Irrefutable proof of the existence of God

[Abba]

Nevertheless I still believe it is appropriate to see the entirety of Creation as a true Fifth Gospel written lovingly by the Word and my words in attempting to describe it do not come close to doing it justice.

Peace.

Peace to you too itt23r.

I think that you should actually take advantage of this great opportunity that is being offered to you in this website of receive criticisms from and reaction of Catholics to your theory. Gregg Alvarez has adviced you wisely when he proposed that you re-read your posts. I would add to that, that you consider seriously what objections are being presented here and why and perhaps rectify your presentation. I see you are already planning to do some changes, such as removing the offensive comments about the Church hierarchy. But, I think that your comments only reflects some serious fundamental issues in your presentation and your disposition which are going to offend people who will respond in various ways. Again, in order to get a better reception from Catholics and to even get someone at the Vatican to take the time to view your theory; you need to rectify your presentation. As it is now, you will get many doors closed and even slammed as you can see in this thread. I would humbly ask you to read all my posts again and consider the concerns expressed. I think that you will benefit from them.

Now, about the ‘gospel’. Calling your theory a ‘gospel’ will get you a lot of closed doors and calling it the Fifth Gospel will get you a lot of slammed doors. Calling yourself the ‘translator’ of the Word is another thing. All these things, are not Catholic and do not fly with Catholics. These are some of the things that you would need to rectify in your presentation of your theory of numbers. Note also, that you would have received a different reception if you would have presented Jesus first and yourself as a servant of Our Lord and demonstrated love and respect for your brothers and sisters and humility. Instead you have come on here as someone who has made a spectacular mysterious discovery for which to find out people have to pay, calling yourself the Translator of the Word, equating your theory with Sacred Scripture and so yourself to one of the evangelist, and anyone who criticizes or responds in an unwelcoming manner or just as much as present positive criticism as I have myself is just hating. Finally, you shoudl appreciate the time people are spending responding to you.

 

[Abba]

I am just going to quote this here and will comment later on it as I need to go right now. Let me give you a heads up to where I will be leading with this and more; specifically Paul’s cosmic christology, and that is that Paul was not referring in Col 1;23 to a fifth gospel or anything other than what the twelve apostles said and wrote about Jesus nor different than what Our Lord Jesus Christ himself revealed to us. Given this, it would be theologically incorrect and unfounded to name and by doing so equate a theory to the Four Gospels. Things need to be put in their rightful place.

1046 For the cosmos, Revelation affirms the profound common destiny of the material world and man:

For the creation waits with eager longing for the revealing of the sons of God . . . in hope because the creation itself will be set free from its bondage to decay. . . . We know that the whole creation has been groaning in travail together until now; and not only the creation, but we ourselves, who have the first fruits of the Spirit, groan inwardly as we wait for adoption as sons, the redemption of our bodies.

1147 God speaks to man through the visible creation. The material cosmos is so presented to man’s intelligence that he can read there traces of its Creator. Light and darkness, wind and fire, water and earth, the tree and its fruit speak of God and symbolize both his greatness and his nearness.

283 The question about the origins of the world and of man has been the object of many scientific studies which have splendidly enriched our knowledge of the age and dimensions of the cosmos, the development of life-forms and the appearance of man. These discoveries invite us to even greater admiration for the greatness of the Creator, prompting us to give him thanks for all his works and for the understanding and wisdom he gives to scholars and researchers. With Solomon they can say: “It is he who gave me unerring knowledge of what exists, to know the structure of the world and the activity of the elements. . . for wisdom, the fashioner of all things, taught me.”

1152 Sacramental signs. Since Pentecost, it is through the sacramental signs of his Church that the Holy Spirit carries on the work of sanctification. The sacraments of the Church do not abolish but purify and integrate all the richness of the signs and symbols of the cosmos and of social life. Further, they fulfill the types and figures of the Old Covenant, signify and make actively present the salvation wrought by Christ, and prefigure and anticipate the glory of heaven.

