Mathematical Justification of Scripture:

Wouldn't our existence have to be governed by some sort of general principles? Wouldn't these general principles have to be derived from logical deduction? Wouldn't these principles have to apply to all of reality from its very foundations to its ultimate conclusion? That is what I am attempting to produce here. It is actually my intent to mathematically prove the Golden Rule. And this Rule along with others can also be interpreted to show the logical necessity of the coming of Christ - His death and resurrection. See preview

But if our intent is to prove the validity of Scripture, then we must know the meaning of "proof" itself. What does it mean that one fact "proves" another? And what else can we know if one thing does prove another?

The field of study that examines the nature of proof is called logic. Symbolic logic uses letters and symbols to represent facts and the relationship between these facts. These letters and symbols can then be manipulated in a mathematical way that is very similar to algebra. And the result will produce general principles. These principles must then apply to every fact in reality, including people.

The first half of this article breifly describes the technical aspects of how I developed these principles. But the second half shows Scriptures that can be interpreted as description of these principles. A more detail discussion of the general principles of logic can be found in a Brief introduction to logic.

So let us now summarize our results:

Propositions are statements that make claims about facts. "The chair sits on the floor" is a proposition. "The door is connected to the wall" is a proposition. "The sky is blue" is yet another proposition.

Propositions can be symbolized as letters such as p , q , r , s , etc. For example, we might decide to let the letter "B" represent the fact that the sky is blue. So, instead of writing out the entire sentence "The sky is blue", we would simply write "B". And instead of writing, "It is true that the sky is blue", we would write, " B is true". This is very similar to letting the width of a box be represented by the letter "w" in an algebraic equation for the volume of a box.

Propositions are either true (T) or false (F). The algebraic equation for the volume of a box is V = l x h x w , where l is the length, h is the height, and w is the width of the box. The letter w in this context can represent any numeric value that can be imagined. But as far as logic is concerned, a proposition represented by a letter can be either true or false. So, for example, if it is true that the sky is blue, then we may write: B = T. But if it is night time, then we would write: B = F .

In algebra, we use the symbol + for plus, - for minus, x for multiply, and / for divide. And these symbols are used between letters that represent the measure of things. But in symbolic logic we use the following symbols to represent the logical functions that can exist between statements:

~ symbolizes negation or the NOT function. ~ p is the opposite of p . If the statement p is true, then ~ p is false. And if p is false, then ~ p is true.

* symbolizes the AND function. The statement " p AND q " can be written as p*q . And the statement p*q is true only if both statement p is true and statement q is true.

+ symbolizes the OR function. The statement " p OR q " can be written as p+q . And the statement p+q is false only if both statement p is false and statement q is false.

=> symbolizes material implication or the "If-Then" function. (p=>q) means that if p is true, then q is true. It also means that statement p "proves" that statement q is true. p is called the premise, and q is the conclusion of an argument. So that if the premise is true, then the conclusion must also be true. And it is customary to consider there to be a relationship of material implication between cause and effect. For as the a premise leads to a conclusion, so a cause leads to an effect.

If the reader does not understand the symbolism used here, a better understanding can be gained by reading Brief introduction to logic.

Now if we are going to talk about reality, then we need to know how truth is related to existence. How do propositions that are either true or false relate to things that either exist or don’t exist? We can assume for the sake of argument that any arbitrary proposition is true even if we know that it does not describe what exists. And we can assume for debate that any proposition is false even if we know that it describes what does exist. We can assume for the sake of argument that something does exist even though we know it’s not true. And we can assume that something does not exist even though we know it does. But, if we agree to let those things that exist be represented by propositions that are true, then those things that do not exist must be represented by propositions that are false. For just as propositions are either true or false, things either exist or they do not exist. Whatever does not exist is non-existent. And whatever is not non-existent does exist.

So, we can debate whether any given proposition is true or false. And we can debate whether any proposition actually describes reality. But ultimately we must admit that there are true propositions that do represent what exists. For to deny that propositions can describe reality is to deny any basis for making the decisions that effect your life.

