Thanks to speaking of faith last week.

I’m really fascinated by this idea of Gödel's incompleteness theorems. Simply stated, he asserted that there are fundamental truths at the foundation of mathematics that cannot be proved.

I like the description here about the UTM machine. But, the easiest one to understand is the paradoxical “I am lying” statement.

So, even mathematics – pure logic and reason – rests on a foundation of unresonability. The simplest number system cannot be proved.

What I like about this concept is that it points to another way of arriving at truth: First, we must assume the basis of truth. Then, truth can build upon that basis.

I think this is a deal killer to the atheist debate.

If the number system of mathematics has no proof, and must be assumed, does that invalidate all of mathematics? Of course it does not. It simply means that a first assumption must be made to build on.

So, if a theist or spiritualist cannot prove the fundamental assumption of infinite intelligence or connectivity, does that invalidate all spiritual thought and discourse? Of course not.

An atheist cannot disclaim spirituality any more than I (using Godel’s theorems) can discount mathematics.

At my retreat a few weeks ago, the leader talked about atheists. Mind you, this guy spends an hour a day in prayer. He’s a very intelligent guy, a well-spoken guy, and a nice guy. But, his response to atheism was remarkably stupid. He simply said: “they have no idea how wrong there are.”

To him, who has assumed God as true, and built upon that foundation with demonstrable results throughout his life, questioning the assumption was ridiculous. It was like questioning the number system