668 “Christ died and lived again, that he might be Lord both of the dead and of the living.” Christ’s Ascension into heaven signifies his participation, in his humanity, in God’s power and authority. Jesus Christ is Lord: he possesses all power in heaven and on earth. He is “far above all rule and authority and power and dominion”, for the Father “has put all things under his feet.” Christ is Lord of the cosmos and of history. In him human history and indeed all creation are “set forth” and transcendently fulfilled.

2500 The practice of goodness is accompanied by spontaneous spiritual joy and moral beauty. Likewise, truth carries with it the joy and splendor of spiritual beauty. Truth is beautiful in itself. Truth in words, the rational expression of the knowledge of created and uncreated reality, is necessary to man, who is endowed with intellect. But truth can also find other complementary forms of human expression, above all when it is a matter of evoking what is beyond words: the depths of the human heart, the exaltations of the soul, the mystery of God. Even before revealing himself to man in words of truth, God reveals himself to him through the universal language of creation, the work of his Word, of his wisdom: the order and harmony of the cosmos-which both the child and the scientist discover-“from the greatness and beauty of created things comes a corresponding perception of their Creator,” “for the author of beauty created them.”

[Wisdom] is a breath of the power of God, and a pure emanation of the glory of the Almighty; therefore nothing defiled gains entrance into her. For she is a reflection of eternal light, a spotless mirror of the working of God, and an image of his goodness. For [wisdom] is more beautiful than the sun, and excels every constellation of the stars. Compared with the light she is found to be superior, for it is succeeded by the night, but against wisdom evil does not prevail. I became enamored of her beauty. scborromeo.org/ccc.htm

I suggest that you pray on it all and consider rectifying the problems of your presentation. Again, this is even before people would open a book to read your theory. There you should keep in mind honest scholarship and remembering to give credit where credit is due. Futhermore, you need to be humble and wait for your Bishop to authorize the publication. You and your work may benefit greatly from you being obedient to the Church and humble.

Peace,

Abba

 

[itt23r]

Thank you Abba for the advice. I would like to comment on both of your posts and will but first let me go back to some of the earlier ones.

 

[itt23r]

To Dandingo;

First thanks for the encouraging words.

Second: I would love to get a review from a recognized apologist. Anyone know how to do that? I tried it last December. Sent a copy of the “Intro” to Scott Hahn with a letter I was certain would persuade him to read it. I later learned it never got past his secretaries. And to the best of my understanding they themselves didn’t even read it. Nothing against Scott Hahn or his secretaries, Those apologists out there that have any kind of national status must receive tons of requests for endorsements. and most certainly the majority have to be round filed without being read. It doesn’t mean I’m going to stop trying. but the first seems to be making a case for it.

 

[itt23r]

To JD:

Back at you. Why wouldn’t God speak to us mathematically?

No really you say that most people don’t think that way and I am wondering if that is true. i can of course only speak for myself and a handful of other people. But I have always felt that buried deep within the Bible is a secret begging to be set free. And I think a lot of other people have felt the same. And so you have attempts at deciphering it like the Bible Code, the Davinci Code, the Kabala, Sacred Geometry, Harold Camping. etc. etc. Failures all of them but it is not the failure I am concerned with as much as what seems to me to be inbred into all of us - the need to know. We’re all instilled with the need to try and figure it all out. And along with inspiration it gives us the Bible also seems to (maybe not all but I think many of) us as though it holds a key.

Now many of you would like to put me and my 2/3rds Rule on the same list as Harold Camping or the Davinci Code. But I can tell you two reasons it doesn’t belong. All of the thousands of attempts to unlock the Bible’s secrets have always ended producing a new theology. The 2/3rds Rule creates no new theology, It rather corroborates a theology that has already been in existence for 2,000 years. No new revelations. No new Churches to be erected. That in itself is pretty unique.

But the thing that has gotten me most is there are no loose ends to be tied up. No missing data points or missing data. Every historical milestone you would expect to be on such a timeline (if it was truly from God) is there. And there is nothing on it that shouldn’t be on but is just to get everything else on it. In other words it seems to possess a divine economy. The math is that elegant. Most of the attempts I’ve seen in the past are full of fudge factors and all different types of anecdotal evidence invoked soley to account for each missing data point. Not so with the Rule. There is only onle rule involved and it seems to catch everything. But on that one you’ll just have to take my word, until you’ve seen it for yourself.

