Apologies for the late reply. Had family in town.
You do realize, that you basically stated what I stated, but in other words?
I dont think so, at least with how you worded it. You said it's impossible to prove God. I said that it's possible to show God's existence through our limited understanding (which is what OP said, and you disagreed with). To repeat, Godel never said it's impossible to figure out truth, only that it's impossible for us to learn infinite truth (completeness of a system) using a limited set of rules.
Gödel's incompleteness theorem proves that no universal truth can be proven (with no assumptions). Only local truths (with assumptions).
Not really. For clarity, I'll post what Godel's incompleteness theorems say. Link:
https://www.cairn.info/revue-internationale-de-philosophie-2005-4-page-513.htm
Godel's first incompleteness theorem (as improved by Rosser (1936)) says that for any consistent formalized system F, which contains elementary arithmetic, there exists a sentence GF of the language of the system which is true but unprovable in that system.
Godel's second incompleteness theorem states that no consistent formal system can prove its own consistency.
The only thing Godel's theorems say, is that it's impossible for humans to create a limited/finite set of rules, to define all of reality/infinity. His theorems never say it's impossible to define truth, or figure it out (even as you worded it).
Hence, no math proof of "God has been proven using math".
Just because we can't count to infinity doesn't mean we don't know infinity (the idea) exists. Higher forms of math are impossible without the idea of infinity. In fact, Godel's theorems actually prove the existence of infinity, and the infinite aspect of reality. It shows that no matter how many rules we apply to a system/reality/creation, we're no closer to properly defining it than when we started, because there will always be some function/equation/truth outside of that rule set, which that rule set can't prove, requiring another rule, and another, and another, etc., which is exactly what counting to infinity is like.
Really, go study the Gödel's theorem yourself
I have.
Apologies for the late reply. Had family in town.
You do realize, that you basically stated what I stated, but in other words?
Not really. You said it's impossible to prove God. I said that it's possible to show God's existence through our limited understanding (which is what OP said, and you disagreed with). To repeat, Godel never said it's impossible to figure out truth, only that it's impossible for us to learn infinite truth (completeness of a system) using a limited set of rules.
Gödel's incompleteness theorem proves that no universal truth can be proven (with no assumptions). Only local truths (with assumptions).
Not really. For clarity, I'll post what Godel's incompleteness theorems say. Link:
https://www.cairn.info/revue-internationale-de-philosophie-2005-4-page-513.htm
Godel's first incompleteness theorem (as improved by Rosser (1936)) says that for any consistent formalized system F, which contains elementary arithmetic, there exists a sentence GF of the language of the system which is true but unprovable in that system.
Godel's second incompleteness theorem states that no consistent formal system can prove its own consistency.
The only thing Godel's theorems say, is that it's impossible for humans to create a limited/finite set of rules, to define all of reality/infinity. His theorems never say it's impossible to define truth, or figure it out (even as you worded it).
Hence, no math proof of "God has been proven using math".
Just because we can't count to infinity doesn't mean we don't know infinity (the idea) exists. Higher forms of math are impossible without the idea of infinity. In fact, Godel's theorems actually prove the existence of infinity, and the infinite aspect of reality. It shows that no matter how many rules we apply to a system/reality/creation, we're no closer to properly defining it than when we started, because there will always be some function/equation/truth outside of that rule set, which that rule set can't prove, requiring another rule, and another, and another, etc., which is exactly what counting to infinity is like.
Really, go study the Gödel's theorem yourself
I have.