mcewan@uiucdcsb.CS.UIUC.EDU (09/15/86)
> Anyway, I was struck with the Mr. Ed first show. The one where Mr. Ed convinces > Wilbur Post he can really talk. And so this posting. > > On net.origins a dude and I have been goin' round and round about what WOULD > 'prove' that God exists, etc. etc. I say, that like anything else, there is > a 'weight of evidence' to consider in making a decision about the existence of > God. MY starting place is the HYPOTHESIS that the God of the Bible might exist, > THEN I start to look at the evidence that the men who left us the record of > their supposed experiences with God have claimed as 'proof' of it. > I do NOT start with the ASSUMPTION that God exists. This, by the way, is why > such a tactic - starting with the assumption and looking at the records - is not > 'circular reasoning' as some have claimed. I don't start with the assumption > that the Bible is the Word of God!!!!! I have come to that conclusion after > starting from the HYPOTHESIS that it might be and examining the EVIDENCE that > those who wrote it, making their claim that they are recording words from > God, are justified in such claims that it is the 'word of God' or not. If you have all this evidence, why don't you post IT instead of the meandering, incoherent messages you keep posting. Are we just supposed to take your word that you really have this evidence without seeing it? > He demands proof (without, I might add, defining what would BE 'proof' for him - > care to step forward with such a definition please?) from God of God's existence > before he will believe such a thing. I replied to him that NOTHING could prove > to him the existence of God since he would interpret every 'proof' as something > other than convincing evidence - just so someone who doesn't believe in ghosts > upon seeing one would retreat to the concept of 'illusion' or some such. I > suspect he has the ASSUMPTION that there is no God as a starting point. Which > is just as weak as starting with the assumption that there is a God. > > The Epiphany you will recall is the revelation to the Gentiles (Wise Men) that > Jesus is the Messiah, the Christ, 'God with us'. The claim of the Bible is that > God has revealed himself to us in the person of his Son, Jesus as recorded in > the experiences of those who knew him and left the historical records. I see. You didn't just accept that the Bible was the word of God, you looked for evidence. And what did you find? It says so in the Bible! There's your evidence. Boy, that was easy. > But on to Mr. Ed. The dialogue goes like this: > > [Deleted conversion between a man and a horse, and a man and a ghost.] > And don't forget this heartwarming conversion between David Berkowitz and his dog, Sam: Sam: Dave, this is God. I want you to get a gun and kill some people. Dave: I'm hearing it with my own ears, so it must be true. Ok, if you say so. > Are Wilbur Post and Mr. Scrooge more enlightened than some of our merry netters? Are you as enlightened as Son of Sam? Scott McEwan {ihnp4,pur-ee}!uiucdcs!mcewan "Guy's brain-damaged, but he's not stupid."