As for me I’m constantly being reminded of the book “The Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy.” And I’m just trying to get the word out that I figured it all out before the Vogons blow up the planet…

 

[itt23r]

To Jochoa:

Thank you for the kind words

And may the peace and joy of Christ be with you also.

 

[itt23r]

To Abba

1st Post

I’ve been called on the carpet by a couple of you already for being a little hard to take, overbearing, uncharitable, etc. And so please allow me to publicly apologize for any offensive thing I may have said here. I will try to do better.

As for the way I burst into this Forum you have to admit I got your attention. The truth is though I have no clue how to present this material to the public so on occasions like this I always fall back on the old head first dive. And since I have been butting my head against the ground now for 6 years trying to get the word out to no avail I can obviously use all the help I can get in amending my technique. So thanks for your suggestions. I have already gotten that one offensive remark you noticed removed from the Website.

Regarding the criticism I really do appreciate every critical remark being made. Criticism is something that is sorely missing in polite company. Not so on the internet. People say things to you here they’d never dream of saying to your face. And even though you’re Christians, no one can accuse you of not being a tough crowd, either. (Not quite as tough as the atheist forum I dove into last month but close). But I always knew you would be tough. I had no false expectations that this was going to be easy It’s never easy. But I also knew something coming in that none of you did. I have the truth on my side and I’m neither stupid or crazy. So armed with that we’ve gotten this far. hopefully the rest of the way won’t be so rocky.

And finally, as to calling this discovery a fifth Gospel I fully understand what you are saying and how it can be misconstrued but i really don’t know what else to call this discovery other than a Gospel. For just as it was when Christ entered Jerusalem and He said to the Pharisees “I tell you, if these become silent, the stones will cry out!” I believe Him. I really do think that the Gospel screams to us from every pore of Creation. Now the book I’ve written is not that Gospel. It is about that Gospel and maybe I need to make that clearer. But maybe to my detriment I have always had a flair for the dramatic so that is where I left it. And calling myself its translator, what else should I call myself? I’m certainly not the author of this Gospel. God is. Post 2 next.

 

[empther]

As for the way I burst into this Forum you have to admit I got your attention.

Which is probably the real reason he’s here.

The truth is though I have no clue how to present this material to the public so on occasions like this I always fall back on the old head first dive. And since I have been butting my head against the ground now for 6 years trying to get the word out to no avail I can obviously use all the help I can get in amending my technique.

By his own admission, or claim,
those four “Accolades” on his website, three from priests and one from the Cincinati archdicese chancellor, are six years old.
So if his ridiculous “2/3rds rule” is so revolutionary and an irrefutable proof of God’s existence,
how come those three priests and the archbishop didn’t drop everything they were doing and rush to Rome to get John Paul II involved? JPII would have loved it.

This simple point seems to be beyond the understanding of some people on this thread.

 

[Abba]

To Abba

And finally, as to calling this discovery a fifth Gospel I fully understand what you are saying and how it can be misconstrued but i really don’t know what else to call this discovery other than a Gospel. For just as it was when Christ entered Jerusalem and He said to the Pharisees “I tell you, if these become silent, the stones will cry out!” I believe Him. I really do think that the Gospel screams to us from every pore of Creation. Now the book I’ve written is not that Gospel. It is about that Gospel and maybe I need to make that clearer. But maybe to my detriment I have always had a flair for the dramatic so that is where I left it. And calling myself its translator, what else should I call myself? I’m certainly not the author of this Gospel. God is. Post 2 next.

Misconstrued? It is sacriligious. You really have no idea how patient people are being here with you. I think your presentation demonstrates spiritual immaturity and lack of catechism. Mind you, I am very spiritually immature and lack plenty of cathechism especially in comparison to many of the members of CAF. Yet, even I, with my limited knowledge can tell you that your presentation demonstrate these things.

I humbly advice you as you work with this endevour to attend Mass every Sunday, receive the Sacrament of Confession regularly and the Eucharist. I recommend the Divine Office as I find that it is really spiritually enriching. Are you familiar with that? Do you have a spiritual director?

