Irrefutable proof of the existence of God

[Flame4]

Evidence of God’s existence comes not from some mathematical pattern but from his outpouring of love for us throughout human history, both publically and in each individual soul. It is especially evident on the cross. From a Catholic perpective, it is dangerous to concentrate on number theories such as the one you are presenting.
As well you are charging people money for this “great revelation” and claiming to be the fifth Gospel. All of this has red flags all over it. Catholics should never accept anything like this unless it is approve and supported by the Vatican. That is why I ammasking why you haven’t shown this to your bishop. Having the supposed testimonies of a few priests isn’t enough. Anyways, if they truly believed it, why haven’t they notified the bishop?

Your entire claim is absurd. It has nothing to do with Church teaching. It seems to either be a money making scheme or a joke to see how gullible us Catholics are. You couldn’t have honestly have thought we would believe this…

 

[inocente]

I searched the internet for the name of one of the priests who your lousy website claims gave an enthusiatic accolade for your book, if it really exists, and I found his email address.
I sent him an email alerting him to your website.

I’ve done the same by emailing the Archdiocese of Cincinnati Chancery, copy below.

On the Catholic Answers Forum someone is advertising a self-published book together with his website which contains favorable reviews supposedly written by your office and three priests in Cincinnati.

The book is about something called the 2/3rds rule, which is said to tell us just about everything including which OT books belong in the Bible, the exact date of Jesus’ conception, and embryonic stem cell research.

Would you be so kind as to let me know whether “your” review is real. If it isn’t, you may wish to ask the hosting company, bluehost.com/, to terminate the website.

The website is at thegospelofcreation.com/accolades.php

The thread discussing the book on Catholic Answers Forum is at forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=623264

Thanks

 

[Abba]

The Bible is great. No argument there. And so are the 4 Gospels. But this book purports to be a 5th Gospel, The Gospel the Bible itself alludes to that is “preached in all creation that is under heaven.” In other words they claim it to be the Gospel written by the Word, Himself through 15 Billion years of His involvement in Creation. Somehow I would have thought Bible advocates would be interested in such a Gospel.

The book, you later admit you wrote yourself is suppose to be a fifth gospel written by the Word? What are you saying here?

 

[Abba]

I will restate that the Bible itself tells of this 5th Gospel (Paul again in Colossians 1:23) so how can it be considered blasphemous.

How is Paul referring to a fifth gospel? You are misunderstanding Col. 1:23.

Colossians 1:23

23 if you continue in your faith, established and firm, and do not move from the hope held out in the gospel. This is the gospel that you heard and that has been proclaimed to every creature under heaven, and of which I, Paul, have become a servant.

Paul did not become a servant of a fifth gospel. He is referring here to the gospel passed down to us from the evangelists. The one he is referring to is pretty much summed up in our Creed.

1 Corinthian 1:15
The Resurrection of Christ
1 Now, brothers and sisters, I want to remind you of the gospel I preached to you, which you received and on which you have taken your stand. 2 By this gospel you are saved, if you hold firmly to the word I preached to you. Otherwise, you have believed in vain.
3 For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance[a]: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, 4 that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, 5 and that he appeared to Cephas,** and then to the Twelve. 6 After that, he appeared to more than five hundred of the brothers and sisters at the same time, most of whom are still living, though some have fallen asleep. 7 Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles, 8 and last of all he appeared to me also, as to one abnormally born.

9 For I am the least of the apostles and do not even deserve to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the church of God. 10 But by the grace of God I am what I am, and his grace to me was not without effect. No, I worked harder than all of them—yet not I, but the grace of God that was with me. 11 Whether, then, it is I or they, this is what we preach, and this is what you believed.**

 

[Whadyamean]

By the way the booklet is also available at Amazon (see link below).

amazon.com/Introduction-3rds-Biblical-Response-Darwinism/dp/1450752489/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1316417898&sr=1-1

However brilliant your proof may or may not be, you might consider hiring an editor to review your work after you collect your prize. The blurb on the booklet has at least two usage errors. I truly hope that that is neither a reflection on the rest of the pages, (2x700…wow…) nor an indication of your mathematical/logical/critical thinking skills

 

[itt23r]

To Flame4

Yes wel I thought the whole idea to be absurd as well when I first discovered it. and it took me 4 years of research after that to finally accept it. But as you say Faith doesn’t come through the head, it comes through the heart. My ultimate conversion had nothing to do with the discovery of the 2/3rds Rule. That aspect of it simply paved the way. And it is just as the Catholic Church says. No one can prove the existence of God - but you can know that God exists. And I know that God exists. not because of some mathematical formula. But because He entered my heart one night back in the winter of 1996.

