Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site qantel.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxj!ihnp4!zehntel!dual!qantel!ken
From: ken@qantel.UUCP (Ken Nichols@ex6193)
Newsgroups: net.religion
Subject: Re: Religion is Religion, not history
Message-ID: <301@qantel.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 8-Nov-84 13:51:40 EST
Article-I.D.: qantel.301
Posted: Thu Nov  8 13:51:40 1984
Date-Received: Sat, 10-Nov-84 07:51:01 EST
References: <512@houca.UUCP>
Organization: MDS Qantel, Hayward, CA
Lines: 39

> I have talked to my share of deeply religious people, many of them in my family.
> I think I understand, for the most part why they believe what they believe.
> The magic word is FAITH. Not scientific evidence. Not historical proof. They
> believe that the Bible is the absolute truth but they don't try to justify
> it using hard evidence. The fact is that believing in God, the Bible or
> anything of a religious nature requires a leap of faith. I get the feeling
> Ken, that you are not willing to admit that. Face it. It's a fact. I can
> easily accept anything you say if you are willing to admit that it is
> faith that is the deep-down reason for it.
>  
> -- 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> From: Scott Thompson
> ------------------------------------------------------------

Yes, Scott, it does take faith.  But there is evidence.

Are you trying to say that it's posible that the writers of the Bible got
together and concoted this scheme to decieve millions of people?  The Bible
was written over a period of thousands of years, and yet it all agrees with 
itself.  I know, you say that someone took the Bible and rewrote it to agree
with itself.  Why?  For what purpose?  And, if this is the case, why include
four accounts of the life of Christ?  Wouldn't that be considered a little
redundant?  And how did these scheming writers or rewriters hide the deep
truths about God so well in the epistles?  It must have been pretty difficult.
And to fake all those letters to those churches.  And what about the
geographical accuracy of the Bible?  How did the writers/rewriters get all
these details right?

It just seems to much evidence to me to write it all off as a big hoax.

Faith is necessary to believe the truths in the Bible, that is for sure.  But
it doesn't require tremendous loads of faith in my life to believe in the 
veracity of the Bible.
--
"...holding forth the                           Ken Nichols
 word of life...' Phil. 2:16                    ...!ucbvax!dual!qantel!ken
----------------