Are you a revert?

Peace,

Abba

 

[atheistgirl]

Seeing as he’s linked to his website, don’t forget about backlinks and google rankings

Sarah x

 

[itt23r]

To Abba Post 2 and beyond

Sorry it has taken so long to get back to you on this one. I was trying to fully understand what you were saying.

But with regard to what I believe is your contention that there is but one way to interpret Colossians 1:23, I’m going to have to adamantly disagree. I’ve personally found Scripture to often be multilayered with many possible interpretations. I also believe that it is possible to have multiple interpretations that are equally legitimate and valid. This layering of Scriptural truths is one of the reasons so many people have come to recognize the divine influence because you can read it over and over and find new things in it all the time. And I believe the modern Catholic Church gives us all free range to interpret Scripture as it suits us as long as our interpretations do not conflict with Church doctrine and dogma. And again as you say making use of the Sacraments and prayer are essential for helping to discern troublesome verses. But again there can be many possible legitimate interpretations.

As for me, because I have a perspective of the Word that goes far beyond the Bible into the entirety of Creation itself, when I am given a choice in a Scripture between a universal or more parochial view (as in Colossians 1:23) I generally gravitate to the universal view. You are certainly free to have an alternate interpretation. But it doesn’t make my interpretation wrong.

On this fifth gospel matter we’re just going to have to agree to disagree. I am of the opinion that it is ireverent not to see the created work of the Word as a fifth gospel. I say this mainly because as an atheist i was blinded to the truths of Scripture and so it was only through my study of this fifth gospel that ultimately brought me back to God. How can I turn my back on it now? I believe I have been commissioned to spread the word about this fifth gospel. I’m sorry that it seems to offend you so.

And finally to what I believe is an accusation that I am not a regular church goer. Let me just say that in my conversion I partially attribute it to a personal Eucharistic miracle. As Catholics who were brought up with the Sacraments (and yes I am a revert) there can be very little appreciation for what we have. Taking Communion every week is often like turning a light on in the daytime - barely noticeable. But take Communion after being separated from it for a long time. For me it was like turning a light on at midnight. My devotion to the Eucharist is enormous. I learned in that one moment that Christ is present in that great gift of the altar whether we believe it or not. And from that one truth I was able to find my way to all the other truths professed by the Holy Mother Church. The Sacraments (especially Communion) are the one main place in our world where the natural and the supernatural meet. And I never tire of telling people of them whenever I have the oppportunity. I might also add that the 2/3rds Rule has a lot to say about all the Sacraments as well.

Peace

 

[empther]

itt23r,

From your very first post on this thread,
for which you joined this board only two days earlier, Dec 7, 2011,
you have been a deceitful scam artist.

There is a new website just launched

** oh, really? know anything about it? ]** 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 ** “they?” you don’t know them? :banghead: :slapfight: ]** claim to have discovered.

This is not how a devout Catholic gives good example.

War

 

[Orangebookbag]

I think I’ll butt in and say I’m intrigued albeit very skeptical of the claims made by itt23r, and I wish more of the book was available for free on the internet (might help sell copies too).

May I also add that empther, you’re being very uncharitable in your approach. Think of the words of St. Paul in first Corinthians. It’s better to be cheated than to live with malice or bear a grudge (I’m paraphrasing).

 

[GreggAlvarez]

… I disagree.

Well, I suppose I would buy a book reviewed by me, but still… Who cares about Gregg Alvarez?

… Absolutely not. God does seem to work on a time schedule. Scripture is full of references to this fact. (I can cite some of you like). And this does not make creation determininstic in either its hard or soft varieties. What it does do however is corroborate Church teaching on Mary’s sinless nature. Every data point found by the 2/3rds Rule relies on God with but this one exception. Here and only here does God rely on Man if salvation history is going to keep going to completion. So would God rely on a sinful person to keep everything on schedule or on one that is wthout blemish? Mary’s answer was quick and without hesitation despite the danger it put her in. And not only can we see in this just how highly God regarded her but also how much we are indebted to her.

