The Truth of God

Having contemplated on whether to begin this set of blog posts, I shall, as the religious say, take the “leap of faith”, and establish these ideas one at a time. I hope that while not every axiom can be formulated with absolute philosophical rigoro, they are intuitive enough for us to derive meaningful conclusions. To that end, I aim to provide intuition for each axiom that I assert, and I hope the correspondence between said intuition and axiom is, by-and-large, acceptable.

As written in the main page, the goal of these posts is to establish the logical truth of Christianity. As with any mathematical model, we will nevertheless, require some basic starting points, called axioms. The most basic axiom for any rational discussion, I believe, is truth. In mathematics, a truth is called a theorem—a proposition that corresponds with reality.

Axiom 1. The laws of logic are valid rules of inference.

Proof-in-cheek. Without the laws of logic (sub-consciously or not), how do we even make reliable conclusions?

Remark 1. I write “proof-in-cheek” to stress that I have not obtained a rigorous proof of these axioms, but hopefully to posit a model in which these axioms are at least plausible for most people reading this blog.

Definition 1. We define a truth to be a proposition that is true.

Theorem 1. There exists at least one truth.

Proof. Suppose for a contradiction that all propositions are false. Formally, for any proposition $p$ , $p$ is false. Let $\mathcal P$ denote the set of propositions. Then the proposition $q$ defined by $q := (\forall p \in \mathcal P\ p = \mathrm F)$ is true. Since $q$ is a proposition, $q \in \mathcal P$ . Therefore, $\exists p \in \mathcal P: p = \mathrm T$ , namely $p =q$ . Therefore, $q$ is false. Therefore, $\mathrm T = q = \mathrm F$ , a blatant contradiction. Therefore, there exists at least one true proposition.

Then Pilate said to him, “So you are a king?” Jesus answered, “You say that I am a king. For this purpose I was born and for this purpose I have come into the world—to bear witness to the truth. Everyone who is of the truth listens to my voice.” Pilate said to him, “What is truth?” [John 18:37–38]

Remark 2. Since I am unashamedly Christian, I will be quoting Scripture throughout these blog posts. However, I will not use them as part of my arguments until I have established that the Scriptures are the true words of God—a central goal in these blog posts as well.

In everyday life, persons exist. For every person on earth, there exists at least one human being (i.e. an individual understanding or perception of the world distinct from other understandings) that inhabits that person. By definition, this being is:

knowledgeable of some at-present reality of the world, and
present in some part of some at-present reality of the world, and
possesses some morality (we will define this notion in the future) in some at-present reality of the world.

Other aspects of life that we would plausibly consider positive include: existence, beauty, fairness, wisdom, love, etc.

Definition 2. For any being $X$ , let $K_X$ denote the set of positive attributes that $X$ possesses. For example, $\text{existence} \in K_X$ . Define $X = Y$ if and only if $K_X = K_Y$ . In layperson’s terms a being is defined by the attributes that the being possesses,

Axiom 2. There exists at least one being.

Proof-in-cheek. Look in the mirror!

In what follows, we will follow Anselm’s ontological argument for the existence of God.

Definition 3. We say that a being $Y$ is greater than another being $X$ (denoted in shorthand $X \leq Y$ ) if $K_X \subseteq K_Y$ . In traditional form, define $X < Y$ if $X \leq Y$ and $X \neq Y$ .

For the LORD is a great God, and a great King above all gods. [Psalm 95:3]

Since $\subseteq$ is transitive, it follows that $\leq$ is transitive, i.e. if $X \leq Y$ and $Y \leq Z$ , then $X \leq Z$ . Similarly, $<$ is transitive. In a similar manner, we have $X \leq X$ and if $X \leq Y$ and $Y \leq X$ , then $X = Y$ .

Since defining these notions more properly generate endless careers in philosophy, we will adopt the existence of being as an axiom.

Definition 4. Call a being $G$ maximally great if for any being $H$ ,

$G \leq H \quad \Rightarrow \quad G=H.$

In layperson’s terms, there is no being that is strictly greater than $G$ .

Lemma 1. A maximally great being must possess every positive attribute.

Proof. Let $G$ be a maximally great being with positive attributes $K_G$ . Fix any positive attribute $p$ . Define the being $J$ by $K_J := K_G \cup \{p\}$ . Clearly, $K_G \subseteq K_J$ . Therefore, $G \leq J$ . Since $G$ is maximally great, $G = J$ . Therefore, $p \in K_G$ . Since $p$ is arbitrary, $G$ possesses every positive attribute.