But that doesn’t negate what I had discovered. It only made it clearer. And in subsequently attaching the math to Calvary it only made it clearer that I had stumbled upon a Holy relic, God’s timetable.

So why don’t I take it to the Bishop? Well I did. That was the first place I went after I finished the first manuscript What else should I have done? And you read what they said if you went to the Accolades section of the Website. I’ll reprint it here if you like.

“The author creatively uses vast resources from many disciplines to develop this monumental lifetime work …. a unified vision of the history of our universe which is clearly the creative work of the Word … a marvelous achievement.”

So my response was what?! Is that all you are going to say? Aren’t you going to rule on it?! And they basically told me no.They could spend 20 years studying it and not come to any conclusions. Bottom line is there is no such thing as an empirical proof of God or anything else for that matter. And they are right. Gravity and everything else that science believes in are only theories and the same goes for the 2/3rds Rule.

But that doesn’t negate the 2/3rds Rule or Gravity or anything else that science gives us either.
Science and theology are equal parts of the equation. And if you have no appreciation of one side or the other you are really missing out. The book I’ve written is for those who have an appreciation for both.

And by all means please do complain to the Bishop. I’ve been trying to get his attention on this matter for years.

 

[Abba]

But again it isn’t really the 2/3rds Rule thats making the initial claim here. In this particular case the Rule is merely corroborating the findings of Newton and focussing in on what is being said. If you would like another example of how enlightening this lens can be, earlier in this thread Jesus’ Baptism is applied to this same light. Take a look at that one and tell me this isn’t intriguing.

When I read the first post I thought of Newton and it is on the 39th post that you finally credit him and only as a back up.

 

[itt23r]

To Abba;

I disagree. the Gospel Paul is referring to in Colossians that is preached to all the creatures is most definitely the one that is interwoven into all Creation. Did the 4 evangelists preach to all God’s creatures? I don’t think so. It is just as it says in the Psalms: “The heavens declare the glory of God and the firment declares His handiwork.” this is one and the same Gospel that Paul is referring to. A fifth Gospel which corroborates the other four in every detail. So no it is not a new or a strange Gospel either

As for my authorship for much of the book I consider myself just a translator.

And yes Whatyamean there are some typos in the website. It was put up hastily and the webmaster hasn’t gotten around to fixing them.

 

[Whadyamean]

Bottom line is there is no such thing as an empirical proof of God or anything else for that matter.

So you are not familiar with the method of the non dualists?

And they are right. Gravity and everything else that science believes in are only theories and the same goes for the 2/3rds Rule.

Are you one of those who use the word “theory” as if it meant “Hypothesis?”

Science and theology are equal parts of the equation. And if you have no appreciation of one side or the other you are really missing out. The book I’ve written is for those who have an appreciation for both.

Indeed, both religion as we know it and science exist in a sort of “flatland.” Yet both exist as part of what we call creation. But neither offer the depth necessary, not even religion and the emotion of faith. Both, as well, acknowledge the existence of more, but where exactly that “more” might be is disagreed on by no less than their distinct methods of inquiry and proof. And at the same time we can see that it is the same “mind,” human, which is capable of falling on one or the other side of the r/s controversy with many awkward straddlers.

Was Ken Wilber’s A Brief History of Everything one of your source books?

 

[Abba]

itt23r,

I have not really read your website nor have I spent much time on this topic, I am just pointing out the negative things that stand out even as I read a little. I still have not read the comments by the priests.

The following statement on your website is truly sad. You demonstrate a lack of respect for Holy Mother Church which is repulsive.

"Additional reviews will be added to this site as they come in. But it would be dishonest not to mention that variations of the pamphlet “Introduction to the 2/3rds Rule” have also been submitted to two prestigious theological journals for critical review (Biblica and Communio) and in both cases they have garnered zero interest. Even more frustrating than this is the reaction of the Church hierarchy. For where you would expect they might be ecstatic about a scientific discovery that corroborates Church teaching (and there are certainly many in the Church that would be appreciative), trying to get through the bureaucracy to gain an audience is like talking to bobble head dolls. For those who’ve been positioned at the gate, admittance seems to be reserved solely for those with scads of letters after their names. But such snobbery is inherent in most modern institutions today and so it was to be expected. All we have come up against is what millions of others before us have already discovered. It’s not easy to break through the glass ceiling to notoriety. So we’ve seen some failures in our initial submissions. But we see it more as a badge of honor than a defeat and we are in full recognition that 2,000 years ago another great spiritual message was completely missed by the theological elitists of that time. Our mission, like that mission, is therefore, to the people and we are happy to report that the reactions from that corner have been very positive thus far as is evidenced from the reviews we’ve posted. "

 

[Whadyamean]

. You demonstrate a lack of respect for Holy Mother Church which is repulsing.