Fair enough, but not fair with my position. I’m saying that the article CAN lead to that conclusion. That conclusion is possible to make based on what you have typed up in that little article. I didn’t say it DOES create a deterministic view. I said it begs the question of determinism. That is, it leaves reasonable room to ask if the mathematics suggests determinism.

How does the 2/3rds rule prove that God relied on Mary to advance the salvation to His people? You don’t have to reveal everything, just a glimpse of how it does that. I’m curious to see whether or not the content of the book will leave that tiny opening for deterministic thoughts to enter.

Read the book and decide for yourself.

Well, not yet. I’m reading Brave New World and then I have nice little list which includes Crime and Punishment, The Brothers Karamazov, The Rebel, The Order of Things… You have to convince me to put your 700-page tome in front of those, or at least the introduction.

… that section of the website is strictly for those who’ve read the book

Gotcha. I’m still curious as to the logistics of creating 4-D things… You don’t have to reveal any part of the book to answer that, do you?

…I agree and will probably amend that essay soon to give more information

Awesome!

…Correct again but I addressed this earlier. Irrefutable proof is ultimately a personal matter and as an atheist it comes to you when you have finally seen so much evidence for the existence of God that you break down and cross over that barrier of probability to the land of knowing without doubt. And as you and I both know it is solely the grace of God that allows it.

I think I agree with this. I will have to ponder.

I certainly agree with that last sentence!

By the way, my preference for continuing this discussion would be by e-mail. Do you have an e-mail

Well, if your intention is getting it out to the public, then it may be better to stay in here. Remember, the ones posting here aren’t the only ones reading. There are about 1900 views to this thread and only about 115 posts. Do the math…

Anyway, as a comparison to the Gospels in Scripture, why is your book longer than the whole New Testament combined? While the Gospels aren’t super easy to understand, they do have a way about them that they can be easy to understand by people of all ages and expertise (or no expertise).

Even then, the Gospels have a teacher called the Catholic Church guided by the Holy Spirit. Do you believe that your book will be on the same level as THE Gospels in that it will be infallibly preached (by non-specialists, mind you) to all the world? Explain your answer. Explain how it will be on the same level of the Gospels as far as revelation is concerned. Explain how it will be preached by non-specialists to non-specialists. Explain how it will have worldwide reception even if it is indeed irrefutable. Explain anything else my stupid brain can’t think of.

 

[itt23r]

To orangebookbag

Yes i am coming to that same conclusion, that i need to put more information on the site as to what the 2/3rds Rule really is. So let me give you here a little bit more.

It’s division by three, that’s all there is to it. Starting from the Big Bang you simply go 2/3rds of the way to Calvary with each step.(and dividing by three is how you get there). The first six steps take you through the six Days of Creation and it continues on after that giving us more and more information until it ends at that great and terrible day that our Lord died for our sins.

And to give you another taste consider the first Day of Creation (characterized by the pronouncement, “Let there be light”) which began around 15 billion years ago with the creation of light at the Big Bang and ended about 5 billion years ago with the ignition of our sun sending its light down on our primordial earth. The book’s contention is that this is also the place where God first planted the seeds of Life in our Universe (somewhere out there in our infant solar system) and that this is the real Light that typified the Day giving it it’s true purpose. To paraphrase John, the Big Bang was not the Light (nor was the Sun). The real light which gives light to every man (at the end of this Day in natural history anyway) was Life.

And to those who have claimed that the Bible is flawed because the 6 Days failed to give any fanfare to the creation of microbial life, the Bible when read through the lens of the 2/3rds Rule fixes that problem (in several places actually). Hope that helps.

 

[itt23r]

To GreggAlvarez

This is getting a little cumbersome to respond to so I am going to respond to each comment with a separate post.

Well, I suppose I would buy a book reviewed by me, but still… Who cares about Gregg Alvarez?.

Its not who you are Gregg, its what you say. I am coming to the conclusion that I should just let us common folk give the reviews and who cares what the elitists think? When have they ever been right?

 

[itt23r]

To GreggAlvarez

Fair enough, but not fair with my position. I’m saying that the article CAN lead to that conclusion. That conclusion is possible to make based on what you have typed up in that little article. I didn’t say it DOES create a deterministic view. I said it begs the question of determinism. That is, it leaves reasonable room to ask if the mathematics suggests determinism.

