The Epiphany, Mr. Ed, and the Ghost of Marley
Brian McNeill
>
>On net.origins a dude and I have been goin' round and round about what WOULD
>'prove' that God exists, etc. etc. I say, that like anything else, there is
>a 'weight of evidence' to consider in making a decision about the existence of
>God. MY starting place is the HYPOTHESIS that the God of the Bible might exist,
Why should I hypothesize that the God of the Bible exists any more
than I should hypothesize that the Homeric gods exist when reading
Homer? I have read the Bible, and there is nothing in it that makes
me feel such a hypothesis would be valid, any more than the Homeric
gods. If I were to follow your suggestion, I would have to
hypothesize the Norse gods, the Native american Gods, etc. because I
don't feel any of them are any more likely than the Xian god, and
therefore should examine them all evenly.
>THEN I start to look at the evidence that the men who left us the record of
>their supposed experiences with God have claimed as 'proof' of it.
>I do NOT start with the ASSUMPTION that God exists. This, by the way, is why
>such a tactic - starting with the assumption and looking at the records - is not
>'circular reasoning' as some have claimed. I don't start with the assumption
>that the Bible is the Word of God!!!!! I have come to that conclusion after
>starting from the HYPOTHESIS that it might be and examining the EVIDENCE that
>those who wrote