What do Godel's Incompleteness Theorems imply about the existence of the Abrahamic God?

Let's limit our scope at least as much as Godel did, here. His Incompleteness Theorem talks only about logical systems with rules, so (logically) it can really only apply to such things. What you can and cannot physically do in the world is therefore irrelevant. At best we can only extrapolate whether such a god can be omniscient... omnipotence would be another question altogether.

A restatement of the rule I like goes thusly: There are more things that are true than any one system can prove.

It is not 'nobody can know everything that is true'. Just that you can't PROVE it. And even this need not be much of a limitation if you happen to know what all those unprovable true things are anyway (such as the postulates of geometry and science).

So no. Godel's Theorems would not seem to directly rule out any of the qualities of an Abrahamic god. Nor do I suspect proponents of such a diety to find it problematic even if it did... they'd probably just decide it didn't apply, much as they have with causation, time, and any number of other such things.

different than that maximum individuals view the Universe incorrectly. the excellent worded definition of the Universe is "The Universe is the totality of existence". That being stated, then there is not something exterior of it. additionally, it somewhat is greater suitable than area and the mass/count/power interior it, so the so-noted as massive Bang (if it got here approximately) does not be the beginning up of the Universe. The Universe is all of existence for the duration of what's considered Time and all dimensions and such. there is not any incompleteness to the Universe, then, the two, because of the fact the Universe is complete in being all.

I think it's a bit of a stretch to try to apply Godel's theorem to theology or religious philosophy.

Strictly speaking, the Incompleteness Theorem only deals with formal, self-consistent, rigorous logic....This excludes nearly all religious traditions, as well as the informal logic used in some sciences. Applying the Incompleteness Theorem to these cases may not be valid, since such ideologies cannot be absolutely proved or disproved.

Secondly, the presence of a God or Gods, implies the existence of some type of supernatural, or occult forces. In general, rigorous logic can only be used to explain natural phenomena, not supernatural ones (although logic is not in itself, natural.....)

I will venture, that if an "omniscient", "omnipotent" God does exist, then, by definition his knowledge and power cannot be described with a finite number of statements, and such may be the case even if he is not all-seeing or all powerful. "All-seeing", and "all-powerful" are logically troublesome statements anyway.....

Hope that makes sense,

~W.O.M.B.A.T.

Because we Religious, and we need hope of an early liberation shines brightly.