No one is going to step forward and confidently announce that he can unequivocally prove that something in the universe is logically not correct. That would be the definition of complete nonsense. No fact of reality will ever disprove any other fact of reality. All the facts coexist, and each fact can be used to prove all the rest. And if we admit that reality is logical, then we admit that propositions can describe what exists.

Consider equation (eq.18) repeated here:

~( p => ~ q ) = p*q

This states that if one fact does not disprove another, then they both must coexist together. And at any instant in time, we know that anything that exists cannot disprove any other thing that exists. The door cannot deny that the wall exists. The chair cannot deny that the floor exists. And since this is true for all the facts of reality, we can define reality as follows:

R = ...*p*q*r*s*t*...

where p, q, r, s, t, are each a proposition that describes a portion of reality.

Even looking around us we can say, "this thing exists and that thing exists and this other thing exists, etc." And so this definition of reality seems like a natural interpretation. (Remember: * symbolizes the word "and")

Instead of one fact not being able to disprove another fact of reality, consider equation (eq.40) which is repeated here.

( p*q ) => ( p => q )

This states that if two facts coexist, then either one can be used to prove the other. And when applied to reality, it means that any fact can be used to prove the rest.

The facts at one instant of time cannot disprove the facts that existed in the previous instant. So, in general the present cannot disprove the past. And this means that reality can be described by the coexistence of all the facts, past, present, and future. And it means that the past can be used to predict the future, and the future can be used to discern the past.

So, we can define reality as follows:

R = ...* p * q * r * s * t *...

And with reality, R, defined as above, we can show that the following principle is valid:

( p => R ) => ( R => p )                 	This is the Golden Rule.

where p is a part of reality R.

If you want to see the explicit proof for this equation, go here:

The most obvious interpretation is as follows: if the fact that p is true proves that every other fact is true, then all other facts will prove that p is true. This might be more easily stated as in the following proverbs:

The premise on which everything rests will become evident.

The Creator of the universe will be manifest.

The cause of all things will be manifest to such an extent that there shall come a new creation again.

God is the Alpha and the Omega, the First and the Last, the Beginning and the End. (Rev.22:13)

And God shall make all things new again. Hallelujah! (Rev.24:5)

For more on how these proverbs above fit the principle of the Golden Rule, go here:


Now, if we let "p" represent the basis of your decisions in life, then we may interpret our equation as follows:

Get back to the basics.

Start over.

You must be born again. (Jn.3:3)

The ultimate consequence that you expect to receive is the premise on which you act and believe.

According to your faith will it be done unto you. (Mt.9:29)

For more on how the above five proverbs correspond to the Golden Rule, go here:

Other expressions of this principle are:

Give and it will be given unto you. (Lk.6:38)

Do not judge, or you too will be judged. (Mt.7:1)

What you do unto others will be done unto you.

The measure you use will be measured to you. (Mt.7:1)

Eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth. (Ex.21:23)

Therefore, do unto others what you would have others do unto you. (Lk.6:31)

For more on the six proverbs above, go here:

The following principles can also be shown as valid: ( The equation numbers to the right are those used in the Reference guide.)

p = (~ p => p )                        	(eq.28)
( ~ p => p ) => p                    	(eq.30)
( p => ~ p ) = ~ p                    	(eq.31)
( p => ~ p ) => ~ p                 	(eq.33)

Below are some sayings that express these principles:

If the fact that it's not should prove that it is, then it can no longer be argued with. (eq.30)

But if the fact that it is should prove that it's not, then it shall forever be lost. (eq.33)

For more on these principles, go here:

Other sayings that express these principles are shown below:

You must repent if you want to be saved. (eq.28)

You must correct your own mistakes if you want to believe with perfect faith. (eq.28)

Whoever humbles himself will be exalted. (eq.28)(Mt.23:12)

But whoever exalts himself will be humbled. (eq.31)(Mt.23:12)

Go into the closet and pray. Then your Father in Heaven will reward you openly. (eq.28)(Mt.6:6)

No one lights a lamp and then puts it under a bed. (eq.31-negated-each-side)(Mt.5:15)

A city on a hill cannot remain hidden. (eq.31-negate-both-sides)(Mt.5:14)

