Re: Pilot Question? Religion?

 Posted on 12/17/1993 by jmsatb5@aol.com to rec.arts.sf.tv.babylon5.moderated


"I've yet to see proof for the nonexistence of god."

It is impossible to prove a negative, and it should not be the goal
of any discussion to try and force someone to either prove a negative, or
concede the validity of the opposing view. In other words...if you say,
"There are green penguins in the North Pole," it is not incumbent upon
me to prove that there are, in fact, no green penguins in the North
Pole. It is incumbent upon the person making the *statement* to prove
his assertion. If it cannot be proven, then it must be dismissed.

Much is made of the notion that faith is something that should not
require proof, that god objects to the idea of proving things. But this
position is not scripturally sound or based. Christ made the repeated
implication that he was there as the culmination of prophecy, that his
walking around was living proof of prophecy...so clearly he felt no
problem with offering proof *himself*, and offering himself AS proof, as
a living person. (I'm not taking a stance I accept theologically, only
arguing the logic behind doctrine itself.) When one of his disciples
refused to believe that it was he arisen from the grave, he didn't say,
"No, just take my word for it," he invited his disciple to stick his hand
in the wound. When Moses was called upon to prove his statements that he
was speaking to Pharoah on behalf of god, *he* certainly had no problem
with proving his statements, through the transformation of the staff and
the numerous plagues that followed.

The whole notion that religion must proceed ONLY on faith, and that
no proof can be required, is in *total* contradiction to what is actually
in the bible, as acted by the key figures in both the old and new
testaments. It is an assertion made only some time thereafter, when the
supposed proofs chronicled in the bible -- miracles, apparitions, the
freezing in place of the sun, frog-rains and open wounds -- ceased to make
regular appearances.

If Christ, asked to provide proof of his ressurrected self, has no
problem at all with providing such proof, I cannot understand why anyone
calling himself a Christian would have a problem with such a request.
But then, as Mark Twain said, "If Christ were alive today, there is one
thing he would not be: a Christian."

jms