[net.religion] Proof of existence

aeq@pucc-h (Jeff Sargent) (10/04/84)

From Andy Banta (pucc-k:agz):

> You people are talking about looking for proof that a God exists or doesn't.

And as has been pointed out (by dear old C.S. Lewis), this is the subtlest of
all the snares:  people can get so wrapped up in trying to prove the existence
of God that they forget all about relating to God Himself, as if God had
nothing to do but *exist*!

> It seems to me that if a God existed, he would make it impossible to
> ascertain whether he existed.

If by this you mean that he would not leave a lot of scientific evidence lying
about, but rather would ask that people come to know Him by faith, I can quite
agree with this.  If, however, you mean that He would not provide any means for
people to come to know Him, obviously I disagree.

-- 
-- Jeff Sargent
{decvax|harpo|ihnp4|inuxc|seismo|ucbvax}!pur-ee!pucc-h:aeq
"I'm not asking for anyone's bleeding charity."
"Then do.  At once.  Ask for the Bleeding Charity."

agz@pucc-k (Andrew Banta) (10/04/84)

>> You people are talking about looking for proof that a God exists or doesn't.

>And as has been pointed out (by dear old C.S. Lewis), this is the subtlest of
>all the snares:  people can get so wrapped up in trying to prove the existence
>of God that they forget all about relating to God Himself, as if God had
>nothing to do but *exist*!

Yes, but it seems to me that the people who search the most for a God
are the ones that have the most question as to his existance. You seem
to feel there is a God, and have therefore given up the search. I can't
condemn you for that. Finding proof that a God does exist would be
rather anti-climactic, for once you've found the proof, you are more or
less obligated rahter than willing to believe in it. From my
understanding, this isn't the way it should be. You should believe in a
God if you want to, not because you're worried about being char-broiled
somewhere down the line or because it would look good to your friends/
neighbors. Along the same lines, I think that if people are interested,
they should find their God themselves, not be lassoed by someone else
who wants to see his fellow man saved ...

>> It seems to me that if a God existed, he would make it impossible to
>> ascertain whether he existed.

>If by this you mean that he would not leave a lot of scientific evidence lying
>about, but rather would ask that people come to know Him by faith, I can quite
>agree with this.  If, however, you mean that He would not provide any means for
>people to come to know Him, obviously I disagree.

 I was trying to imply the former. This is why I have no real intention
of searching for physical evidence. It seems to me that it would be
self-defeating in a God's eyes to leave physical proof lying around. If
he did, it would destroy any reason for faith, and simply give reason to
know. This is bad wording, but as an example, you don't need to have
faith that the sun is going to come up each morning, you should be able
to know it. All I'm really trying to say is that if a God exists, and
exists as so many people today believe he exists, it would be
self-defeating on its part to leave evidence.


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Andy Banta			{decvax!allegra!inhp4}!pucc-k!agz
Alcohol Design and Application Corp. --- Serving people over 21 years.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"I can't explain, you would not understand,
 This is not how I am ... "

rlr@pyuxn.UUCP (Rich Rosen) (10/09/84)

> From Andy Banta (pucc-k:agz):
> > You people are talking about looking for proof that a God exists or doesn't.
> 
> And as has been pointed out (by dear old C.S. Lewis), this is the subtlest of
> all the snares:  people can get so wrapped up in trying to prove the existence
> of God that they forget all about relating to God Himself, as if God had
> nothing to do but *exist*!

The same argument has been made for Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny.  As
is often case with C. S. Lewis, all one has to do is make certain presumptions,
and everything will be fine.  Don't wonder whether or not god exists, just ask
him and he'll tell you.  I wonder why "his" "response" is never "No.  I don't
exist."  Could it be that assuming that there's something there to answer such
a question assumes a specific answer?  
-- 
"If we took the bones out, it wouldn't be crunchy!"
					Rich Rosen    pyuxn!rlr