From God's inexistence it follows God's existence

[irichc]

1) Every truth leads to another one. Otherwise, truth's limit would be a non-truth, in which truth is going to find its beginning and its end. In that case, false propositions would proceed to true ones, and true ones would generate false ones as well.

2) Thus, every truth, whatever it may be, guides us by means of an infinite enchainment to supreme and unattainable Truth, which is God.

3) By stating a single true proposition, being really true, we are denying the limit that will denaturalize it (vid. 1); we are declaring an infinite progression of truths and, consequently, recognizing God's existence (vid. 2).

4) So, even if that hypothetical true proposition was "God doesn't exist", as far as it is asserted as a truth, it follows that God (i.e. the Truth, vid. 2) exists.

5) However, if God exists, the previous proposition (vid. 4) is false; and, if God doesn't exist, it is false too, because in that case the Truth (i.e. God, vid. 2) wouldn't exist and, then, single truths wouldn't exist either (vid. 3). So, in any case, God exists.

Greetings.

Daniel.


Theological Miscellany (in Spanish):[/u]

http://www.gratisweb.com/irichc/MT.htm

[felix102]

Hi daniel. I hope you enjoy this forum.

I've always liked philisophical proposals.  Had a knack for things that are confusing and hard to follow. Logos in its purest form.  

I understand the basic jest of what you are saying, but I have a problem following your logic. Truth here is being treated as a very abstract entity which is very hard to follow. If you can make it concrete it would be very helpful.

I would like to understand what you are trying to say so here are some counter propositions for the first statment:

1) Every truth leads to another one. Otherwise, truth's limit would be a non-truth, in which truth is going to find its beginning and its end. In that case, false propositions would proceed to true ones, and true ones would generate false ones as well.

First of all we must know that truths are only attained through a series of disproves which are infinite. Truths cannot be approved, only the entities that make the "truth" true can disproven and refined...so that Truth will become even "more" true. Thus when you talk about "truth's limit would be a non-truth, in which truth is going to find its beginning and its end," it would be more accurate to say that the search for the ultimate truth is unattainable because the process of disproving and refining truth will always continue to be an infinite process.

Also, "Every truth leads to another one"  Truths are manipulated inductively(many truths together constucting one single truth) and deductively(one general truth broken down into many single truths). I think it would be more accurate to say that truths are founded upon one another instead of that they lead to each other.

I agree with "false propositions will eventually become true ones if they are asserted to be true- which in turn will be foundations of other falsehoods"....It cant be any truer, can it?