(proof omitted)

a couple of weeks ago, Josh posted a blog relating God in the lovely language of mathematics. as its my degree, ive had some thoughts on the idea recently. this thought comes with the disclaimer of potentially nasty looking maths jargon... you have been warned =)

okay.

the bulk of maths works like this; we have axioms, that is, obvservations about the way a branch of maths works - on a very basic level. We just assume they are true because often it just makes logical sense that they do. Then, people make new ideas, or 'propositions'. Then these people use the axiom, the given true thing, to explain how they got to their proposition - the explanation being the 'proof'. After that, you can make more propositions, where the proofs can be based not just on the axiom, but on all the other previous propositions that have been made before it. So you get a tirade of propositions, proofs, more propositions, more proofs etc until you have the maths we know and (err-hem) like today.

but the good thing about this is, is that if the beginning puzzle piece of maths, the axioms, is invalid - then everything else that follows it is brought into dispute and all the theories and proposition made dont count for anything, because the base is shaky. The axioms themselves, for the most part, are never proved, because theyre 'just a given'. So from the start, mathematics is very much a matter of faith.

What I find interesting is the way that people talk about God. Ive heard a couple of my non-christian friends lament the 'lack of proof'. They would like to believe the things I believe, and they could see they would find it to be a refuge and very helpful, but as far as they can see, theres been no proof shown to them that God's out there. Its funny that people think then, of God as a "proposition", where proof would need to be made of God's existence, and principally thered have to be something before God to base the proofs upon!

"id give everything i have, for something i dont have to prove" - john ellis

"he is before all things, and in him all things hold together." - colossians 1-17

"This is what the kingdom of God is like. A man scatters seed on the ground. Night and day, whether he sleeps or gets up, the seed sprouts and grows, though he does not know how" - mark 4-26-27


We're making it difficult for ourselves if we approach the idea of God as 'something to be proved'. It is much easier to consider God as an axiom, just a given, whereupon looking at it, we are convinced (but never proved) that it is true. Axioms, if they ever had a voice would say "believe in me, and all the other mathematics holds together. Look what the capabilities are for when you accept me. why, maths would be nonsense and chaos if it didnt have me!" These claims are wonderfully similar to Jesus's claims to be the son of God, that im happy enough to say, in regards to him, i am convinced, and the proof is omitted =)