The Double Dichotomy Proof of God

[John J. Bannan]

THE DOUBLE DICHOTOMY PROOF OF GOD


1) A metaphysical dichotomy between the set of all possible all inclusive states of existence and no states of existence proves that no states of existence cannot be the case, because our universe is real.

2) A metaphysical dichotomy between the set of all possible all inclusive states of existence that can become real and the set of all possible all inclusive states of existence that cannot become real being those possible all inclusive states of existence that contain two logically possible but contradictory states proves that the set of all possible all inclusive states of existence that cannot become real cannot be the case, because our universe is real.

3) Because our universe had a beginning and does not need to be real, and because something must be real without our universe being real due to the fact that no states of existence cannot be real, then there must be something real without our universe being real proving that all inclusive states of existence that can become real must be possible in reality.

4) Because the set of all possible all inclusive states of existence that can become real is infinite because one can imagine any given universe with the addition of just one more thing ad infinitum, then there cannot be a probability for any given universe because the set is infinite.

5) But because the universe is real, then there must be something real which determines what becomes real among the infinite set of all possible all inclusive states of existence where said determination is not based on probability or random chance.

6) Because something can be real and our universe not be real, then there must be a power to create the real such as our universe, and as there is a power to create the real, then there must be a power to determine what is real based on an order of preference.

7) Because the set of all possible all inclusive states of existence that can become real is not inherently ordered, and because it is possible to determine based on preference which possible all inclusive states of existence come into reality, then there must be a real eternal constraint that determines through will and intellect to allow any or all of these possible all inclusive states of existence to become real.

8) Because the actualization of any or all possible all inclusive states of existence that can become real requires the constraint to actualize them, then the constraint cannot be made and therefore must be infinite pure act without moving parts.

9) Said constraint must have power over all possible all inclusive states of existence that can become real being omnipotent and omnipresent.

10) Said constraint must have knowledge of all possible all inclusive states of existence that can become real being omniscient.

11) Because the mind of the constraint is omnipresent and hence within all of us, our minds are contained within the mind of the constraint which calls all of us to be Sons of the constraint.

12) Hence, a single being exists who is eternal, omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent, is not made, and has a will and intellect and we call this being God.

[John J. Bannan]

[Replying to post 140 by Bust Nak]

Let's see. A brief chemical process on the surface of a planet appears to have no more meaning than a paint chip falling off a wall. If you wish to perceive more meaning than that - you are truly deluded. Only God brings meaning.

[JoeyKnothead]

From Post 141:

Let's see. A brief chemical process on the surface of a planet appears to have no more meaning than a paint chip falling off a wall.

I'm reminded of images of folks chipping off parts of the Berlin Wall. Some of 'em even holding onto those parts for long after.

It's just a wall, right?

If you wish to perceive more meaning than that - you are truly deluded. Only God brings meaning.

We risk our own credibility when calling others "deluded", while exposing our own delusions for all to see.

[John J. Bannan]

[Replying to post 142 by JoeyKnothead]

In atheism, the Berlin Wall is meaningless. Was the Berlin Wall emotional? Sure! Plenty of those people holding up those chips were very emotional in doing so. However, this is to again confuse motivation aka emotion with meaning. Two entirely different concepts. Atheists live for emotion - not meaning.

I have my proof of God to back me up. No one has yet popped a hole in it. So, I am safe in claiming my belief in God is not delusional. You, however, who claim no God nonetheless assert meaning in life where there is none without God. That is delusional.

[Hatuey]

[Replying to post 140 by Bust Nak]

Let's see. A brief chemical process on the surface of a planet appears to have no more meaning than a paint chip falling off a wall. If you wish to perceive more meaning than that - you are truly deluded. Only God brings meaning.

No. Mind projects meaning. Mind observing produces meaning. It's what minds do.

Minds also project certain of their supposed "meanings" onto other minds without proof that such meaning exists in the other mind(s). Because minds cannot demonstrate such theory to be accurate, minds always apply the mechanism of faith to presume other mind(s) derive meaning as does the mind doing the presupposing.

Those minds who claim that an invisible and undetectable mind (god) derives meaning as does the mind of the claiming mind are erroneously projecting schema onto a hypothetical mind.