I wouldn’t take that as being against the Church, but against bureaucracy, which please don’t imply does’t exist in the hierarchy. You act like a person taking a neutral social error as a racial slur.

 

[itt23r]

To Abba

Newtons’ contribution is only to the focal point of the 2/3rds Rule. And he in fact postulated more than one possible date for the Crucifixion. And if you want to get technical he in fact preferred the year 34 AD for the event for some esoteric reason. But Harvard has since shown that that date would have conflicted with the life of Paul and they are the ones who get final credit for April 3, 33 AD. And again the 2/3rds Rule merely corroborates this assignment because by placing the focal point there all 27 of the dates it predicts during the time of Christ fall neatly into place on the Hebrew Calendar. And what they tell us about His life (his hidden years and everything else) is nothing short of spectacular.

 

[itt23r]

To Whatyamean

Nope not familiar with the method of non-dualism. But somehow I’m guessing it is another attempt to override Hume.

Theory, hypothesis, your right, I probably am one of those.

And no I didn’t draw on Wilber in writing the book. Should I have? From what little I know of him he seems to be heavily influenced by eastern religion, which my book might have greatly benefitted from. By I admitted in the Prologue (which my Webmaster still hasn’t included in the Website, argh) that I am not well versed in eastern thought and so the book is going to suffer as a result of it. But I also invite those who are well versed in oriental culture to take what I’ve written with the intent of making a more rounded universal philosophy. I would definitely like to see what the Buddhist or Taoist perspective on all of this would be.

And to Abba: as regards the bobblehead comment. That was more of a private thought that was never supposed to be in the final version of the website. My apologies for the offense. It will be corrected as soon as my webmaster deigns to get around to it.

 

[Whadyamean]

To Whatyamean

Nope not familiar with the method of non-dualism. But somehow I’m guessing it is another attempt to override Hume.

Nope. No way.

Theory, hypothesis, your right, I probably am one of those.

Too bad. You lose big points for that one.

And no I didn’t draw on Wilber in writing the book. Should I have? From what little I know of him he seems to be heavily influenced by eastern religion, which my book might have greatly benefitted from. By I admitted in the Prologue (which my Webmaster still hasn’t included in the Website, argh) that I am not well versed in eastern thought and so the book is going to suffer as a result of it.

Sorry, but yes, big time.

But I also invite those who are well versed in oriental culture to take what I’ve written with the intent of making a more rounded universal philosophy. I would definitely like to see what the Buddhist or Taoist perspective on all of this would be.

Those may yet be inadequate to the task in their public and popularized form. . Good luck, but it is a rally good idea. You might look up Shankara, Ramana Maharshi, and their many Western counterparts that one usually doesn’t hear about. What they speak of is not a cultural or religious dynamic and yet is, as far as i can tell, vitally fundamental to your considerations. They are vitally fundamental to any considerations, but are largely ignored because of all the immersion in relativism, even in the Church that it appears to be dogmatic correctness.

 

[JDaniel]

I will restate that the Bible itself tells of this 5th Gospel (Paul again in Colossians 1:23) so how can it be considered blasphemous. And it is hardly new revelation either since it is simply creation we are speaking of from the Big Bang to Calvary as seen through the lens ot the Logos.

The Catholic prescrption isn’t Sola Scriptura. It’s Sola Dei Verbum. Meaning by the Word of God alone. And the Word is found not just in the Bible but throughout the created universe. This book simply provides us a roadmap. But the revelation and yes the Gospel has always been there.

itt23r:

With all due respect, from Colossians 1:23, how do you derive there a fifth gospel book? Here’s the passage from The Jerusalem Bible, p 344 of pt. II, The New Testament:

“Now you are able to appear before him holy, (23) pure and blameless – as long as you persevere and stand firm on the solid base of the faith, never letting yourselves drift away from the hope promised by the Good News, which you have heard, which has been preached to the whole human race,***** and of which I, Paul, have become the servant.”

Note: ***** “Lit. ‘to all creation under the sky’.”

