Logic and Faith Meet

In geometry, consider the size of a point.  Mystically, the size of a point can’t be determined.  Tell me how big a point is, and I’ll reduce it by half.  Tell me again, and I will cut it in half again, and so on. Geometry does not tell us the size of a point, or even prove that a point exists.  Now consider two points, on the Cartesian plane, and draw a line between them.  Because you don’t know the exact size of the points, you can’t know the exact size of the connecting line, and so on. It can be said that it is important that the points are relatively the same size in order for calculations to become closer to an equality, but rarely are two points or two shapes, or even copies of points and shapes equal. The job of an engineer is to say, "Close enough." However, if one point is big, and one is small, in the real world, it can effect the size of a line.

Judaism has answers for this; the logistic size of points, and line on the Cartesian plane.  We assume a "yud" is a point. In the same way, we assume the existence of a point is possible , so too we are able to have faith in G-d without logistical proof.

This is a letter yud:

We just believe that a point can exist because of a mystical meaning of the Hebrew letter “yud.”  How big is a yud?  It is the size that it is.

Likewise, we can fill the Cartesian plane with lines and shapes because of the mystical meaning of the Hebrew letter “tes.” Tes is like a pregnant woman. In creation, tes was pregnant and gave birth to the universe, in the same way that a mother gives birth.

This is the letter tes:

Ubiquitous Cosmological Evidence of G-d Still Not Enough for Some Atheists

Acceptance of Gd, as He is on His terms, and not on your opinion of how G-d should be, is one of most important acts anyone can do. That is what religionists refer to as faith.

Richard Dawkins, probably the foremost atheist in this time concludes that in atheism he has found remarkable Darwinian “grandeur,”

Charles Darwin was not known as a poet, but he produced a lyrical crescendo in the last paragraph of On the Origin of Species.

"Thus, from the war of nature, from famine and death,[i] the most exalted object which we are capable of conceiving, namely, the production of the higher animals, directly follows. There is grandeur in this view of life, with its several powers, having been originally breathed into a few forms or into one; and that, whilst this planet has gone cycling on according to the fixed law of gravity, from so simple a beginning endless forms most beautiful and most wonderful have been, and are being, evolved." - Charles Darwin

but then Dawkins deems those same acts of nature to be too horrible for him to consider a deity's involvement.

“The God of the Old Testament is arguably the most unpleasant character in all fiction: jealous and proud of it; a petty, unjust, unforgiving control-freak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, capriciously malevolent bully.”

― Richard Dawkins, The God Delusion

That is a verifiable contradiction.

Can anyone see the error of Dawkins' logic?  Logic such that if Hashem creates it, then according to Dawkins, no matter what, it is as if it were created by a hateful, devilish, hideous being, like the picture.



Yet, if there is no Gd, and something becomes created, then according to Dawkins this is surely worthy of remarkable praise, such as in the case of this woman. this:

2nd Criticism of Intelligent Design: It is not obvious that Gd is involved in creating us from nothing.

The universe has properties. Some of those properties, the ones that make sense on paper are constrictive. They do not make sense under the most extreme analysis. There are always impurities, and it is impossible to make something completely pure. When we call something pure it is because it has met standards, such that it is pure enough. This is where the Ayn Soph comes in. The Ayn Soph fills the gaps that are generated by Elokim's divine utterances and derivatives of the utterances which make up reality. Elokim is compeletely concealed, which explains why one may see logic or reason is all there is in the universe. We must learn that we do not have all the answers in the most concrete way, that then Elokim, meaning the constrictive aspects of the universe become apparent. Thus, the name Elokim describes that Gd is asociable with logic and reason, while the name Ayn Soph describes the exact opposite aspect of Gd.
What's more we need not believe that we shall run out of ideas due to the name of Gd, which describes Him as infinite creativity.  That name is Yah, and through immitation of His good and upright ways, we may tap into this creativity, in the same way that Aaron drew water from a rock.  Yah means that the Torah and its commentaries will never end, and that our knowledge of the universe will never cease to grow.  So, even though the universe is constricted, as Elokim is a name of Gd, it is also equally expansive as Yah is a name of Gd, and as above it is also equally impossible to purify religion into complete restriction, such as logic and reason, due to the name of Gd that is Ayn Soph.