I didn't say it was the only language that could implement itself elegantly. Admittedly, I've never seen seen a Forth implementation in Forth, so for all I know, it's incredibly ugly. Or so beautiful it could bring tears to the eyes of god. I don't know.
True, you didn't. But you did say it maximized elegance, which means you think a Forth in Forth cannot be more elegant.
In practice, some people adore Forth. Most do not. Some people adore Prolog. Most do not. Relatively more people adore Lisp than either Forth or Prolog.
Such elegance is therefore in the eye of the beholder, not some god.
Forth's elegance is how it well it matches up to most hardware. The inner loop of a Forth interpreter can be as little as a few dozen lines of assembly, and its eval not much longer.
What did you expect me to do? Argue? You made some good points. :-D
Although you do realize the god part was hyperbolic, showing an absurd maximal beauty. I'm not even very religious, it just seemed a fitting representation of such an absurd beauty. I thought that was pretty clear from the context...
