Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.3 4.3bsd-beta 6/6/85; site sdcc6.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!ihnp4!houxm!vax135!cornell!uw-beaver!tektronix!hplabs!sdcrdcf!sdcsvax!sdcc3!sdcc6!ix415 From: ix415@sdcc6.UUCP (Rick Frey) Newsgroups: net.religion,net.religion.christian Subject: Re: What constitutes proof of the existence of God? Message-ID: <2215@sdcc6.UUCP> Date: Thu, 26-Sep-85 04:57:29 EDT Article-I.D.: sdcc6.2215 Posted: Thu Sep 26 04:57:29 1985 Date-Received: Fri, 4-Oct-85 05:12:00 EDT References: <8508172148.AA02946@sdcc6.ARPA> <308@pyuxn.UUCP> <2195@sdcc6.UUCP> <350@pyuxn.UUCP> Organization: U.C. San Diego, Academic Computer Center Lines: 201 Xref: watmath net.religion:7864 net.religion.christian:1392 Summary: God, proofs and friendly Bibles. Paul, I'm going to take my article and put some of my questions next to your answers and see if we can find out what's wrong. I write you and think I've said something you need to answer, you write back with the same idea and neither of us seem to be hitting the other, so let me make clear a few of the points of my last article. >> That would be true if we were talking about the same God. But the one >> to whom you refer evolved (??) and is evil and doesn't have the >> properties of the one I believe so I'd be interested in hearing about >> how this God came about. > > Why do you keep insisting that we are talking about different > Gods. Are you talking about the God that you whorship, the God who calls > Himself the ruler of the universe? In that case, we are talking about the > same God ... We'll start here. You didn't answer my question. I said that the God you're talking about evolved, is not omnipotent, not omniscient, did not create the world and mankind and that right there is more than enough to make him or it or whatever something completely different from what I believe in. In everything you say, you describe what the Bible says of Satan to the letter. The great deceiver, intent on destroying people, trying to get people to worship him, but you are not talking about "God". "God" (the God of the Bible) does not exist. There is this evolved, nutty, powerful creature out there who's trying to trick people, but we're just not on the same wavelength here. While you disagree with the Bible, I can at least go to it to show some basis for God having these attributes. Where do you get that your evil-god is not omnipotent? How do you know he evolved and that he hasn't just tricked the scientists? If there is this powerful evil god out there trying to trick us all and make us miserable, how do you point to anything as true and correct if this god can make people be stooges? How do you know that the scientists who derive the natural laws aren't stooges? > You are consistently skirting the issues about the nature > of God in order to cling to beliefs about Him that you have learned to > need. You contradict your own words several times when you say you feel > that God exists but you demand proof from me of His existence. > Skirting them? How? I'm trying to get you to be clear on how this god that you talk about is the same God that I talk about. And where did you get that I learned to need these beliefs? Maybe I chose them? Maybe the needs are real? And the proof of existence that I demand from you is for this god that you're talking about. I believe that the God of the Bible exists, but I don't know anything about evil, evolving, semi-omnipotent gods out to get people aside from what the Bible tells us about Satan. And don't just go back to your statement that God and Satan are the same person/thing, because then you're back to this evil God that I still want to know the above info on. > Certainly there is evidence that Christ walked the Earth, but the > only evidence we have that he did what you believe he did is the word of > God Himself. Wrong. There's lots of historical evidence supporting Christ's existence outside of Biblical manuscripts. There are letters between Roman court officials talking about what to do with this Christ, Jewish historians talk about the uprisings he caused, all sorts of religious sects refer to Him and to the things He did that are not part of the Bible. There's plenty of evidence outside of the Bible. While almost eveyone on the net has jumped on this guy, read Josh McDowell's book (the chapters on the life of Christ) Evidence that Demands a Verdict. Next point. Here was a question that I asked that you never answered. >> Would you put up with that excuse from your kids? "Sorry Mom, I didn't >> clean my room because the evil, damager-God made me be bad." > Believing that evil is a > ``volitional choice'' is simply giving in to the lies of God. > So you didn't answer my question, what are you going to do with your kids? When your son comes home and says that he didn't mow the lawn because the evil-damager God made him be bad are you going to buy it? Kids don't choose to make jokes at one another? They don't enjoy the self-glorification of cutting someone else down? You don't think they know when they're doing something like that that they know is wrong? You ought to go back and visit a sixth grade again sometime. > You say ``doesn't it seem kind of convenient that everything wrong > gets blamed on God and the good stuff comes only when God is too lazy to > really screw us?'' Yet you would claim that everything good in this world > should be credited to God while the ``bad stuff'' is our fault? Tell me, > Rick, which sounds more truthful to you? You've already heard my answer. A rhetorical answer, expecting something you know I'm not going to grant you doesn't make a whole lot of sense in terms of trying to prove your point. > > You ask to see the death and hatred God wrote down. Look at the > Bible itself for all the examples you need. The demand that a man sacrifice > his son. We'll