[net.religion] God as a psychological phenomenon

kechkayl@ecn-ee.UUCP (04/27/84)

#R:ssc-vax:-9000:ecn-ee:18600018:000:1831
ecn-ee!kechkayl    Apr 26 22:53:00 1984


<Round and round she goes . . . . >

Ok, one more time. You complain that I assume that god doesn't exist,
and then question the need for such a belief.  Very good, you are
correct, that was exactly what I was doing, I admit it.

Next, you say that you wish to discuss the merits of the Christian
position. Fine. For the purposes of argument:

	1) There exists a supreme being, the creator of all
	   that now is.
	
	2) This being loves, and takes an interest in humanity.

With the preceding major concessions, tell me:

	a) Is belief in Christ superior to belief in (for instance)
	   Buddha, or Allah (I won't even MENTION R.S. :-).

	b) If the answer to (a) is true, why?

On the subject of belief, you seem to make much of the difference
between 'I CAN'T believe', and 'I WON'T believe'. I can only infer
that you think that we all secretly know that there is a god out
there, Virginia, and we're just not believing to spite him.

>On the other hand, I know people who *won't* believe that women
>are equal to men, or that blacks are equal to whites.  It's not
>that they can't believe it (for there is plenty of EVIDENCE (emphasis
>mine) to suggest that they are).  Their biases and prejudices
>interfere with normal reasoning and they refuse to see the truth.

Not trying to be insulting, but:

	a) What evidence? Show it.
	b) When you began to believe in Christianity, did you 
	   already have this, or did you believe, and look the
	   evidence up later?
	c) If you already had it, was the evidence a deciding factor?
	d) If not, why did you believe?


Now a question which I suppose IS insulting, but then, I LIKE flame.
Is it possible that:
	'Your biases and prejudices interfere with normal 
	 reasoning and you refuse to see the truth?'


			Set phasers on flame, Mr. Sulu,

			Thomas Ruschak
			pur-ee!kechkayl