Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/17/84; site hplabsc.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!ihnp4!nsc!amdahl!hplabsc!brengle
From: brengle@hplabsc.UUCP (Tim Brengle)
Newsgroups: net.religion.christian
Subject: Re: Who gets the Glory?
Message-ID: <2766@hplabsc.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 22-Oct-85 20:40:00 EDT
Article-I.D.: hplabsc.2766
Posted: Tue Oct 22 20:40:00 1985
Date-Received: Thu, 24-Oct-85 01:02:22 EDT
References: <1489@vax3.fluke.UUCP> <383@pyuxn.UUCP>
Organization: Hewlett Packard Labs, Palo Alto CA
Lines: 59

[I am new to this network and news.  Please forgive any breaches of ettiquette
 or custom.}

Paul,

In your article <383@pyuxn.UUCP>, you wrote:
> I find it sort of sad that you can simply ignore the evidence pointing to
> the fact that your God, the God that you whorship, is in fact the evil
> Damager-God. The assumptions you make about the nature of God to get you
> to that conclusion are too many to count. Perhaps if you can shirk them you
> will know the true nature of God.

You seem to imply that the evidence for your damager-god is overwhelming.  Or
that the number of assumptions required to believe in its existence are fewer
than with a benevolent God.  So far, (remember that I have only been reading
here for about 2 weeks), I have seem nothing to suggest either.

In order for there to be Good of any form, there must be an Evil to measure
it against.  Consider any of the so-called utopian communities that have been
started -- including those be various religious groups.  My understanding is
that the "usual" reason for their short life is internal dissetion.  This
suggests that even is a group of all Good people get together, the usual
process of finding identity (that is differentiating yourself from the rest
of the madding throng) stratifies such a Good group into the More-goods and
the Less-goods.  It is then but a simple semantic change for "Less-good" to
become "Evil".  (Please no flames about the existence of absolute Truth --
there just isn't room to go into everything here.)

My limited understanding of your views would seem to indicate that you have
just taken Good and renamed it Evil, and vice versa.

Assume for a moment that your view and the traditional Judeo-Christian view
(hereinafter labeled "my view") are equally good at explaining the facts --
that is, the physical evidence around us.  I can guess that you will argue
over that assumption, as can I (from the opposite view).  But grant it for
the moment.

Then, what strikes me most about the system that you espouse it the total
lack of hope.  You do not allow your damager-god to be omnipotent, but even
so he must be a truly potent adversary.  After all, have you the power to
cloud men's minds as you claim he has?  If he is then so powerful, how can
you have any hope of defeating him?  Does that not leave you in a place where
your struggle is ultimately futile (and hopeless)?

My view, on the other hand, has me in league with God.  And places me in a
position of hope -- after all I have a very, very powerful ally.  Especially
since I believe that he is omnipotent.

It strikes me that a beliefe system without any hope is not worth the trouble.
I choose instead to believe that God has a plan (beyond my puny understanding)
that gives victory in the end.

I have a further question:  is there any love in your system of beliefs?  The
entire reason for my coming to know God is love.  His unending, infinite love
for me.  It will be hard to convince me that He whose love I feel daily is
one and the same with your damager-god.

					Sincerely (and I really mean it),
						Tim Brengle