Nothing is hidden that will not be revealed. (eq.28)(Mt.10:26)

For more on the above 8 proverbs, go here:

Other proverbs are:

Nothing can continue to live which works to produce its very own death. (eq.33)

But if your way of life does not produce death, then even your death will cause you to live. (eq.31-negate-each-side)

Through hard work do men succeed. (eq.28)(Ge.3:17)

Through much pain do women give birth to new life. (eq.28)(Ge.3:16)

For more on the above 4 proverbs, go here:

And from the New Testament, we have:

If salt loses its saltiness, it is thrown out. (eq.33)(Mt.5:13)

If a seed falls to the ground and dies, it will produce many seeds. (eq.28)(Jn.12:24)

Jesus suffered for the cause of right; and this proves He deserves eternal life (eq.30)

Whoever loses his life for Christ will find it. (eq.28)(Mt.10:39)

But whoever finds his life will lose it. (eq.31)(Mt.10:39)

If you believe in Christ, then even though you die, yet shall you live. (eq.28)(Jn.11:25)

Jesus said, "I am the Living One; I was dead, and behold I am alive for ever and ever." (eq.28)(Rev.1:18)

And the fact that He has been gone so long will only make His Appearing more glorious.(eq.28)

No eye has seen, no ear has heard, no mind has conceived what God has prepared for those who love Him. Amen. (eq.28)(1_Cor.2:9)

The Scripture references that I quote above are only a portion of all the verses that describe the principles that I have explained here. See if you can find other verses that follow these principles.

Some may wish to challenge my claim that these Bible verses were written to explicitly express the principles of logic that I have stated. After all, the original authors did not say that they were expressing these principles of logic. And there might be better ways of expressing these principles. However, some things are indisputable. You cannot argue that reality is not governed by the principles of logic. For all arguments rely on logic. Therefore, human life is also governed by the principles of logic. And there are two main principles that we have deduced.

The first is:

( p => R ) => ( R => p ). The Golden Rule

This was interpreted to mean that the premise on which everything rests will be manifest. And if there be any proposition on which all of reality is based, then by definition it is God. For God is by definition the Creator of the whole universe. God is the One that determines everything else. So, from this principle of the Golden Rule, we must conclude that God will be manifested in creation. The universe shall prove that God exists. God shall become just as real as anything else in the world.

And the second principle that we have deduced is:

p = ( ~ p => p )              	The Diamond Rule.

This principle states that a proposition is not true unless even the fact that it's false proves that it's true. But if there be anything that will never change, if there be anything that is always true, if there be anything that shall always live, then by definition it is God. For God by definition is the Everlasting Truth. So, by the principle of the Diamond Rule, we must conclude that even the fact that He's not must prove that He is. Even His death must cause Him to live.

But how might these principles be recognized on a more intimate level? We define God to be the Absolute Truth. And humans cannot escape having to make arguments and assertions. But, every argument that you state, every assertion you make only affirms the proposition that truth and judgment shall emanate from a human being. For if truth does not emanate from humans, then neither does it emanate from you. So, if the truth does emanate from you, then the truth does emanate from humans. And since this is the premise of all of your arguments, then this must also ultimately be the conclusion that you state. You must ultimately acknowledge that God will Appear as a human being. For, if you state any truth at all, then it is you that states that the Truth shall come from a human being.

But the only reason that we value the truth is so we can make better decisions that effect our lives. But anyone can state any arbitrary thing they may wish. Therefore, determination is the measure of how sure you are that something is true. Determination is defined as the willingness to continue in spite of pain or frustration. No one remains determined to uphold a truth if they think it will result in everlasting torment. We remain faithful to what we believe is true because we believe it will eventually lead to a better life even though there may be some temporary difficulty. Where there is no determination, there is no evidence of what you truly believe. And no one can make any serious claim that something is true without implying a measure of determination. Therefore, if any human should make any serious claim at all, then he states that this truth can grant a better life even though there may first be tribulation. And so the most fundamental and absolute Truth must result in eternal life even though you die.

end of preview return to top of page