take them one at a time. The demand for God to have perfection is what you're really after (if it's not than you're not dealing with the Bible). God claims to be perfect. God claims to have created the world for purposes unknown (in many ways). God made a simple rule (or it might be part of His nature) that He will not/cannot allow sin into His presence. God made a rule that the wages of sin are death. If God was to keep His own rules and yet have us in a relationship with Himself, only He could pay the price that He demanded. He couldn't wave it without invalidating the rule and the rule still stands, so He had to pay for it. And it's funny that you take what the Bible calls the greatest act of love ("Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down hiw life for his friend.") and try to turn it into something evil. > The destruction of masses of people at God's say-so. I would guess that you're referring to some of the Old Testament wars, but if you read through alot of those stories, the other nations did alot of picking on the Jews. While I don't know of any off-hand, I'm fairly sure that there's historical/archeological evidence for the Assyrians, the Babylonians, the Egyptians, the Persians and probably other nations completely taking over the Jews. Wouldn't you fight back? In the one story where Saul doesn't wipe out the entire Amelikite nation (he saves the King and bunches of sheep and stuff) years later (I can't remember the reference off hand) it's an Amelikite spy who almost gets the Jews wiped out again. God makes it clear that you do what He says and more often than not, survival depended on it. > The torturing > and killing of people for the purpose of teaching Job a ``lesson.'' Huh? I quickly reread Job so I might have missed something, but whe were the people who were tortured and killed? I didn't see Job's wife mentioned in the ending of the book, but as far as I could tell, most of the stuff happened to Job himself. And then its simply a question of importance. Use the example of football practice. A coach and the players make the decision that giving up free-time and working hard are more beneficial to learning and growing as a team than messing around. Another analogy I always use is this. Imagine your daughter, too young to understand how a stove works or what red burners mean) starts to put her hand on the burner. Are you not going to use whatever means available to stop her? Obviously you'd stop short of shooting her, that would defeat the purpose (we hope) but you'd yank her, grab her, do almost anything else to keep her from hurting herself. You're going to have to sit still here for a load of Biblical assumptions, but the Bible claims that our relationship with God is eternal and infinitely more important than the short time we'll have on this earth. In the story of Job, God is making the simple point that Christ makes in Mark 9:47, "And if your eye causes you to stumble, cast it out; it is better for you to enter the kingdom of God with one eye, than having two eyes, be cast into hell." And also and more exactly like the story in Job, Mathew 16:26, "For what will a man be profitted if he gains the whole world and forfeits his soul, for what in this world shall a man give in exchange for the life of his soul?" More on the Bible being a textbook for evil question: >> But that's my question. Show me some of the death and hatred that God wrote >> down for us to follow. Love your enemies? Bless them that curse you, pray >> for them who despitefully use you? Are these the words that inspired the >> inquisition? How about, "all those who live by the sword will die by the >> sword." Did the Bible inspire the inquisition or did men? > You ask who inspired the Inquisition and the torture and murder of > millions in the name of God. I answer, who else but God? But what kind of an answer is that? We were talking about how the Bible was this source for evil and you tacked the inquisition on the teachings of the Bible so I gave you a few quotes that sure seem to me to say no inquisition, but your response was another rhetorical question that I'd hope by now you'd know that I wouldn't agree with. I'm still looking for you to answer my questions about how the Bible supported the inquisition. > > Finally, you ask to hear about any leader since Christ who advocated > real human love. I can think of two in this century. Mahatma Gandhi and > Martin Luther King. Look at the fate God had in store for each of them. > When I asked that question, I was sure there were a few people that for the most part could be said to fit that distinction so I won't argue with those two. But that still doesn't even begin to touch the surface of rulers who have come in the name of Christ or of God and have practiced everything but what the Bible teaches. >> The Bible defines its purpose and >> nature quite clearly, "It is the Spririt who gives life; the flesh profits >> nothing; the words that I have spoken to you are spirit and are life. >> But there are some here who do not believe." (John 6:63,64) "If you abide in >> My word, then you are truly disciples of mine; and you shall know the truth >> and the truth shall set you free." (John 8:31,32) You didn't want to respond to this set of quotes so let me give you a few more. "He it is who has My commandments and keeps them, he it is who loves Me." John 14:21 "Do nothing from selfishness or empty conceit, but with humility of mind let each of you regard one another as more important than himself; do not merely look out for your own personal interests, but also the interests of others." Philippians 2:3-4 Please explain to me what these are doing in the book of an evil god? How does God get pleasure from teaching people ways to relate to one another that emphasize everything this god's against? Rick Frey Brought to you by Super Global Mega Corp .com