Of God – a refined version

With reference to 2 of my blogs:
http://realmofenquiry.blogspot.com/2008/04/of-god.html
http://realmofenquiry.blogspot.com/2008/05/on-fragmented-christian-philosophy-of.html
[I have refined my idea of God – major credit goes to Spinoza – from the two posts as shown above.]

First, it must necessarily be maintained that God be innately coherent under the following proof. The non-existence of something and of nothingness itself is simpler than the existence of something and of nothingness itself. Since the simpler has to be truer, since lesser things are assumed, then the non-existence of something and of nothingness itself is more likely to be true. However, the essence of both something and nothingness exists. Thus the question of why there is existence of something and nothingness itself in the first place is begging. And so since reality is composed of the essence of something-ness and nothingness, then reality must be significant. And whether taken that God is an innate property or outside property (or being) of reality, it remains that whatever guides, creates, or both guides and creates reality must too be significant. And since insignificance is meant as having arbitrary value, but that since God is significant, then God is non-arbitrary, and therefore in essence coherent.

If God is to be perfect since he is significant – and he is indeed so – then it follows that his nature must be simplest of simplest, thus in itself self-sustaining. And this sense of self-sufficiency must therefore make the least assumptions, to the point where only self-sustaining axioms explain his nature. And therefore only the field of Pure Mathematics can explain his nature, since examples especially like those of Geometry are self-explanatory. God is therefore, since self-sufficient, un-derived. And thus no assuming axioms can be used to partition his nature, which his nature is of no known attribute. Thus he is not a thing – since it is what that which that has meaningful attributes.

Before we get any further, we must note that the argument from simplicity – as mentioned above – that it is simpler, particularly, for the non-existence of nothingness itself. That is, of the non-existence of what that which has no meaningful attribute. But remember that reality already exists, as opposed to that which is simpler is truer, thus that God exists in order to answer the begging question of existence at all.

It must also be noted that God cannot exist or be confined to a super-reality, since this would make him derivative of that super-reality, thus causing him to be insignificant and therefore arbitrary. It is almost certain to a humanist or atheist that I may even go further to conclude then that God does not exist if he be arbitrary. However, God remains necessarily significant in reference to the simplicity argument, and thus cannot necessarily exist or be confined to a super-reality.

And so God’s nature can be considered as being independent or part of reality, or be in reality itself.

For the former, that if God is independent of reality, and is self-explanatory, thus innately coherent, and since one’s essence reflects upon one’s nature, which therefore reflects upon his will and thus what he does or causes to exist, then reality – its existence having been answered by the begging issue of existence at all – is too innately coherent. Then if this is so, and that reality cannot be a derivative of any other, and thus does not need God, the conclusion of reality’s self-sufficiency contradicts the initial claim that God be necessarily independent of reality

Then, it must be necessary that God is an innate property of physical reality. And therefore it shall become that God is physical reality itself. This leads to another point regarding that of his perfection. For if he were a being, it cannot be contained with physical reality nor be independent or part of that reality, since to be a being is to have form, appearance, and these phenotypic issues are speculative since all perceivable forms have their defects. Thus it would be simpler that he be not a being, but a property innate of physical reality, but not a derivative of it. Like a mathematical equation, God is the group of variables in the undifferentiated equation, relying upon no other to explain its existence, and that derivatives of this equation of the variables form what we perceive as physical reality. These variables are the criteria of perfection and, as a whole, define the true essence of perfection. God is therefore within and around all things, the un-derived factor(s) of physical reality, of the truest of knowledge, the purest of intellect, the optimum of all perfection, and lastly, the coherence of all things.

And so since it is deemed that God be an innate property of physical reality, or that God is physical reality itself, then it can in fact be said that the path of nature is the will of God; the unbroken natural chain of events of physical reality is but God’s divine decree as applied for eternity. And to say that prayers get answered by God, despite the reasonable conditions and parameters as defined by the respective human(s) for the prayer, is but absurd in light of God being nature itself. That if humans are unable to recognize the natural constraints, then obviously their prayers go unanswered. That is, no matter whether they pray or not, God’s will is unbroken, and will not be forgone for a mere human’s ignorance of his eternal decree on nature itself.

As revealed in my previous posts, the Spinozian conception of God is in direct conflict with most, if not all, of the major religions’ conception of the nature of God. Their desire to intellectualize supposedly ‘holy’ texts is ultimately intellectual bankruptcy and have thus to resort to metaphoric interpretation or render as a cultural condition of the time of the respective book. If God is perfect, by the rational axioms I have revealed on the above, not only does Heaven not exist, or that God is not part or independent of reality, or that God cannot be separated via the Holy Trinity (since it is simpler to consider all perfection as a whole rather than parts), or that God has no infinite human attributes, but also that miracles do not occur at all.

When humans come to realize the Spinozian conception, they shall abandon their desire for Jihad, War, Genocide, and even for the prohibition of abortion and stem-cell research, and fuse into a united brotherhood that marvels at the coherence of all things, and the innate coherence of physical reality. They shall pray to God not as a sign of worship, but instead for the respect of and admiration for the tranquility of the perfection of coherence. What sense of honor, indeed, when the realization that God is nothing but nature comes forth – that God is nature and all physical reality itself.