How does the 2/3rds rule prove that God relied on Mary to advance the salvation to His people? You don’t have to reveal everything, just a glimpse of how it does that. I’m curious to see whether or not the content of the book will leave that tiny opening for deterministic thoughts to enter…

Well again the 2/3rds Rule doesn’t prove anything but i think the fact that Mary’s choice is the only reliance the timeline has in a human factor says a great deal. There are no other direcct connection by the 2/3rds Rule to the choices of any of the great personages in salvation history. not since the fall anyways. There are indirect connections to Moses and Abraham, etc. etc. but nothing direct. And I think this is in complete accord with Scripture. God can make a Moses or an Abraham from anyone as long as we keep saying yes to Him every time he makes a request. But because of our fallen nature aren’t even the best of us often inclined to tell God to wait. Sure God we’ll do that for you but how about tomorrow?

In contrast God shows through the 2/3rds Rule that He has perfect confidence that Mary is not only going to do the right thing, she’s going to do it at the exact right time (or in the fullness of time as Scripture puts it). How have we as Christians forgotten to celebrate the sheer magnitude of this singular event in Salvation History? By the 2 great Holidays connected to the Annunciation (1 Jewish, one secular) the 2/3rds Rule has a remedy for this as well.

 

[itt23r]

To GreggAlvarez

responses to three more of your comments

Well, not yet. I’m reading Brave New World and then I have nice little list which includes Crime and Punishment, The Brothers Karamazov, The Rebel, The Order of Things… You have to convince me to put your 700-page tome in front of those, or at least the introduction.

Judging by this list you are going to be tied up for a while and Dostoevsky is a tough act for me to try to nudge into. The best I can say is my “Intro” will take you a couple of hours tops to read and digest and help you decide better if “the tome” is worth reading.

As for the 4-D image it is as you thought. just a 3-D representation with a time element thrown in. And we’re still having trouble getting the graphics right on that one.

Also instead of waiting for the updated “What is the 2/3rds Rule?” essay, take a look at the reponse to orangebookbag. Everything that will go into that essay is in that post.

 

[empther]

May I also add that empther, you’re being very uncharitable in your approach. Think of the words of St. Paul in first Corinthians. It’s better to be cheated than to live with malice or bear a grudge (I’m paraphrasing).

Un hunh.

There are other scriptural verses:

Thou shalt not steal.

Thou shalt not bear false witness.

Aren’t these important anymore?

 

[itt23r]

To GreggAlvarez

Last response to your long post.

Well, if your intention is getting it out to the public, then it may be better to stay in here. Remember, the ones posting here aren’t the only ones reading. There are about 1900 views to this thread and only about 115 posts. Do the math…

Anyway, as a comparison to the Gospels in Scripture, why is your book longer than the whole New Testament combined? While the Gospels aren’t super easy to understand, they do have a way about them that they can be easy to understand by people of all ages and expertise (or no expertise).

Even then, the Gospels have a teacher called the Catholic Church guided by the Holy Spirit. Do you believe that your book will be on the same level as THE Gospels in that it will be infallibly preached (by non-specialists, mind you) to all the world? Explain your answer. Explain how it will be on the same level of the Gospels as far as revelation is concerned. Explain how it will be preached by non-specialists to non-specialists. Explain how it will have worldwide reception even if it is indeed irrefutable. Explain anything else my stupid brain can’t think of.

I concur with you on the first paragraph.

As to the second paragraph take a look at the table of contents and you will see that a large portion of the book is made up of appendices. and the 1st three chapters and chapter 5 are really just a rehash of where science and theology stand right now in their positions. The new material is concentrated within the chapters 4, 6, 7 and the Epilogue. That’s about 350 pages and half the size of the entire book.

And as I was explaining to ABBA the Gospel of Creation absolutely IS on the same level as all the other four gospels. However my book IS NOT that Gospel. It is merely a book about that Gospel, a book trying to present to the public some of the wonders contained in that Gospel which can be found throughout the created universe. And my book certainly has no business on the same ambo with Sacred Scripture anymore than any other book written about the Gospels.

Peace brother