Mathematics - Proof of God

Discussion in 'General Discussions' started by Angela888, Sep 26, 2014.

  1. Mathematical proof of God !

    This is one of the simplest and most powerful proofs of God there is – no one with any ability to reason could say there isn’t a God after reading this !

    A simple equation:

    2% + 2% = 4%

    2% of Carbon + 2% of Oxygen = Carbon Dioxide (CO2)

    1% of Carbon + 1% of Oxygen = Carbon Dioxide

    0% of Carbon + 0% Oxygen = Nothing

    So what does this mean ?

    This means, that according to simple maths, 1 + 1 = 2, ergo 1% + 1% = 2%

    Forgetting ‘evolution’ arguments for now, How did the Universe begin ?

    How could matter have been created ?

    If 1% of matter (or even anti-matter, or dark matter or any substance or sound wave or light wave or anything) + 1% of something else could possibly in a 10 to the power of infinity chance create a ‘Big Bang’, which then in turn would create in astronomically impossible odds the world, the galaxies and the solar systems, then it must be understood that:

    0% of matter (sound waves, light waves or anything) + 0% of anything = Nothing


    There is no point of origin for the creation of Anything – it is scientifically impossible to create anything (to cause the Big Bang) from Nothing !

    It is mathematically impossible to create 1+% from 0% + 0%



    This leaves only one alternative:

    A Creator ! Something, Someone outside of the laws of Science – that Created Scientific laws – A God – The most powerful Scientific Mind in the Universe !

    This is absolute proof that there is a Creator

    When people stand before the Judgment seat of God, all the Creator has to say to them is:

    “Did you understand mathematics – even the simplest form of mathematics? Then you are without excuse ! ”

    Because with this knowledge (the knowledge of what is created) it should prompt the person to genuinely seek if there is a God.

    If you want to know If there is a God, please pray this prayer (You have nothing to lose by praying this prayer, except a few moments of your time, and it is wise, considering that the greatest gamble in life is whether there is a life after death or not !)

    “God, I realize that the Universe is the greatest and most astounding thing in Creation, and I realize that there is every chance that it was Created, and not made by accident, so, if you are real, please show me in some way, whether through wisdom, understanding, miracle or anything. Please help me to understand how to obey you if you are truly the Creator.”

    (Note: Sometimes the way of God is to work in the understanding of the person, as well as working out circumstances. Some are privileged to receive miraculous signs from God, and there are many testimonies of these things, one of the reasons God works like this is because God is trying to develop understanding for the person on a natural level.

    The mystery of God – the language of God is FAITH – if all God had to do was prove to everyone through conventional means that He is the Creator – there would be absolutely no need for faith. The Lord has given everyone on the planet everything they need to at least have some level of faith: The Creation, Conscience, Emotion, Life, Understanding, and much more.)

    Based on all the evidence, which is beyond overwhelming, for God, it would be unwise not to seek for some answers about who God is and the meaning of life !
    Major and dUmPsTeR say Amen and like this.
  2. True. Just FYI CO2 is 1 Carbon, 2 Oxygen (carbon dioxide) and 1 Carbon and 1 Oxygen is carbon monoxide (CO). Percentages don't reflect this connection. If you want mathematical proof of God, check out

    And Welcome :)


    Again, Welcome to CFS
  3. You might want to consider that 2% of 100 plus 2% of 1oo is 4o which is 2% of 200.

    By volume if the carbon were hot enough for the carbon to be a gas, then the carbon might be 50% of the volume and the oxygen might be 50% of the volume.

    By mass the ratio is 12/32 or 3/8.
  4. Good stuff!! I agree completely.
  5. Aquinas has a similar argument

    The Argument from Efficient Cause - Thomas Aquinas
  6. I saw a theatrical performance. I think it was called Midnight Catechism. I did not understand most of the jokes, but my mother and grandmother laughed so much they almost peed in the chairs. At the end of he performance, the nun who played the main character asked for questions from the audience. I asked for an explanation of the Holy Trinity. She said it is one times one times one.
    Abdicate likes this.
  7. I always felt that the Big Bang was a novel scientific proof for the existence of God. Not everyone agreed with me, I know of a lot of Christians who greatly oppose the Big Bang, and I don't think they really know why. There is, I think confusion about the difference between a non-denominational observation, and a denominational interpretation. I think the Big Bang is really what I would call an extraordinary act of God (i.e. a Miracle). The fact there is little to interpret it in any meaningful way is not, IMO, indicative of it being wrong, but of it testifying the eternal existence of a Creator.
    Ghid likes this.
  8. Yes, that sounds reasonable to me. Or, as the Zen Master would say, the arrow missed the monkey, and then, OMG, it hit the monkey.

    Or maybe Prophyry would say, the Big Bang says nothing about the existence of God because it is a scientific theory, not a theological dogma. They are not in the same category.

    Science deals with disprovable ideas. Religion deals with non-disprovable ideas. They are something like the two twains, which approach each other on the same track. The engineer on one is Norse. The engineer on the other is a Souse. Norse is norse, and Souse is souse, so never the twains shall meet.
  9. An Atheist with an IQ of 50 would shred you to bits with this as it is only a flawed argument and not proof.
  10. Isn't big bang all about something out of nothing? They simply say that something can come out of nothing..
    Ghid likes this.
  11. Forgive me, but that appears to be gibberish, proof of nothing.

    The problem with the Big Bang being a natural event is that it violates the laws of thermodynamics.
  12. Why does anyone even try to prove the existence of God? You can't do it ever no matter what you do. If you could prove it then tell me what faith is for.

    We are not meant to have solid empirical evidence or proof. We are meant to have faith. You either believe or disbelieve.
    Ghid likes this.
  13. In Hawkings Book, A Brief History of Time, he mentions Hubble's discovery in 1929 that the stars are moving away in all directions. That suggests that everything was initially all in one place, but I don't think its says anything about the source of everything. He also says that the scientific rules that explain the universe are contradictory.

    May I change the subject slightly?

    I don't know why I think this is so funny. I can't write about it without laughing. :ROFLMAO:

    To me the interesting point is that in science when people have a mystery, they look for an answer usually resulting in the discovery of a new mystery. In religion when people find a mystery, that is the answer and the quest ends. Seems to me, that if the question under discussion truely is a theological question, a non-disprovable question, then stopping at the discovery of a mystery might be good. But if the question is disprovable, maybe the discussion has crossed through the gate like the fools who hate knowledge.
  14. I sort of lost you there!!
    Ghid likes this.
  15. Well, I tried to say two things.

    As far as I know, the Big Bang is not about something coming from nothing. I have heard of the idea that matter comes from space. That might be confused with something coming from nothing, but I am not sure if that is really a current scientific idea.

    The Big Bang is about the expanding universe and everything beginning at the same point. Hawking says in his book that an astronomer named Hubble discovered that the galaxies are all moving away. The universe is expanding, which fits with the idea that the universe began at a point. As I understand, the expanding universe fits well with General Relativity. And sometime in the fifties astronomers in England discovered the residual radiation from the so called Big Bang. I don't have a footnote for those last two, except that I learned about them in dinner table conversation.

    And I tried to say that IMO science should not poke around in the religion, and vice versus. Hawking is an expert about his field of science, so I am willing to accept what he says about science. I suspect he knows little about religion except maybe he read Genesis 1. Of course, Hawking, like Isaac Newton, might be an expert theologian, but as far as I know his knowledge ends with Genesis 1.

Share This Page