Advertisements

Logical Proof of “God”

I don’t see a way around believing in god.  No matter how I look at it, all my sessions of deep thought eventually confirm the existence of some ever-present force that created the universe, exists through all of us, and is infinitely connected to every part of the universe it created.

To me, God is consciousness.  It is the source point from which all things emanated.  It is the divine thought that brought all things into being.

[maxbutton id=”4″]

 

This consciousness that we all experience seems to be directly connected to all matter as well, as shown by experiments in the field of Quantum Physics.

I think that the Upanishads put it best though;“The world is seen and led by consciousness; consciousness is the foundation, consciousness is all there is.”

They also relate this consciousness to Brahman, as it is the thing that connects us all into one united entity.

One reason why I believe that people in recent years are having trouble believing in God is because of the stigma that has been attached to it after years of misunderstanding the word.  It is more commonly thought of as something closely related to a human, or a being, who watches everything that everyone does from a passive third party perspective.

Although I have done my best to explain my concept of God, it is truly an unknowable principle and because people have tried so hard to conceptualize the unknowable, it has led to mass confusion, wars, and disbelievers.

The esoteric traditions have tried their best to uphold the true meaning of god.  The teachings have remained esoteric, (which in this example means “belonging to an inner circle”), because of the incredible profundity of the subject.  Due to the fact that most people are not equipped with the intelligence and persistence that it takes to come anywhere near understanding such an abstract thing, “faith” was created.

But for the people who believe they know better, and have decided that having faith without understanding, is a foolish thing to do, they have started a new religion which is the “anti-religion” itself; Atheism.

While atheists will tell you that there is no way that god exists, and that they, unlike religions, have used logic and reason to come to this conclusion and so it must be true, I would like to counter by saying that logic and reason confirm for me the exact opposite thing; that god cannot possibly NOT exist.

Many atheists will acknowledge that there once was nothing, and now there is something.  How can this be, if God is not present in this equation?  If all of this was created, this implies a creator, and that is one attribute of God that is agreed on by all world religions.

One counter-argument to this could be that everything just created itself.  Of course I would have to agree that there is a possibility that this is true, but if everything created itself, then this everything is the creator and is therefore God.

Sticking to esoteric and mystical schools of thought, we come to a blatant confirmation of what I have just said; God is EVERYTHING.

If we are all just a small piece of this grand cosmic puzzle, then the picture that is made by finishing the puzzle and putting all the pieces together would undoubtedly be God.

In Hinduism, God is the creator, the upholder, and the destroyer.

In an attempt to reconcile Religion with Science, I would like to point you to the incredibly close analogy that Science has postulated reality with.

Science says that the universe was once confined to a Singular Point and that point expanded in The Big Bang into everything that we know the material realm to be.

Science next hypothesizes that this realm will continue to expand to the farthest reaches of the cosmos and will remain in

The Confines of The Universe

Observable Universe

existence for trillions upon trillions of years.

And a relatively new theory that has shown tremendous popularity as of recently, is that at a certain point, everything will stop expanding and begin to contract back into this point in what Science has termed “The Big Crunch”.

A Large amount of scientists believe this, and are also atheist, which I feel to be a total contradiction of beliefs.

Does this small point which science has postulated not perfectly represent a mystical version of God?

A trillion years may seem like an unfathomable amount of time, but for Brahman, it is just a blink of the eye… and that’s exactly what the big-bang/big-crunch theory seems to perfectly symbolize; God opening it’s eye, and then closing it.

The closing of the eye (The Big Crunch) does seem like a pretty unsettling thought, but don’t be alarmed, for God will surely open it’s eye again, for everything works in cycles.

In order to conclude this essay, I will leave you with a Logic Proof, which, if all points are accepted, proves once and for all, the existence of God.

  1. If the Universe once did not exist, and now does exist, then it was created.
  2. If the universe was created, than something created it, whether that thing be itself, god, or any other principle, force, or thing.
  3. If the name God is assigned to whatever it is that created the universe, and the universe was in fact created, then the existence of God is necessary and cannot be denied.

I encourage you to comment on and discuss what I have written.  I realize that I have attempted to do something that might be impossible, but I have had these thoughts recently and felt it appropriate to finally share them with the world.

