From: jfb@macsch.com (John Baskette)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Re: Non-Religious Practice
Date: 2 Oct 92 05:07:15 GMT
Organization: MacNeal-Schwendler Corp.

In article <Sep.25.21.05.24.1992.3862@athos.rutgers.edu> jwong@copper.denver.colorado.edu (Jack Wong) writes:
>
>   Recently I posted an article on being a Non-Religious Practioner.
>   In my statement, I said I don't agree or believe the truthfulness
>   of the Bible.  All I asked was for some more facts besides the
>   Bible claiming that God exists.  
>
>   Is that too much to ask for from this Newsgroup?  To some obviously
>   it must have been because I got some real nasty and attacking
>   comments.  Are you all that sensitive to the point to get nasty
>   with someone who don't believe in God just by faith.  
>
>   Look, if people around this group is so nasty and uncivilized in
>   responding to my simple remarks, I want no part of it.  I hope
>   it's not the case because I know of a few people that are very
>   caring unlike some people in this group.
>
>Jack,

I am very sorry for the nasty attacking comments.  I would like to 
apologize for anything that may have been said that was insensitive
and attacking.  I do not understand why someone who is a Christian, who
presumably would wish to persuade you to accept the Christian faith, 
would behave this way.  I think that your inquiry is perfectly fair and 
reasonable.

Sometimes Christians get nasty or defensive because they are not all
that secure in their own beliefs.  Being rude and defensive is a kind
of defense mechanism.  I am not saying that this is OK.  I am not trying
to justify the behavior.

I would like to provide you with an argument or arguments that support 
the truthfulness of Biblical claims about the existence of God and the
person and work of Christ.  May I first ask a question?

What would you accept as good evidence or perhaps proof for the 
truthfulness of Christian claims?  

If you give me some guidance on what you will accept as evidence then
I will try to post a concise argument that might be interesting.

I would like to recommend some books.  One is "Mere Christianity" by
C. S. Lewis.  Another is "Scaling the Secular City" by J. P. Moreland.
There are many other books of value.  If you are philosophically 
oriented you might want to check out Alvin Plantiga.  He has a book
call "God and Other Minds" and another easier book the title of which
escapes me at the moment.  There is also a book, "The Kallem (sp?)
Cosmological Argument" by William Lane Craig.

Right now I wish to comment on some of the responses posted so far.

Many Christians believe that Christianity must be accepted only on faith
or by taking a "leap of faith".  If a leap of faith is truly blind 
(i.e. the object of belief in question has no reasonable evidence or 
arguments that warrant faith) then a leap of faith can be used to 
justify belief in virtually any idea.  I don't think that many believers
actually believe on this basis.  Most Christians have some kind of 
experience with what they perceive to be God or Christ.  The nature of 
these experiences are such that the Christian does not believe that
the experience could have been the result of anything other an actual
encounter with the living God or Christ.  For this reason the Christian
chooses to continue to believe that the Christian interpretation or view
of the world and existence as the correct view.  This is not IMO a leap
of faith.  It is a form of discovery whereby an individual interprets
experience by forming a world view that best accords with those 
experiences.

Some will say that experience is purely subjective and therefore cannot
be used as evidence for or against the truth of the Christian faith.
The problem with that idea is that all experience is a form of subjective
experience.  Presumably all human observers (with numerous exceptions) 
see the sun rise using their own subjective senses.  Humans then compare
their common experiences and form a model or interpretation of the world
that agrees on some level about what the sun is and that it rises and 
sets once every 24 hours.

In fact, I do not know of any skeptics that try to deny that
people have religious experiences.  Varieties of religious experience
is a subject of scientific investigation.  I suggest that the existence
of the religious experience is a form of objective evidence for the 
Christian faith in that the Christian world view predicts that such 
experiences would occur.  This evidence, however, is rather weak because
there are many other possible interpretations of the world that can
justify the existence of religious experience.

It is my opinion that just taking Christianity on faith is not what
people actually do and is not any kind of argument for the truthfulness
of Christianity.  I wish to say more, but I have to go now.  Thanks,

John