"Godel's Theorem"

Ralph Haulk


Here's a mathematical theorem I've been studying for several years now, and it may apply directly to what ex-WCG members are learning.

Kurt Godel, if you haven't read about him, was a close friend of Einstein. Both taught at Princeton.

Here is what Godel's theorem says in layman's terms:

In any consistent axiomatic system, there exists undecidable propositions. Not only are there undecidable's, but there are an infinity of undecidable's.

So what does this have to do with thee truth of God?

Basically, the implications of Godel's theorem is that there is no possible way to put all truth in one package. Not just in mathematics, but in logic, law, or even religion, if it attempts to formalize its truths.

What it means, basically, is that if God is the sum of all truth, then there can be no "One True Church" to represent Him. No matter how hard we try to refine the truths to completely represent God, we will end up with constant splintering and speciation of ideas about God, assuming that God is truth.

In "computerese", we might say that there are no algorithms or decision procedures by which we may proceed from "here" to "God".

But let's assume it is possible. Suppose we can create a knowledge of God such that all truth about God can be put in one complete, consistent package.

If it can be put into language, it can be translated to algorithms. If translated to algorithms, then it can be programmed. If it can be programmed, there is no reason in the future that we couldn't create a robot Artificial Intelligence that could be a better "son of God" than ourselves!

Obviously this is ridiculous, but what is the difference between trying to create a robot son of God according to human rules and dogma, and trying to build a church in God's name, incorporating people into that church? Both would be built on human rules and regulations, human laws, human concepts of reason and logic and truth.

If the idea of building a robot son of God is ridiculous, it is equally ridiculous to assume we can build a church that completely represents God!

Dies the bible say anything about this? Actually, Paul writes in Romans 8:7 that the carnal, natural mind is enmity against God and cannot be subject to God's laws. If true, this would have at least two results:

1.Nobody can claim authority in God's name, since no mind can be subject to God

2. Any attempt to do so would result in infinite splintering and speciation of ideas about God.

Today there are over 38,000 versions of Christianity, and look what happened to the WCG members when they tried to decipher God's laws into a meaningful, complete system!

In Matthew 5, Jesus said he came to fulfill the law. But surely, if Romans 8:7 is true, and if Godel's theorem is true, which it is, or it wouldn't be a theorem, then the result of trying to keep God's law, even under Jesus, would produce continual splintering of ideas, right up until even father would be against son, mother against daughter, etc.

Apparently Jesus knew this, because that's just what he said in Matthew 10:34-38!

If you think about it, it makes good sense. People seek to organize, to control and direct human behavior into one collective system, yet that is destructive. We are told that the more we organize in one area, the greater the disorganization in related areas. That is know as entropy, based on the second law of thermodynamics.

God's purpose would not be to make us collectivize, but to make us continually speciate and separate, use our minds so we can intelligently adapt to change.

If there is to be a Kingdom of God on earth, it would be composed of individuals who study and learn to think for themselves.

Now, we seem to have a mathematical theorem to back it up!


Comments? Visit Ralph's Wordpress Blog HERE



Back to Painful Truth menu

        The content of this site, including but not limited to the text and images herein and their arrangement, are copyright 1997-2010 by The Painful Truth. All rights reserved.

Do not duplicate, copy or redistribute in any form without prior written consent.