Easiest Way to prove that there is a God

Recently I put the following question to an atheist:

‘Can you name a single thing in nature that has the property of hardness, but that is not hard itself?’

His reply was this:

‘That doesn’t make sense.’

Then again I wrote to him:

‘Thanks for your reply. From your reply it becomes clear that you also think that only a hard thing can have the property of hardness. I think this can further be translated to this: a hard thing will have the property of hardness simply because it is hard and not due to any other reason or factor lying outside of it. This is because if something can have the property of hardness due to some reason or factor lying outside of it, then in that case a thing that is not hard itself can also have this property. Am I clear up to this point?’

This made him furious. His angry retort was this:

‘Just how stupid do you think I am, Socrates? Tell me the point, don’t try to sell me this scholastical dialectic.’

So I had to say goodbye to him with this:

‘I am not trying to sell you anything. I am just trying to show that there is evidence for the existence of God. But if you feel offended, then I will have to stop right now.’

Actually the point that I was trying to establish was that a thing cannot have the property of hardness if it is not itself hard.

Now what I am going to write is for the sake of argument only. Nothing is being asserted here. That means the case I am going to discuss below is purely a hypothetical one.

Let us now suppose that what is really impossible has actually become possible, that there is a thing in nature that has the property of hardness but that is not hard itself. In that case what will we have to conclude from this? We will have to conclude that the thing in question must have received this so-called property of hardness from something external to it (say A). Now it may be the case that A has also received this property from B, B has received it from C and so on ad infinitum. So here there will be an infinite regress. In order to stop this infinite regress we will have to ultimately posit the existence of a hard thing in nature from which the thing in question could have received its property of hardness.

That means if we find a thing in nature that has the property of hardness but that is not hard itself, then that thing will give us the evidence that there is at least one hard thing in nature.

In a similar vein we can also say that if we find in nature a thing that has the property of softness but that is not soft itself, then that thing will give us the evidence that there is at least one soft thing in nature.

In the same vein again we can also say that if we find in nature an entity that has the property of timelessness but that is not timeless itself, then that entity will give us the evidence that there is at least one timeless entity in the universe.

Now is there an entity in nature that has the property of timelessness but that is not timeless itself? Yes, there is. Light is such an entity. SR has shown that at the speed of light time totally stops. That means light has the property of timelessness. But light is not timeless, because light can be extinguished at any time. No star will burn forever in the sky. But a really timeless entity can never cease to be, because for it time does not exist. I am very much alive at this moment, but at the very next moment I may die. But for a timeless entity this very next moment will never arrive, because it is not in time. Thus a really timeless entity can never cease to be. That means the case of light is akin to the case of a thing that has the property of hardness but that is not hard itself, which will further mean that the property of timelessness is not light’s own inalienable property. Rather we will have to presume that it has received this property from some entity external to it. Here also we will have to ultimately posit the existence of a timeless entity in the universe if we want to stop the infinite regress.

So, the property of timelessness of light shows that there is a timeless entity in this universe from which light has received its so-called property. As we have seen a timeless entity is also a deathless entity because it can never cease to be, so we can say that the property of light shows that there is a timeless and deathless entity in this universe.

An entity can have the property of timelessness due to two reasons:

1) If it is not in time;

2) Or, it can have this property due to some reason or factor lying outside of it.

Being not in time an entity will have this property simply by default. Being not in time it can never cease to be, because for it there will never be any second moment. As light can be extinguished at any time, so we cannot say about light that it has this property because it is not in time. Rather we will have to say that it has this property due to some reason or factor lying outside of it. So in order to stop the infinite regress here we will have to ultimately posit the existence of an entity that will have this property simply because it is not in time.

Simply put:

Hardness is the property of a hard thing only. So, if we find this property in something that is not hard itself, then from that we can infer that there is a hard thing in nature.

Similarly we can say that timelessness is the property of a timeless entity only. So, if we find this property in some entity that is not timeless itself, then from that we can also infer that there is a timeless entity in the universe.

Please also read my article ‘Property of Hardness’ here1.

Reference:

  1. https://sekharpal.wordpress.com/2016/11/14/property-of-hardness/
Advertisements

7 thoughts on “Easiest Way to prove that there is a God”

    1. From your comment it appears that perhaps you have not read my article carefully at all. Otherwise you would have found that there is at least one citation from science. Here is a quote from my article:

      ‘Now is there an entity in nature that has the property of timelessness but that is not timeless itself? Yes, there is. Light is such an entity. SR has shown that at the speed of light time totally stops. That means light has the property of timelessness. But light is not timeless, because light can be extinguished at any time.’

      As per SR time totally stops at the speed of light. So although light has the property of timelessness, yet it cannot be said that this property is an intrinsic property of light, because light can be extinguished at any time. A really timeless entity can never cease to be, it is eternal, everlasting. Light is not such an entity. Hardness is the intrinsic property of a hard thing; we cannot think of hardness as separately existing from a hard thing. But in case of light we find that light not being timeless itself is still having the property of timelessness. That means light has received this property from some other entity that has the property of timelessness as its intrinsic property.

      Here we do not require anything more from science for proving the existence of God. That is why I say that this is the easiest way.

      Like

      1. Give me some pier reviewed publications that show that the speed of light is “Timeless”.
        ——-
        Quote:
        “Hardness is the property of a hard thing only. So, if we find this property in something that is not hard itself, then from that we can infer that there is a hard thing in nature.”

        Why? Based on what?

        “Similarly we can say that timelessness is the property of a timeless entity only.”

        This assumes entity – why can’t the state before the universe is a thing be the thing that is timeless?

        What if time isn’t really real in the way we think it is?

        Why can’t the timeless thing be something natural?

        “So, if we find this property in some entity that is not timeless itself, then from that we can also infer that there is a timeless entity in the universe.”

        Does not follow.

        Like

  1. The only thing that stops at light speed are objects with mass. Photons do not have mass, electromagnetic waves have no mass. Thus, they can travel at the speed of light while still having the property of being affected by time.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s