After death, there's nothing to wait for or to see. It's called a void.
Since we've revived this dead thread, I might point out that Goedel's Incompleteness Theorom shows that there may be true statements that cannot be proven.
Goedel proved the existence of God(like), though he did not publish it himself . I have a copy of the paper.
satt_fs wrote:Goedel proved the existence of God(like), though he did not publish it himself . I have a copy of the paper.
MY GUESS: He did no such thing. Many have claimed to prove the existence of god. I've never seen any supposed "proof" that holds up to even casual challenge.
Goedel's essay entitled "Ontological proof" is very brief one about a page and a quarter. It appears to say that the existence with all the "positive" properties exists even if it is not known what "positive" means in an accidental world.
Dagga argues that "After death God will prove he exists, or reaffirm that he doesn't, all we have to do is wait and see." I thought the question was whether or not we can prove the non-existence of God.
By the way, I can use your logic just as fruitfully: After death *$%?@ will prove he exists, or reaffirm that he doesn't; all we have to do is wait and see." Does my arguement inspire you to believe in *$%?@?
If so, I've got a bridge to sell you.
By the way, has anyone heard from BoGoWo?
satt_fs wrote:Goedel's essay entitled "Ontological proof" is very brief one about a page and a quarter. It appears to say that the existence with all the "positive" properties exists even if it is not known what "positive" means in an accidental world.
Ontological "proofs" for the existence of god never work...because ontological proofs are not proofs. They are really nothing more than arguments.
JLNobody wrote:Dagga argues that "After death God will prove he exists, or reaffirm that he doesn't, all we have to do is wait and see." I thought the question was whether or not we can prove the non-existence of God.
By the way, I can use your logic just as fruitfully: After death *$%?@ will prove he exists, or reaffirm that he doesn't; all we have to do is wait and see." Does my arguement inspire you to believe in *$%?@?
If so, I've got a bridge to sell you.
By the way, has anyone heard from BoGoWo?
If there is no god...how can god "reaffirm that he does not" exist?
Frank Apisa wrote:Ontological "proofs" for the existence of god never work...because ontological proofs are not proofs. They are really nothing more than arguments.
"Ontological" in the nature of the proof, but Goedel utilized the axiomatic system of modern logic.
I do know that Jerry Falwell offers a special edition gilt-edged, leather-bound Holy Bible for a fairly hefty price ($400 - it is quite beautiful). If the family buys two or more copies, then a special bonus offer kicks in where if the buyer does not reach heaven upon death, then the full price paid is refunded.
My bad; it's "Godel's Incompleteness Theorem."
Goedel's Incompleteness Theorem: One cannot prove the consistency of mathematics if it is consistent.
Goedel's Essay on God(like): One can think about God(like) consistently even if one does not know what the positive values are.
(Gödel, Goedel, or Godel)
