Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site osiris.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!unc!mcnc!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!umcp-cs!aplvax!osiris!jcp
From: jcp@osiris.UUCP (Jody Patilla)
Newsgroups: net.religion
Subject: Re: net.miracles
Message-ID: <298@osiris.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 3-May-85 16:33:25 EDT
Article-I.D.: osiris.298
Posted: Fri May  3 16:33:25 1985
Date-Received: Sun, 5-May-85 02:50:51 EDT
References: <262@cmu-cs-edu1.ARPA>
Organization: Johns Hopkins Hospital
Lines: 38

> ______________________________________________________________________
> 
> In several past articles, there have been a lot of readers posting
> responses with the assumption that God exists in the first place
> while responding to posts that question that existence.  There are
> many others that deal with some other idea, such as miracles, rather
> than the existence of God.  I will simply deal with the topic from
> the existence of God arena, though this post applies to all others.
> 

	Wait a minute, how can the religious believers have a leg to
stand on in this argument ? A religion is a belief system. The believer
accepts the articles of the religion ON FAITH, because *there is no
proof*. That is what faith means. If there were undeniable scientific
proof, then it would be a fact, not an item of faith. The very notion
that a god or gods exist is an article of faith, not a fact. 
	The Bible, the Koran, the Book of Mormon - that these are the
words of God or Allah is an item of faith with those persons who
believe in them, but there is no proof outside of those books that
they were written by God or by my aunt Matilde. To say that "it says
right here in the Bible that this is the Word of God" doesn't cut it
since that is not evidence outside of the item you are taking on
faith.
	Now, I don't want to impugne anyone's religion or beliefs, I
am non-commital about other people's religions as long as they don't
try to foist them off on me. I believe some pretty odd things of my
own but I don't try to hold them up as facts, only as my personal
(and admittedly colored) experiences. The point is religions are without
proof by their very nature - they require FAITH. THerefore, you cannot
speak of their beliefs as fact, and so there can be no argument here
about who is accepting what evidence and so forth.

-- 
  

jcpatilla

"'Get stuffed !', the Harlequin replied ..."