From: ata@hfsi.uucp (John Ata - FSO)
Subject: Re: Reincarnation
Organization: HFS, Inc., McLean VA
Date: Sun, 4 Oct 1992 02:59:33 GMT

In article <1992Oct3.151101.14176@netcom.com> payner@netcom.com (Rich Payne) writes:
>In article <1992Oct2.224417.23923@hfsi.uucp> ata@hfsi.uucp (John Ata - FSO) writes:
>>In article <1992Oct1.053346.25405@netcom.com> payner@netcom.com (Rich Payne) writes:
>>>In article <1992Oct1.030539.14018@hfsi.uucp> ata@hfsi.uucp (John Ata - FSO) writes:
>
>[...]
>
>>>>>you are making, but not the difference.
>>>>
>>>>You mean to tell me that certain logical conclusions don't fall
>>>>into place for you if you accept the premise that a Supreme Being
>>>>(god) created the heavens and the earth?
>>>
>>>But knowing only that "(god) created the heavens and the earth" tells
>>>me nothing of it's purpose or nature. For that, you need to study the
>>>religious manuals and doctrines. Usually, parents teach this to their
>>>children before they are old enough to understand it. For most it catches
>>>on, and they will either belive, or at least go through the motions. Some
>>>ask questions right off, and never become believers. But this is more
>>>a measure of human interaction than proof of god, or evidence of purpose
>>>or the nature of the universe.
>>
>>I'll start you off...
>>
>>1) We are not alone in this universe.
>
>Funny, this is the same claim made in alt.alien.visitors. 

So? What does that have to do with anything?

> 
>>2) Someone created us, presumably for a purpose.  Maybe I'll be curious and
>>try to find out what that purpose is.
>
>They also make this claim in alt.alien.visitors.
> 

So?  What does that have to do with anything?

>>3) <Come on, I know you can fill in the blanks> :)
>
>There are so many ways to fill in the blanks, all of which are reflections
>of what you know and believe. 

Wonderful!  Then making the assumption conditionally will allow
one to explore avenues that they might not otherwise have
explored.  This will allow one to draw certain conclusions if they
accept the premise.  BTW, I'm not insinuating at all that everyone
will come to the same conclusion that I or anyone else did.

>>My point was to subject everyone to all the conclusions that it meant to me.

Sorry, I meant my point was *NOT* to subject everyone, but you probably
guessed that.

>
>I can accept this...
>
>>I was only trying to show that just accepting that premise can lead one
>>to question and search in areas that they might not have otherwise done.
>
>I doubt that most netreaders are ignorant of the premise you use. They have
>either accepted it, or not, or use another premise entirely.

Again, where does this statement come from?  I thought we were discussing
whether or not accepting the premise that God created the heavens and
the earth could lead one to draw *any* logical conclusions.  We were not
discussing who and who is not ignorant of the premise.

> 
>>>>Actually, the superstition can probably be objectively tested.
>>>>That is, a study could be done to determine if knocking on wood
>>>>statistically changed the presence of what we think is good luck.
>>>>The control group would, of course, have an object that felt like
>>>>wood but was not.  If the study was scientific and conclusive, I'd
>>>>bet you'd start the practice of knocking on wood... :)
>>>
>>>No, I was asking if you had any such proof of the validity of religion.
>>>And I still do not see what differentiates religion from superstition.
>>> 
>>
>>My point was that a religion is valid irrespective of any scientific proof.  
>
>By this do you mean that religion is valid as a personal belief? Or do you
>mean that it's claims are valid?

By this, I mean that religions are usually unfalsifiable by
scientific standards.

>
>>                           This is quite unlike the superstition in the
>>example above whose validity can be scientifically tested.
>
>How is it that the validity of the claim that 'god answers all prayers'
>cannot be tested? I belive this is in the Bible, I will have to check.

You wouldn't take a quote out of context, now would you? :)

> 
>Rich
>
>payner@netcom.com


-- 
John G. Ata - Technical Consultant | Internet:  ata@hfsi.com
HFS, Inc.		  VA20     |     UUCP:  uunet!hfsi!ata
7900 Westpark Drive	 MS:601	   |    Voice:	(703) 827-6810
McLean, VA  22102	           |      FAX:	(703) 827-3729