as Descartes and Leibniz. To solve this debate, Kant’s worked on transcendent reasoning by using Aristotle’s categories. But his transcendentalism was not accepted.

The debate was reopened in the 1920s when many Western world linguists concluded that sensual data are primarily symbolic. By this time physical scientists had developed many physical laws. These laws use six primary symbols (charge, temperature, mass, length time and angle) and secondary symbols such as ‘density.’ The meanings of all of these symbols are precise and thus work together to expose new physical laws. However, these symbols are not working together in the infinitely small (free atoms) and the infinitely large (cosmology).

Since the life scientists have not been able to build their own symbols and laws, they expect physical scientists to produce living things from nonliving things. So, life scientists are using physical symbols to build life sciences such as sociology, psychology, neurology, etc. However, these life scientists are not solving medical problems such as cancer, diabetes, autism, and muscular dystrophy and human problems such as crime, child molestation, drug use, and poverty. Further, physical scientists have tried, but have never produced life from nonliving physical matter.

I say that something is wrong with positivism and the sciences that it is creating. At this time followers of Abraham, Moses, Plato, Nicholas of Cusa, Gottfried Leibniz, Friedrich Hegel, Georg Cantor, and me will say that reasoning goes beyond logic and thus that the origin of all finite things is an infinite God. From these followers, you can thus expect a debate against positivism.

Today, many physicists say that origin of all finite things is not God. Instead, they say that Big Bang is the origin of all finite things. However, the Big Bang is a finite thing. Essentially, these physicists are saying that ‘a‘finite thing is the origin of all finite things.’ This saying is illogical. Something is wrong with positivism.

Wednesday, September 05, 2007

New Policy for Managing Comments

As of September 5, 2007, only comments that address the contents of a blog or discuss new ideas will be posted.

Tuesday, September 04, 2007

Positivism: A Teaching and My Technical Response to Michael Hennessy’s Comment to Yesterday’s Blog

According to the Britannica Encyclopedia (2006 CD), positivism confines itself to the data of experience and excludes a priori or metaphysical speculations. It developed through several stages such as Empiriocriticism, Logical Positivism, and Logical Empiricism, and, in the mid_20th century, Analytic and Linguistic philosophy. Thus, all knowledge regarding matters of fact is based on the "positive" data of experience. Beyond the realm of fact is that of pure logic and pure mathematics.

Positivists became noted for their repudiation of metaphysics; i.e., of speculation regarding the nature of reality that radically goes beyond any possible evidence that could either support or refute "transcendent" knowledge Positivism is worldly, secular, antitheological, and antimetaphysical. Strict adherence to the testimony of observation and experience is the all_important imperative. Positivists have been Utilitarians and promote the maxim, "the greatest happiness for the greatest number of people."

Positivism has its roots in the French Enlightenment and in the 18th_century British Empiricism, particularly that of Hume and George Berkeley. The role of sense experience was stressed.. The thought of Auguste Comte designates positivism. He was influenced by the Enlightenment Encyclopaedists (such as Denis Diderot, Jean d'Alembert, and others) and, especially in his social thinking, was decisively influenced by the founder of French Socialism, Claude_Henri, comte de Saint_Simon, whose disciple he had been in his early years and from whom the very designation Positivism stems.

However, the positivism of Plato does not confine our minds to the task of explaining empirical data. In his Sophist (at 257b), Plato says, "When we speak of ‘that which is not,’ it seems that we do not mean something contrary to what exists but only something that is different." So, if we use the word ‘not’ to seek something that is not finite, we are free to posit ‘infinite.’ Our minds must make this posit, otherwise we cannot determine the origin of finite. Positivists reject this form of human reasoning. Without the gift of creativity from God, a positivist says that a person is the ‘subject’ of empirical data of objects. I, and other people who believe in God, say that every person is creative and is not merely part of an audience of empirical data.

On the use of Leibniz''s monads, I suggest the use of spiritual atoms because phyical atoms are not being found. I do not build a science on them because this science will be complex and will probablye require the development of Cantor's transfinite numbers. So, building a science on them by me is well beyond the scope of my book.

Monday, September 03, 2007

More on the Images of God

Yesterday, I identified the ancient and modern personalities whose thoughts I have studied in detail. My book was written to summarize their thoughts because reading their material in detail is a hefty task. Since publishing my book, I concluded that the works of Friedrich Hegel should be added to my list of preferred personalities. I believe that the works of all of these personalities must become familiar to any person who wants to understand God and the universe. Many of today’s scientists and mathematicians are failing because the works of these personalities are unknown to them.

In my book, I decided to use spiritual atoms to form the universe primarily because physicists cannot find any physical atoms. In the 16th century Gottfried Leibniz sought and developed the nature of the true atom. He called the true atom a ‘monad.’ I use his monad but change its name to ‘a spiritual atom’ because I concluded that God is an infinite Spirit who creates finite Spirits. As the true atoms of the universe, the created Spirits form the ‘matter’ that forms all created things in God’s intelligent design. A cloud, piece of steel, human, dog, tree, etc. is something different because they have different Spirits within. Further, since the Spirits forms only one universe, all Spirits are united. So, I agree with Hegel that the universe is an organization of Spirits. This means that order does not originate in chaos.

Since all finite things are uncompleted, a finite thing can be called a ‘bad infinity in motion.’ Since all Spirits are uncompleted, they are always in motion. All formed things (or images of God) thus obey the law of life and death. This law means that every Spirit is immortal and moves from image to image. It is not possible for such laws to be changed by Nature because opposites, such as life and death, are unified in God. The life of an image thus begins. develops, and ends, re begins, re develops, and re ends, etc. This process can approach a real end but can never reach a final end because no thing in the universe can achieve the completeness of God.

Sunday, September 02, 2007

Seeing All Created Things As Images of God

The more I study Friedrich Hegel, the more I convince myself that the work of Hegel on dialectical thinking on negatives aligns to Plato’s Being (God) and Becoming (Universe) theology, which is found in Plato’s Timaeus dialogue. I also conclude that Hegel’s work adds to the modern work of Renaissance personalities, Nicholas of Cusa, Gottfried Leibniz, and Georg Cantor. All of this modern work is aligned to the ancient work of Abraham, which replaces idolatry with a monotheistic God. This modern work is also aligned to the ancient work of Moses on a creation theory and the development of a self-governing republic, which are found in the first five books of the Old Testament. The modern work is also aligned to the teachings of Jesus Christ.

My work is also aligned to these ancient and modern works with a scientific proof of God, a scientific link between an infinite God and our finite universe, and the development of spiritual atoms, which forms the universe. My work also shows the consistency of the work of these personalities and the alignment of the teachings of Jesus Christ to these works. I argue that all of these works must be considered by one who is searching for new truths.

Common to the work of all of these personalities is the concept of self-knowledge, which is also spoken of as ‘know thyself.’ To know thyself, nothing is imposed on a person from anything external.

Since God is a completed infinite or a pure whole that has no parts, God cannot be divided so that things can be created from the parts. In order to create things out of nothing, God must form many images of himself. God creates images of himself by transforming the different infinite essentials of His completeness into finite essentials. All created things are thus images of God, but are not completed. Here is the difference between God and all crated things. However, God distinguishes the things He creates perfectly. This means that all created things have independence. With this independence, no image can impose itself onto some other image. This independence is the gift of freedom from God.

Thus, a human is creative and can transform himself or herself to higher levels of consciousness by negating the many different falsities that live with its own truths.’ A degree of negativity exists in all created and imperfect things because the coming together of the images to form a single universe adds contingencies to the essentials that determine the content of every image. I believe that these negatives are showing us the causes of cancer.