Can the descriptions of God, claimed by the Bible, be proven? In Descartes’
Meditations, Descartes logically proved the existence of an infinite and
truthful being. The Holy Bible describes God, our creator. I plan to compare the
logically proven infinite being (God) and the Biblical God and see if their
traits mirror each other. If they do then it would prove, if not give strong
evidence, that they are one in the same. First I will restate Descartes’ proof
of an infinite and truthful being. P1- Ideas are either internal, external, or
innate. P2- The idea of infinity is not internal. P3- The idea of infinity is
not external. P4- The idea of infinity is therefore innate. P5- Any cause must
be greater than or equal to it’s effect. P6- An infinite being is the cause of
the idea of infinity. P1-P6 proves that their exists an infinite being. P7-
Established is an infinite, truthful being. Since it’s infinite, then it’s
infinitely wise. In Plato’s The Republic, Socrates proved that a wiseman would
be Just. Therefore, an infinate being would be infinitely Just. So if the Bible
is truth, and the Biblical God exists, then God would be infinitely wise and
Just as well. Following this logic, everything God carries out in the Bible must
follow the guidelines of Justice. If there is an instance where God displayed an
act of injustice, it proves at least the prophet to be false. I have not
inspected every line in the Bible nor do I plan to. But I will go over some of
the main principles of Christianity, with a focus on Catholosism, and see if
they follow that which is Just. The chose Catholosism for two reasons. One is
because it’s my religion and it’s the one I know the most about. Second is
because of it’s views of Salvation, which is the main focus of religion. The
Bible is translated in many different ways by different religions. Many
religions believe that all you need is faith. Catholosism believes in faith and
works. I will use the most extreme view, which is Catholosism. The steps to
salvation are that you must have faith. When you have faith then you must also
have repented all mortal sin.. In Catholosism the two kinds of sin are Mortal
and Veniel. Mortal sins are called mortal because what it does is kill your
salvation. You must repent a mortal sin to receive God’s grace once again. A
Veniel sin is a less serious one that still lets you receive God’s grace. That
is, they need not be repented. If your soul is clean of all mortal sins then you
are fine. If not then your going to hell. Now, does this follow in the logic of
what an infinite and truthful being would do? Well a sin is an instance where
you gave in to your desires. An Ideal human would never do that. Any instance
where you put appetite before wisdom are all covered within the ten
commandments. Therefore the idea of “sin” is sound. Then comes the
separation of a veniel sin and mortal sin. One might think that the separation
is God passing judgement on you. Passing judgement on someone to live forever in
hell would harm them. It would make the Judgement maker unjust and less noble.
Therefore an infinitely wise being, God, would not do this. He doesn’t do
this. The separation is not a passing of judgement. God makes rules and lets you
choose your path. If you chose one that would land you in hell, then God will
give you the opportunity to repent and clean your soul of that mortal sin.
Evidence also shows that you may commit as many Venial sins as you want. He does
not use a balance scale to determine you salvation. Which proves that it is in
no way passing judgement. Many may still argue, why is Catholosism preaching
‘final judgement by the father’. If you examine the term Judgement, it means
to make a decision or form an opinion. Since God is all knowing, he need not
make decisions or opinion since he knows all that is truth. Therefore, neither
would it be Just or possible for God for pass Judgement. Judgement, as stated in
Catholosism, is used for lack of better term. The real definition is ‘looking
into your soul to find truth.’ That truth will determine whether you go to
hell or heaven. Then comes the question of, why is faith necessarry. It is not
nesarely necessary. An ignorant human who was never given a chance to chose
faith is not excluded from heaven. The ones without faith who are excluded are
the ones who consciously chose not to put their faith in God, but rather to put
their faith in something else or nothing at all. That all follows what is Just,
therefore Salvation as Catholics translate the Bible follows. Another belief is
that of Purgatory. Purgatory happens when you have no mortal sins, but your soul
must be cleaned of Venial sin before you may face God in heaven. In The
Republic, a distinction was made between harming someone and hurting someone,
being that harming makes one less noble and hurting may make one more noble. A
being who is Just being would never do harm. Purgatory is an example of hurt
without harm because it cleans the soul of every instance of sin. Therefore
Purgatory would be one of the supreme acts of Justice. Next I will examine
Jesus, the son of God. It would be logical for the son of an infinite being to
be an ideal human. An ideal human would commit no sin and commit no injustice.
Or, he would never give in to his appetites when logically it would be unwise.
Jesus never committed a sin, and did good works and carried out what was Just.
Jesus was that Ideal human. Since Jesus was human, eventually he would have to
die. Which happened when they crucified him on the cross. He died on the sins of
the Jews who were actual humans (non-Ideal). They gave in to their appetites
when logically there was no reason for his execution. You can deduce that they
committed a sin when they killed him. Jesus died for our sins. It would not be
hard to prove the execution of Jesus because of the kept records from that time.
I will now take myself off the specific subject of God and put a focus on Jesus.
A strong proof may be made not only on God, but on Catholosism as a whole.
According to scripture, Jesus stated that whatever his twelve aposoles preached
would be as if he preached it himself. They were the founders of Catholosism
with Peter, one of the twelve, taking head as the Pope. Through the years,
Catholosism has not changed in their ideals and beliefs as the other religions
have. They stuck with whatever the original twelve have said. And it is logical
to know as well that ideals also never change. If the popular belief on an issue
has changed, it wouldn’t make sense to change the ideal as well. It would be a
fallacy of logic to conform simply because of a majority. In conclusion, I have
not found any flaws in logic within the bible’s description of God. All his
traits and processes of salvation mirror that of what an infinite and truthful
being would be and use. Along with this, I was able to, unpurposely, accomplish
two other things. One was create or identify a method for disproving any divine
scripture. Simply put, if a prophet makes a description of God, but that
description does not follow logically into what an infinite and truthful being
is, then the description is wrong. Therefore, anything else that prophet has
written may fall into question and he may be defined a false prophet. I have
found none such case and a proof that I will never find such a case has not been
presented to me. The second thing that was unpurposally accomplished was a
strong argument leading toward the overall truthfulness of Catholosism. The
Catholic Ideals follow logically what is God, and the son of God. It didn’t
change with any popular idea of a time. Any change in ideal that did occur was
deemed unjust and changed back. It also didn’t sprout out of no where simply
because one did not agree with an ideal. What I have presented was a strong
argument that should give Catholosism a logical edge over others, and make it a
logitions religion.