Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site pucc-h
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!floyd!harpo!ihnp4!inuxc!pur-ee!CS-Mordred!Pucc-H:aeq
From: aeq@pucc-h (Jeff Sargent)
Newsgroups: net.flame,net.religion
Subject: Re: evidence for the non-existence of God
Message-ID: <606@pucc-h>
Date: Thu, 22-Mar-84 09:23:38 EST
Article-I.D.: pucc-h.606
Posted: Thu Mar 22 09:23:38 1984
Date-Received: Fri, 23-Mar-84 21:26:06 EST
References: <892@ssc-vax.UUCP>, <23@mako.UUCP>
Organization: Purdue University Computing Center
Lines: 74

Reply to Tim Stoehr:

First, I think your title overstates the case.  A lack of evidence (as you
perceive it) in favor of something is not positive evidence against it.
And, as so many opponents of Christianity do, you're imprisoning yourself by
insisting that God be demonstrable solely to the rational mind; you're also
trying (and failing) to imprison God, who (again) deals with the whole person,
not just the rational mind.  (Jesus Himself refused to do signs and wonders on
demand for the cynical Pharisees; He made a remark which implied that the only
sign they'd get would be His resurrection.)

> What about all the people who believed in God and don't now, such as
> myself, what convinced them?

Presumably you never actually came to KNOW God.  My guess is that you grew up
in a church "having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof", as
the Apostle Paul put it.  You thus saw no evidence of what Christ can really
do in a life (particularly not in your own), or in a group of lives coming
together.

> In the 25+ years that I have lived, I have witnessed absolutely nothing
> that pointed to the existence of God.  That, in itself, is rather
> convincing to me.  Granted I've never seen a black hole either, but
> there is evidence that they exist.  Where is the evidence that God
> exists?  Don't tell me that "2,000 years ago there was..."  The details
> of what went on 2,000 years ago nobody knows, noone can say that if
> Jesus existed, that he lied, or not, about being the son of God.  Let's
> examine something that we know more about, again, I point to the total
> lack of real, current evidence, of any kind.  And I don't care if on
> sunday morning I can turn on the TV and listen to people say they've
> "talked to God", etc.

Christians do fall down on the job.  Jesus said, "By this shall all men know
that you are my disciples, that you have love for one another."  It is obvious
that this is not true of ALL who claim to be Christians.  Still, you have
not been looking in the right places for evidence; and (as I said before)
you are only hurting yourself by limiting the evidence you'll examine.  I have
known groups of very loving and caring Christians, with a quality about them
quite different from any camaraderie that may arise among any non-Christians
I've seen.  And why shouldn't I tell you that 2000 years ago a Man who claimed
to be the Son of God (and performed quite a few miracles--for those who really
needed them--thereby lending credence to His claim) was raised from the dead
with no human intervention, and was seen alive by many people who had seen Him
die, quite dead?  Don't say that you don't believe something that was written
2000 years ago.  Do you believe the histories of, say, the Roman Empire that
were written at that time period?  You believe every historical fact on
authority, because someone whom you perceive as reliable has told you so.
In many (not all) cases, there is some physical evidence backing up the
historical record.  There is evidence of many types, including physical,
backing up the Biblical record.  Again I recommend the books "Evidence that
Demands a Verdict" and "More Evidence that Demands a Verdict", by Josh
McDowell.  And finally, why not believe those who say that they have talked
with God, or been miraculously healed by Him (such an incident was even
broadcast on "That's Incredible" a few months back), or (as in my case)
experienced considerable psychological healing because He has unstintingly
loved me?  Try it; you'll like it.  Or rather, try Him; you'll love Him.
"Taste and see that the Lord is good."

> Christianity has survived as a philosophy, it does not depend on the
> existence of God.

This does indeed sound as though you grew up in a liberal church, preaching a
philosophy rather than the Good News that "God was in Christ reconciling the
world to Himself."  But true Christianity--a true relationship with God, such
as I and millions of others have experienced--obviously depends on having
someone to relate to.

This has gotten rather long, so I'll reply to at least some of the rest
later on.

-- 
-- Jeff Sargent
{allegra|ihnp4|decvax|harpo|seismo|ucbvax}!pur-ee!pucc-h:aeq
Have you hugged your junk mail today?