Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 (Tek) 9/26/83; site mako.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!akgua!sdcsvax!sdcrdcf!hplabs!tektronix!orca!mako!tims
From: tims@mako.UUCP (Tim Stoehr)
Newsgroups: net.religion
Subject: Re: A Challenge
Message-ID: <100@mako.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 9-May-84 12:36:58 EDT
Article-I.D.: mako.100
Posted: Wed May  9 12:36:58 1984
Date-Received: Sun, 20-May-84 00:06:50 EDT
References: <1700019@iuvax.UUCP>, <757@akgua.UUCP>
Organization: Tektronix, Wilsonville OR
Lines: 38


 > Of course, nobody is required to be a Seeker of Truth but I
 > notice that many of the Skeptics of the Net appear just plain
 > hostile to faith, supernatural things, religion in general,
 > and Christianity in particular (probably because of majority
 > status in the culture).

Hostility is the wrong word, frustration is more like it.  To explain
what I mean, I'll give you a real example.  Mr. Norris defies
a scientific explanation of the creation of the universe because it
does not explain the creation of hydrogen.  OK, fine.  The natural
question to then ask Mr. Norris is to explain how God was created.
His answer will be that your question does not make sense or cannot
be answered scientifically, thus avoiding the same type of question
that is staunchly used to defend Christianity.  Now, THAT is frustrating.
In other words, I am told that God exists, is everywhere, is
omniscient, omnipotent etc. yet I can see no evidence anywhere, then
I'm told that I'm not looking in the right way for the right things, and
on and on and on.  Naturally, it frustrates people when they are given
arguments, NONE of which, can be shown to be true or false, which I
believe is the case of arguing for God's existence, even though the
likelihood seems extremely low to me.

 > Certainly it would make for dull
 > reading if Rich and the Agnostic Hordes just rolled over and
 > played dead, but I detect a meanness of spirit in a lot of
 > what passes for skepticism.

"Agnostic hordes?", "roll over and play dead?"  You sound a bit mean
and hostile yourself, unless of course, it's just skepticism.

 > "By the way, this IS net.religion"
 > "How do you know that is true ? Where's your evidence?"

It says so at the top of the article.  Also, I found the article in
/usr/spool/news/net/religion/1643.  The article is therefore net.religion,
therefore I was "in" net.religion when I read it.  If only there was
as convincing evidence to support christianity's claims.