From: whheydt@pbhya.pacbell.com (Wilson Heydt)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Re: Question for fundamentalists
Date: 16 Sep 92 04:12:49 GMT
Organization: Pacific * Bell, San Ramon, CA

In article <Sep.15.04.11.59.1992.25639@athos.rutgers.edu>, ptfarre@afterlife.ncsc.mil (Peter Farrell) writes:
> In article <Sep.12.23.57.38.1992.13105@athos.rutgers.edu> boe@cadsun2.slac.stanford.edu (Robert Boeninger) writes:
> >As a serious sceptic, I have a fundamental question for so-called Christian 
> >fundamentalists.
> 
> I hate to sound indifferent, Bob, but my first response is a question in
> turn. Is your motive for these questions:
> 	a) Indifferent curiosity
> 	b) Contempt for Christianity and Christians 
> 	c) Genuine seeking for the Truth with a capital T
> 	d) Just for the hell of it (meant more literally than you might think)

I suggest another, and--I hope--more interesting reason.

There are those of us who are not believers in any religion, but live
in a country with a majority of believers in a closely related set of
sects.  Aside from an genuine interest in how our neighbors
think--*especially* when otherwise sane and rational people start
spouting what sounds like arrant nonsense--it behooves the areligious
to understand the beliefs around them.

> The moderator occasionally (more often than I would like) lets enemies post
> to the newsgroup who clearly (from their tone and words) could not care less
> whether anyone answers them. 

The moderator may be wiser than you think.  If your beliefs undergo no
tests or challenges, you may not uderstand your own beliefs very well.

As for the answers . . .  Sometimes *how* a question is answered
reveals more, and more interesting, information that what is actually
contained in the answer.  

There are questions asked from an adversarial stance that are answered
very poorly (if at all).

> If you really are not interested in whether
> the Bible is valid, God exists, Christ was who we say He is, or in anything
> spiritually speaking that Christianity is concerned with, would you mind
> or misunderstand very much if you get little response?

Specific claims are made.  In another thread here it is pointed out
that claims internal to religious bodies need reasoned answers.  What
then of answers asked from outside?  Can those of us that are curious
receive no better answer from you than 'you have to have faith'?  If
that is the only answer--then those without faith are doomed if you
are correct and you are very foolish if you are wrong.

> I mean, supposing (to take the other side's viewpoint for a moment) that we
> are all just silly followers of a dead Jewish carpenter who believe an
> ancient anthology of literure, poetry and legend that is patently false
> as a foundation of reality about man, life, death, morals and eternity,
> I would enjoy being permitted to continue socializing with fellow
> believers without redundant interruptions of the "so tell me how come...if"
> variety.

Sounds good to me.  If so--please keep it all in the club and Let My
Government Go.  However. . .  Since religious issues--especially
Christian ones--seem to be rather thuroughly tangled in government and
government policy, those who do *not* share your religion are forced
to operate as if they did, and your business becomes my business
regardless of my wishes.

> On the other hand, if we are right about all this and if you are genuinely
> searching for the answers not only to why we believe in the Bible and in
> this Jesus of Nazareth as we do but also for an absolute morality, believe
> me: I and many others of us will be happy to talk with you. Honestly.

I've had similar discussions on a number of occasions.  To date--no
clear answers are forthcoming.  Even so, I persist.

	--Hal
-- 
Hal Heydt                    |    "Boycott Time-Warner"
Analyst, Pacific*Bell        |         --J. Danforth Quayle
510-823-5447                 |    "... kill all the lawyers."
whheydt@pbhya.PacBell.COM    |         --William Shakespeare