Subject:
|
Re: Religion and Science
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Tue, 5 Dec 2000 15:12:15 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1017 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Christopher L. Weeks writes:
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, John Neal writes:
>
> > And yet, Bruce, if I said to you "there is a God who exists as revealed by • Jesus of
> > Nazareth", what would be your first response? Maybe you'd say, "that's nice • for
> > you, now run along and play" (oops, that's what *Lar* would say). But what if • I
> > pressed and said,"No really, it's true!" Your next thought would be that you • would
> > want *proof*. Is that inconsistent to expect? Or maybe you'd want evidence. • What
> > amount of evidence would convince you? Hypothetically speaking, what *would* • it
> > take to convince you as a skeptic?
>
> You weren't asking me, but this is a great question.
>
> I think direct observation of a miraculous occurance that I couldn't explain in
> any other way more easily would cause me to seriously consider a divine
> explanation. If I routinely conversed with spirits, I would probably reject
> the notion that I was insane and accept some supernatural explanation (though
> depending on my delusions, it may well not be Christian in nature).
>
> I'm not sure what it would take. A plausible body of inexplicable evidence of
> soem kind.
I suppose the turnabout is fair, so I'll ask it:
What evidence, if witnessed by or expressed to you (the 'you' being
a believing Christian), would lead you to conclude that Christianity
is incorrect, and that there is in fact no God (or at least not the
God of Abraham as relayed in Scripture)? That's a much harder
question, one that's even more difficult than the one John asked
you, because while we might believe in the face of a miracle and
admit that we might be persuaded to do so, I have yet to meet any-
one who can honestly and comfortably answer the opposing query.
That doesn't speak badly of them, but it does stand as testament
to the power of faith and the (un/)provability of its veracity.
However anyone that expects to debate the question must be able
to consider both hypotheticals.
best
Lindsay
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Religion and Science
|
| (...) Jesus of (...) for (...) I (...) would (...) What (...) it (...) You weren't asking me, but this is a great question. I think direct observation of a miraculous occurance that I couldn't explain in any other way more easily would cause me to (...) (24 years ago, 5-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
198 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