NAMASTE

-Ascended Master

Advertisements

5 Responses to Logical Proof of “God”

  1. Ross Baker says:

    Hi, I found this arguement interesting, I have read somewhat into spirituality contexts and have come to a conclusion that feels right to me at this current stage in life, now this may sound far fetched and crazy but in the question of existence and creation I don’t think anything can be deemed as such. Now I am God, not in a ego statement, but another view, God is consciousness, the one thing science cannot fathom, yes we are products of biological ancestry but I look at my life not as in physical means but as a lofe of energy, a soul; consciousness. A lot of the limitations placed on our potential is what we’re privy to knowing, how it is expressed and for what reason and what we are conditioned to believe. We are all connected via a field or ether, which I look at as thus, If I am but energy, intent, thought consciousness how I respond what I emit; negatively or positively will have a direct impact on this earth and existence and it is not just me but for all, what is we could all see the bigger picture; I believe in reincarnation, I cannot help but explain the connection I get to nature, to certain people and to certain places. The thoughts I create from no where that can translate to universal reliability. I believe life extend on and on as this is not a new belief, life continues each and every life until we discover truth and divine oneness. I believe once we have accomplished this we go to another plain, no not yet heaven and this continues until we reach the final plain and that is oneness with all, no form just everything existing as one, have you ever noticed how divided we are down here, I think this is why we strive for love and acceptance, where as I think as we reach that final level that desire isn’t there anymore as it has already been found, purely wholely. I believe from our origin in the spirit realm we’re split from our true soul mate which we spend life after life searching for, and finding, that is part of the deja vu I menationed. We came from somewhere, but I don’t believe God created all if we exist as a conscious God internally, we just need to realise it and accept this. One must learn everything one can throughout each life, accept each test and trial and loss with love and acceptance. One can never be stagnant, we’re really limitless, we are universes as we will extend on forever because as energy it cannot die it will just go somewhere else. It’s a beautiful way for me to look at life, I see everything brighter, I work to live a life of non materialistic attitude and love and compassion and it is sometimes overwhelming to be able to express and feel and think as I do at only the age of 24. I still have so much more to learn and will continue to do so. Finally we must accept death, I morbidly and strangely look forward to the day though hopefully not for many years as with my conscious energy will learn more and will be set for another adventure here or perhaps somewhere else. I think we needn’t ponder where we came from so much I guess but look for the symbolism and brightness this life can bring even the shadow of darkness we’re all to come aware and conscious being eventually. I hope some of this made sense. Ross

  2. I’m afraid I have to agree with the first commenter. With the well-cited Watchmaker’s Argument, there is a simple point of basic logic that, ironically enough, precludes the argument that the creator view of universal existence could be a logical inevitability. Any system of logic that describes entities, forces, or phenomena outside itself can only really describe its own gaps of logical continuity. A creator, regardless of description as entity or force, is necessarily outside the system of logic used to describe it, since the creator must first exist to create the system in question. Logically, haha.

    Metaphysical doublespeak aside… Proselytizing and evangelically arguing ones theistic philosophies when the argument is unsolicited serves to convince none so much as the evangelist. The important distinction is that logic is unarguable, it simply is or is not. Beliefs and ideas are infinitely arguable, and as such are much more interesting because they can be debated based on subjective analysis. There’s nothing wrong with holding a given belief or exploring a given idea. The rhetorical problems arise when describing an idea or belief as a logical necessity. The system so described is a belief structure whose internal system of logical reference necessitates the idea in question in order to function.

    Of course I could be wrong. Wouldn’t be the first time, won’t be the last.

    NAMASTE
    -descended student

  3. And thank you for responding! I don’t necessarily believe that at some point there was nothing, although I don’t have any formal backing for that — just a gut feeling. As to a creator being everything, that is the part of your argument to which I am most drawn. I am happy to say that I believe the universe itself awoke to the need for self-expression and then split off parts of itself which became life, which eventually became intelligent life, which allowed the universe to know itself. (I admit to hijacking this idea from that most unlikely of philosophers, Robert A. Heinlein.) Still, even that interpretation does not require a creator.

  4. No, No, No. Philosophers have thrown this argument around for hundreds of years. Your entire essay is dependent on one highly questionable premise, that is, that everything must have a creator. This is also know as the Watchmaker’s Argument. What precludes our universe being the end result of a former big Crunch? And that big Crunch the end result of a former Big Bang? And so on? And how can anyone know if something created the universe? We are part of the universe, and as such, are unable to look at the question without being influenced by certain other arguments: namely, the Problems with Evil, the Problems of Divine Justice, and the Problems of Immortality. Any person can assert from the deepest place in their heart that there is a God, but there is no logical proof, and therefore the entire argument is dismissible.

    • ascendedmasta says:

      The watchmaker argument says that as a watch is complex and thus has a designer, so the universe is complex and this implies a designer as well. That is not what I am saying.
      Granted you need to make two assumptions in order to see my point as truth. These two assumptions are logical assumptions, but assumptions non-the-less;
      assumption one ; there at some point was nothing, non-being, non-existence.
      assumption two ; that we exist!
      if you agree on these two points, then a creator must be present, and this creator doesnt have to be a being, but it is a creator.
      I believe this creator to be everything… the one universal self that willed itself into existence and is every part of its own creation.
      the self exists to observe and ponder itself.

      Thanks for the comment Judith

Leave a Comment...

Partners Section:

dep file Depfile password Dep file Dep file Depfile password Depfile password dep file dep file Depfile password dep file Depfile password dep file Depfile password dep file Depfile password dep file Dep file dep file Dep file dep file Dep file dep file Depdile password Depfile password dep file dep file depfile password Dep file Depfile Password yify torrent empire torrent yify vikings season 4 auto clicker autoclicker slender the eight pages he gift torrent walking dead torrent the walking dead torrent fl studio 12 torrent Depfile password Dep file dep file dep file dep file dep file dep file dep file depfile password depfile password depfile password depfile password depfile password depfile password Depfile Dep file Dep file Dep file Dep file Dep file Dep file Dep file Dep file dep file depfile password depfile password dep file depfile password dep file depfile password dep file depfile password