Lemma 2. A maximally great being must be unique.

Proof. Let $X$ and $Y$ be maximally great beings. Consider the being $Z$ whose attributes are defined by $K_Z := K_X \cup K_Y$ . Clearly, $K_X \subseteq K_Z$ so that $X \leq Z$ . Since $X$ is maximally great, $X = Z$ . Similarly, $Y \leq Z$ implies that $Y = Z$ . Therefore, $X = Y$ .

I am the LORD; that is my name; my glory I give to no other, nor my praise to carved idols. [Isaiah 42:8]

Axiom 3. At least one greatest being is can be conceived without logical contradiction (even if this being does not exist in reality).

Proof-in-cheek. It is plausible to perceive of a being that possesses every positive property that we think of that are actually positive, whether we actually believe this being exists or not. Alternatively, consider the fine-tuning argument for the plausible existence of a spaceless, timeless, immaterial, immensely powerful, and deeply personal creator.

Great is the LORD, and greatly to be praised, and his greatness is unsearchable. [Psalm 145:3]

Theorem 2. There exists a uniquely maximally great being. Call this being ‘God’.

Proof. By Axiom 3, a maximally great being $G$ can be conceived without any logical contradiction. Let $K_G$ denote this being’s properties, so that $\text{conceivable} \in K_G$ . At this point in the argument, $G$ may not necessarily exist in reality. However, by Axiom 2, a being $H$ exists. Let $K_H$ denote this being’s properties, so that $\text{existence} \in K_H$ . Since $\text{existence}$ is a positive attribute, by Lemma 1, $\text{existence} \in K_G$ . Therefore, $G$ exists. By Lemma 2, $G$ is unique, and described using English language the name ‘God’ (this is Anselm’s philosophical definition of ‘God’).

Corollary 1. God exists.

Proof. Under the following assumptions:

Axiom 1 (consistent laws of logic),
Axiom 2 (the existence of at least one being),
Axiom 3 (the plausibility, not necessarily existence, of a maximally great being),

Theorem 2 holds.

In the beginning, God… [Genesis 1:1]

Though technical, abstract, and inescapably philosophical, we have established that if our intuitions about truth are at least plausible, then it is true there exists a uniquely maximal being called ‘God’ that is in particular, absolutely true, since this being possesses all positive properties of all other beings. Note that our arguments only follow from the axioms. Nevertheless, I believe that these axioms are reasonably acceptable by most who read this blog.

For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse. [Romans 1:20]

Furthermore, nowhere in this post do we conclude that God refers to the Christian God. All that this post asserts is the existence of a maximally great being, and there is no claim on the identity of this God—whether this God is perfect, loving, just, communal, solitary, etc.

Finally, since strictly speaking I am not formally trained in philosophy or theology, my claims ought not be considered authoritative. There are some technical difficulties with Theorem 2 as I have presented it, that can be rectified using more technical axioms (namely, that ‘existence’ is a positive attribute; though the intuition behind both presentations remain largely the same). There are better explanations for the ontological argument, and the video below is one far more thorough explanation for said argument.

Nevertheless, my claim is that under a few more reasonable axioms, we must conclude that this God is the Christian God, revealed in God the Son: the God-Man Jesus Christ—the King of all creation.

Long ago, at many times and in many ways, God spoke to our fathers by the prophets, but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed the heir of all things, through whom also he created the world. He is the radiance of the glory of God and the exact imprint of his nature, and he upholds the universe by the word of his power. After making purification for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high, having become as much superior to angels as the name he has inherited is more excellent than theirs. [Hebrews 1:1–4]

This is my thesis and endeavour for all of my remaining blog posts.

—Joel Kindiak, 23 Sept 25, 2037H

Responses

The Scientific Case for God – KindiakMath

November 11, 2025 at 11:30 pm

[…] in a moment. For now, the plausibility of the existence of God seems trivial, but coupled with the ontological argument, actually guarantees the existence of said God. This argument we will explore […]

LikeLike

Who is Your King? – KindiakMath

December 25, 2025 at 4:35 pm

[…] certainly divinely intelligent, and whose existence is plausible. But being maximally great, the ontological argument strengthens the possibility of God’s existence into the necessity of God’s existence. […]

LikeLike

The Truth of God

Share this:

Responses

Leave a comment Cancel reply