Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site cybvax0.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!unc!mcnc!decvax!genrad!mit-eddie!cybvax0!mrh From: mrh@cybvax0.UUCP (Mike Huybensz) Newsgroups: net.religion Subject: Re: Believing In God Message-ID: <364@cybvax0.UUCP> Date: Wed, 20-Feb-85 12:15:21 EST Article-I.D.: cybvax0.364 Posted: Wed Feb 20 12:15:21 1985 Date-Received: Tue, 26-Feb-85 05:22:03 EST References: <642@decwrl.UUCP> Reply-To: mrh@cybvax0.UUCP (Mike Huybensz) Organization: Cybermation, Inc., Cambridge, MA Lines: 28 Summary: In article <642@decwrl.UUCP> merrill@rex.DEC writes: > What if there were a Large Monolith discovered on one of the outer planets > that had engraved on it in 2000 earth languages "Greetings from God", would > that make it easier for you to believe in Him? Would that make it too easy? I would wonder who was the practical joker. Perhaps some alien? > My personal belief is that God chooses many ways to reveal himself to mankind > but Totally Objective Evidence (TOEs) is NOT one such method because He chooses > for us to exercise our "faith", our "hope", and above all our "love". Right there in the Bible are numerous purportedly undeniable miracles. Such as the opening of the Red Sea, etc. Such as the stopping of the sun. Why should I insist on anything less? > If you could choose HOW God would reveal himself to you personally, what would > it be? Like George Burns' "God" He would be invisible, inaudible, and perhaps > incomprehensible to anyone but yourself: personal and subjective. If that happens to me, then I'll believe. No sweat. But I doubt that I will be personally enlightened by any of the myriad dieties whose adherents claim visitations. Nor would I be able to distinguish whether the diety was showing me truth or falsehood. Contrary to many popular folk traditions, I don't see that I could distinguish Satan from God from any other sufficiently manipulative being. -- Mike Huybensz ...decvax!genrad!mit-eddie!cybvax0!mrh