vendredi 27 mars 2009

God is simple. Utterly.

Someone said, "if the earth was designed by God, who designed the designer?" - Someone answers, "God does not need a designer, since He is eternal." Atheist answers in more detail:

I prefer the dawkins argument. It just makes more sense than a blanket statement that God is because he is and always has been and always will be. If the universe is too complex not to have been designed, then God is also too complex not to have been designed. A creator-god is never portrayed as something simple or, more importantly, something simpler than the universe. If this god is at least as complex as the universe, then it needs a designer and creator at least as much as the universe.



Saw the bold letters? Here again:

A creator-god is never portrayed as something simple or, more importantly, something simpler than the universe.



Portrayed by whom? Not Orthodox Christians, I hope! Because, God is utterly simple. God is one God in three persons. That is not complex. It is either true or impossible. God is eternal. That is not complex, but either true or impossible. God designed everything else. That is not complex either. What makes even men design is not a complexity within them, but a simplicity, which by design they translate onto the complexity of outer existence. When I design even a sudoku, at nearly any stage of the design, the things already designed into the sudoku are more complex than my designing mind. Any sudoku I make - I will give you one sudoku solution, I have not yet "hidden" squares on it - I have only two things "in my head" and God knows what on the paper:

1 each numeral (or whatever symbol chosen) once only every line, column and block;
2 the trick I am at the moment using to get it done.

5 8 9
6 4 3
7 2 1
7 2 1
5 9 8
6 4 3
4 3 6
2 1 7
8 9 5
9 5 8
3 6 4
1 7 2
1 7 2
8 5 9
3 6 4
3 6 4
1 7 2
9 5 8
4 3 5
2 1 6
8 9 7
2 1 7
9 8 5
4 3 6
6 8 9
7 4 3
5 2 1



In me this simplicity means unconsciousness of what I was doing the moment before and what I will be doing the moment next. This unconsciousness is not very vital to the designing, is it? Indeed it can botcher the design into a nonsense, where two numerals would have to fit onto the same square. You've guessed it: God is simpler than that too.



Hans G. Lundahl
Aix en Provence
14/27 March 2009
Two days after Annunciation n. s
.

2 commentaires:

Anonyme a dit…

http://tinyurl.com/clb7rx is short for the real long url I took the quote from

Hans G. Lundahl

Hans-Georg Lundahl a dit…

This has been commented on.

Do atheists have a talent for missing the point?

http://www.thinkatheist.com/profiles/blogs/the-sudoku-proof-of-the

Decide for yourselves. A refutation by its nature is not a proof of one's thesis, but a disproof of a proposed disproof of one's thesis. And it is in the nature of a disproof of a disproof of one's thesis, that it is not supposed to prove directly one's thesis - like God existing or being utterly simple - but to disprove the proposed disproof of it.

The proposed disproof was, I repeat: "A creator-god is never portrayed as something ... simpler than the universe".

I took the liberty for explanations' sake to use human creativity as a loose parallel.

Here is my argument:

What makes even men design is not a complexity within them, but a simplicity, which by design they translate onto the complexity of outer existence.

And my example of it is that at any moment in constructing a sudoku solution - which is perfectly usable as such even without gridlines! - my mind which is constructing it is simpler than the sudoku solution it produces.

But reducing an example of a disproof of a disproof, that is an example of an explanation of a difficulty to the category of direct proof ... it is parody, and it is also being very fumbly about matters of logic.