[net.religion] A Question for Rich Rosen

kene@mako.UUCP (04/28/84)

I have read numerous articles from Rich condemning (debunking?) religion.  
These typically contain general statements to the effect of "there is no 
evidence that God exists" or "religion is a vane, outdated, superstitious
exercise for unsophisticated minds" or some such similar vein.  Statements 
to this effect spark my curiosity with regard to the following question, 
and I invite Rich (and anyone else who regards himself/herself in Rich's 
camp) to comment on it:

QUESTION:
What evidence would you LOOK FOR to convince you that God 
DOES (or at least COULD) exist?  

If you choose to respond to this question, I ask that your response be 
clear and specific as possible.  I have read lots of articles on the net 
by a number of people stating that they DON'T accept certain evidence as 
valid, and I'm wondering what evidence people WOULD accept.  


                                 Watching and Waiting,

                                   Ken Ewing 
                            [decvax,ucvax]!tektronix!mako!kene

steven@qubix.UUCP (Steven Maurer) (05/03/84)

[Pardon me for butting in]


>  and I invite Rich (and anyone else who regards himself/herself in Rich's 
>  camp) to comment on it:
>  
>  QUESTION:
>  What evidence would you LOOK FOR to convince you that God 
>  DOES (or at least COULD) exist?  

>  If you choose to respond to this question, I ask that your response be 
>  clear and specific as possible.  I have read lots of articles on the net 
>  by a number of people stating that they DON'T accept certain evidence as 
>  valid, and I'm wondering what evidence people WOULD accept.  


    This very question was asked of me by GRW, while I was in college.

    My answer:   A license plate.

    Not just ANY license plate, one especially monagrammed with my name
    on it, and saying on the back: "Guess Who?".   I would, of course,
    like this to be delivered into my hands in the typical showy fashon --
    a poof, bang, flash, and a "Let there be License Plate".

    This would remove all my doubts.


    Now I realize that this is a pretty tall order, but for the guy who
    reportedly made the universe in 6 days, it should be nothing at all.
    I ALSO realize that "Satan", and his crowd, could probably do the same
    thing.... hey no problem!  I don't choose sides!  Just get me my
    license plate.

    Some Christians will no doubt tell me that this is improbable evidence
    since either 1] It interferes with my "free will", or 2] "God doesn't
    work that way".    As far as 1] is concerned, I will tell you that I
    really couldn't care less about free will when such valuable retirement 
    property (heaven/hell) is at stake.. I handily give it all up....
    hmmmm... still no license plate.    As far as 2] is concerned, I
    disagree..  The entire Bible is made up of stories where NON-BELIEVERS
    are accosted by angels: "Pssst!  Hey bub!  Wanna believe in a god?",
    and converted to the faith.   (Often these people were mass murders,
    and one convert had even spent his life trying to stamp out
    Christianity, before some angel came down and said cut it out).  Why
    should I be left out of the fun??


    Steven Maurer

karl@osu-dbs.UUCP (Karl Kleinpaste) (05/05/84)

In the interest of avoiding a quoted quote of a quote, I think the
series of events is something like:
    (a) Rich Rosen et al want evidence for the existence of God,
    (b) Someone (in frustration, I guess) asks what sort of evidence
	would be acceptable, and so
    (c) Steven Maurer suggests that a divinely-created license
	plate would be in order, complete with proper "fanfare."
(Have I misrepresented anyone?  If so, yell once, and I'll either
retract or correct...)

Now I feel I have to quote Steven in order to provide proper context:
    Some Christians will no doubt tell me that this is improbable evidence
    since either 1]..., or 2] "God doesn't work that way".
    ...  As far as 2] is concerned, I
    disagree..  The entire Bible is made up of stories where NON-BELIEVERS
    are accosted by angels: "Pssst!  Hey bub!  Wanna believe in a god?",
    and converted to the faith.   (Often these people were mass murders,
    and one convert had even spent his life trying to stamp out
    Christianity, before some angel came down and said cut it out).  Why
    should I be left out of the fun??

OK, well, my answer is going to be "[2] God doesn't work that way."
Now let me try to explain it.

God doesn't work that way because that method expects God to serve man.
That, as I have pointed out to a couple of others in the mail, is not the
correct order of things.  God is God, and as such he is supposed to be
served.  By saying, "Give me a license plate or I won't believe in you,"
you seem to be giving God an order.  He is not prone to do what humans
order him to do.  He is much more prone to do what humans *ask* of him
in humility, when they coincide with his will.  The reason that Christians
view prayer as a powerful tool is that Christians are trying to learn
God's will, and hence their prayers will be more likely to coincide with
one of the many possible events which would reflect God's will.

This question (asking for a license plate) is much like the complaint,
"Why doesn't God get rid of the evil in the world?  *Then* I'd believe
in him."  There are many things that God wants to do for people, but
people are supposed to be serving their God.  When you say, "then I'll
believe," you are requiring God to do you some service first.  That's
just plain not right; it's backward.  You have attempted to place the
responsibility for your belief on God's shoulders.  Sorry, that's your
personal, private responsibility.  God has already given evidence for
his existence; that's what the Bible really becomes.  Why would you be-
lieve new evidence presented to you now?

This reminds me of a pair of articles recently.  David Norris described
a miracle to which he was a witness: A friend afflicted with cancer was
abruptly found to be completely healthy (no cancer).  Someone else wrote
that this was not a miracle, but that it was an as-yet-unexplainable
medical fact.  Well, to Christians, that was a prime example of a miracle
which God worked; non-believers rationalize it away into "unexplained" and
reject the evidence.  It seems clear to me that this attitude won't be
satisfied with any evidence of any kind.
-- 
"Gee, I haven't been really flamed in months..."
Karl Kleinpaste @ Bell Labs, Columbus	614/860-5107	{cbosgd,ihnp4}!cbrma!kk