God bless,
jd

 

[itt23r]

So JD if the literal translation of Colossians 1:23 is “was preached in all the creation that is under heaven” How can you conclude that it was one or any of the NT Gospels since none have accomplished this feat even to this day? I would counter that the only gospel capable of reaching into the entire created Universe in Paul’s day (or ours) would be one thqt is interjected into every molecule of Creation. Much like the internal Law that is inherent to all living humans that Paul speaks to us in Romans, I think that it is a better interpretation that this gospel he is referring to is more of a universal gospel. The same as is found in Psalm 19:1. This gospel would certainly not countradict the other four but it has been given us all the same.

God bless.

 

[empther]

Thank you innocente for emailing the office of the Cincinattie archdioces chancellery.

Please let us know how it works out.

Putting this charlatan in his place is of great interest.

 

[empther]

Itt23r wrote:

And to Abba: as regards the bobblehead comment. That was more of a private thought that was never supposed to be in the final version of the website. My apologies for the offense. It will be corrected as soon as my webmaster deigns to get around to it.

Shows what an amateur he is.

I also have a website with my own domain name.
empresstheresa.com
I can make changes myself in thirty seconds.

By the way,
in case the so called “Accolades” on his website suddenly disappear,
here they are. Since itt23r claims they were written by priests of the Cincinatti archdiocese he can’t claim copyright.
　
http://www.thegospelofcreation.com/accolades.php

“In a nutshell, the author is proposing a sort of quantization of time, significant dates in history occurring according to a precise pattern by the design of God. He intends to show that this same pattern runs through both the Scriptures and through the natural history of the universe. If this is so, the implications are profound.” Fr. Joseph Kindel, MS, MDiv

“The book makes connections with faith, science and the Bible that I always sensed existed, but I have never seen articulated so well and so compellingly.” Fr. Thomas Nevels, MDiv.

“What The Gospel of Creation has impressively done is to not only show that a person’s faith in what is believed to be the inerrant Word of God can be very convincingly corroborated by the disciplines of math and science, but also that – perhaps more importantly – the disciplines of math and science can only best serve humanity when placed in conversation with the rich resources of faith.” Fr. Ryan Ruiz, MA, MDiv

“The author creatively uses vast resources from many disciplines to develop this monumental lifetime work …. a unified vision of the history of our universe which is clearly the creative work of the Word … a marvelous achievement.” Archdiocese of Cincinnati Chancery Office

 

[Abba]

There is a new website just launched that is advertizing a book that claims to provide irrefutable mathematical proof of the existence of God. Not only this, it also claims to prove that Jesus is His Son and that the religion He started 2000 years ago is Catholic. In fact there seems to be no end to what they claim to have discovered.

They further claim to have done this by dating the 6 Days of Creation using scientific data. And by this method they believe they’ve discovered the mathematical ratio the Pre-Socratic Greeks ascribed to the Logos. It is by setting this ratio to natural history that all of these claims come from. And the way they claim to prove all of this is by the fact that of the 27dates this method discerns during the time of Christ, 24 land on Jewish Holidays. The odds against this happening is obviously enormous. But not only that these Holidays illuminate these dates in Christ’s life so much it is like reading a whole new Gospel that declares on every page that the Catholic Church has been right all along about pretty much everything.

Has anyone heard about this book or website? Would anyone like to know more?

This deceptive presentation demonstrates disrespect for your brothers and sisters. Don’t you think?

You see, your whole approach is wrong to begin with, and this is before even looking at your numerology.

All glory and honor belongs to God.

Jesus Christ is the first and all things were made through him and for him.

Btw, are you a revert?

 

[Abba]

So why don’t I take it to the Bishop? Well I did. That was the first place I went after I finished the first manuscript What else should I have done? And you read what they said if you went to the Accolades section of the Website. I’ll reprint it here if you like.

They? The Bishop is one.

I would think the Bishop would give it to the priest ( I forget the title of the priest) who is in charge of giving the nihil obstat to make sure it is not harmful. What happened to that?
Oh, I just read a little more of your post and so - you did not get the nihil obstat.

Science and theology are equal parts of the equation. And if you have no appreciation of one side or the other you are really missing out. The book I’ve written is for those who have an appreciation for both.

And by all means please do complain to the Bishop. I’ve been trying to get his attention on this matter for years.

So, your Bishop and the Vatican is ignoring you and you call them bobble heads (not sure if that is a simply typo of yours and you mean to call them bubble heads).

Humility, humility, humility.

What is at stake here are souls. You do not want to become rich and infamous. Right?