[Bust Nak]

[Replying to post 140 by Bust Nak]
Let's see. A brief chemical process on the surface of a planet appears to have no more meaning than a paint chip falling off a wall.

Is that how it appears to you? Surely that depends on which brief chemical process on the surface of which planet you are talking about. A certain brief chemical process in the form of a human, appears to have lots more meaning than a paint chip falling off a wall.

If you wish to perceive more meaning than that - you are truly deluded. Only God brings meaning.

That's the same question begging fallacy as before. Your presupposition are just that, presupposition.

In atheism, the Berlin Wall is meaningless. Was the Berlin Wall emotional? Sure! Plenty of those people holding up those chips were very emotional in doing so. However, this is to again confuse motivation aka emotion with meaning. Two entirely different concepts. Atheists live for emotion - not meaning.

There is no confusion. People are emotional about said wall because it has meaning.

I have my proof of God to back me up. No one has yet popped a hole in it. So, I am safe in claiming my belief in God is not delusional. You, however, who claim no God nonetheless assert meaning in life where there is none without God. That is delusional.

What do you think we have been doing since page 1 if not poping holes in your argument?

[Hatuey]

In atheism, the Berlin Wall is meaningless. Was the Berlin Wall emotional? Sure! Plenty of those people holding up those chips were very emotional in doing so. However, this is to again confuse motivation aka emotion with meaning. Two entirely different concepts.

No, meaning for each individual aware of the Berlin Wall was projected by each individual mind according to prior understanding of the Berlin Wall and what it represented. For some atheists, Christians, and Buddhists the Berlin Wall was meaningless (for example, those who never knew of its existence). For some atheists, Christians, and Buddhists, it was very meaningful. Nothing to do with religion, everything to do with prior understanding by the mind.

Atheists live for emotion - not meaning.

No. All minds produce meaning all the time. Meaning IS the one and only product of the mind. Even those individuals who place a high value on emotion do so because for them, emotion is the one of the most meaningful aspects of their existence.

I have my proof of God to back me up.

No, you don't. If you did, you'd be on worldwide news right now and on every radio, tv, and internet site in the world.

No one has yet popped a hole in it.

Oh, ye of little faith.

So, I am safe in claiming my belief in God is not delusional.

Correct. No one is going to harm you for holding to such a belief as that.

You, however, who claim no God nonetheless assert meaning in life where there is none without God. That is delusional.

No. Not only is it not delusional, it would be delusional for anyone to claim that there is delusion when an invisible, undetectable thing (god) must be presupposed in order for a mind to produce that which it always produces every millisecond of its existence.

[JoeyKnothead]

From Post 143:

In atheism, the Berlin Wall is meaningless. Was the Berlin Wall emotional? Sure! Plenty of those people holding up those chips were very emotional in doing so. However, this is to again confuse motivation aka emotion with meaning. Two entirely different concepts. Atheists live for emotion - not meaning.

Yet again we see an inability to accept that meaning is what we make it.

I have my proof of God to back me up. No one has yet popped a hole in it. So, I am safe in claiming my belief in God is not delusional.

Delusion is a cruel mistress.

You, however, who claim no God nonetheless assert meaning in life where there is none without God.

See Divine Insight's Post 127, where he destroys your argument so well, archeologists won't ever find the first sherd of it.

That is delusional.

I'll keep telling it, 'til you finally understand it...

We risk our own credibility declaring something "delusional", while displaying all the symptoms of it.

[John J. Bannan]

[Replying to post 145 by Bust Nak]

Really? How does a human have more meaning than a paint chip?

See, I told you guys you were confusing emotion with meaning.


Not a single one of you has popped a hole in my proof of God. You have your criticisms, but I've answered all of them. There has been no hole produced by any of you and I am intellectually honest enough to admit if I had to go back to the drawing board. None of you have made me go back to the drawing board.

[John J. Bannan]

[Replying to post 147 by JoeyKnothead]

Divine Insight is your hero? If I were you, I would pick someone else.

[JoeyKnothead]

From Post 149:

Divine Insight is your hero? If I were you, I would pick someone else.

Not so much hero, as impressed about how he shattered your argument.