Someone’s going to say verifying a blockchain and verifying a resurrection aren’t the same kind of proof. Let’s kill that before it lands.
Math is immaterial, it’s not made of atoms, yet it governs physical reality perfectly, every time, everywhere, zero exceptions. Nobody’s ever seen the number 7. You’ve only ever seen 7 things. The number itself is abstract and unchanging, the exact properties something needs to be transcendent. Bitcoiners already trust an immaterial mathematical law to secure their entire net worth without blinking. You’ve been living inside a transcendental argument for God this whole time, just calling it rationalism.
Historical claims get verified differently than blockchains, and that’s fine, the tool matches the claim. You don’t run a node to confirm Caesar crossed the Rubicon either. You check sources, hostile witnesses, martyrdom, timeline. Same method historians use for every ancient event you already accept without a fight. The resurrection gets held to a standard nothing else in history has to clear.
And before problem of evil gets dragged in to change the subject, moral outrage at suffering only makes sense if good and evil are real categories, not chemical preference. You need God’s moral law standing to even file the complaint against Him.
Verify the math. Verify the history. Neither one bends for a double standard.
#ToChristAlone #Math #DontTrustVerify #AskNostr #Christianity
Replies (5)
Spot on!!
Just so that I understand your logic correctly is the argument essentially “maths is abstract therefore a transcendent god exists” or am I missing one or more steps in your reasoning? I am really interested in understanding the logical bridge you are proposing.
Math governs physics, instincts govern human biology.
Fair question, and no you’re not missing steps. Abstract existing isn’t the whole claim. A number sitting out there being true doesn’t govern anything, it just is. What turns “true in the abstract” into “binding on every atom in the universe with zero exceptions” is a mind. Laws need a lawgiver, not just a fact needing a filing cabinet. Platonism gets you the abstraction. It doesn’t get you the universal enforcement. That’s the part that needs a mind behind it, not just a shelf for it to sit on.
Ok, so I am a bit slow and had to sleep on it. Are you saying that because bitcoiners trust maths for verification of the blockchain, and maths ultimately requires a transcendent mind, they are using a super high standard of verification (probably the highest). Therefore it is not inconsistent to accept that there are other truths that are verified using a different system such as historical evidence, and scholars of history also have a super high standard for verification (even though it is different than using maths), therefore there is no double standard being used by a person who verifies the bitcoin blockchain and then verifies the resurrection of Jesus if they are using the appropriate methods of verification for each subject. Or in other words, both methods of investigation have equally high standards of verification, therefore both forms of investigation end in discovering transcendent truth?
