>
>Bob Sewell wrote to Mark Bloss about "Existence Exists"
 
 MB>  I can't say I can remember the post
 BS> Well, I've let my original question scroll off, but perhaps I can
 BS> reconstruct some of it from the portions of your quotes, to which
 BS> mine were addressed, found in another message still on my system.
 
 MB>> Because it takes faith to believe in Him, and to evidence Himself
 MB>> would mean that God somehow must prove Himself,
 BS> I "evidence myself" to people daily, my family, friends,
 BS> coworkers, the clerk at the convenience store where I buy gas, etc.,
 BS> and yet I don't do it because I have to prove myself to them.  Why is
 BS> it different for God?
 
 Because you are a part of the natural world - the physical manifestation
 of reality - God is "outside" the natural world, and the physical
 manifestation of reality is _from_ God; therefore, the physical reality
 _is_ evidence of God; but for any formal system (F), (F) cannot prove
 itself.  
 
 MB>> so that I would
 MB>> then not need faith to believe in Him.  If He proved Himself so 
 MB>> that faith is not required to believe in Him, then His purpose
 MB>> for me is diminished, ie, I do not develop faith, which is an 
 MB>> attribute _of_ God.
 BS> Why does God need this attribute?  What is there for Him to have
 BS> faith in?
 
 God does not "need" this attribute - he _has_ it.  If He did not have
 it, He would not be God.
 
 MB>> He exists because it would be impossible for my limited
 MB>>  imagination to understand a universe _without_ God.
 BS> God's existence or non-existence does not hinge on the strength or
 BS> weakness of your imagination.  He is either there or he isn't,
 BS> independent of you.
 
 And if His existence is independent of me and my imagination - then
 he MUST exist; because whatever is greater than my imagination can
 concieve, _is_ God.  Of all things that exist, or imagined - my
 conciousness will always be able to concieve something greater;
 and because we cannot have an infinite progression, there must be a
 God.
 
 MB> - but I would first need to know
 MB>  _why_ you submit the question - by that I mean - what requirment of
 MB>  faith is there?
 BS> That's why I asked.  It makes no sense to me why there would be a
 BS> requirement for faith.
 
 MB> Is God limited by a lack of faith in Him?
 BS> You mean, like he draws strength from our faith, like a vampire
 BS> sucking blood for his life?  I doubt it.  I wouldn't think a being
 BS> powerful enough to create the universe wouldn't need to feed off His
 BS> creation.
 
 MB> Or are we rewarded for believing _whatever_ we are taught,
 MB>  whether it is true or false, or ambiguous, simply by believing?
 BS> I dunno.
 
 MB>  Regardless of these prerequisites, I can say, that I believe that the
 MB>  requirment of faith is a given; if on the one hand science requires
 MB>  physical evidence, and on the other hand faith requires that one
 MB> should  never hold any possibility as being impossible.
 BS> But that leaves one open to believing anything.  How does one
 BS> choose what to believe and what to disbelieve, as far as things
 BS> requiring faith?
 
 The best test for belief is what has historically and experientially
 _worked_ best; and the best record we have of the historical and
 experimental, is the Bible.
... No man is an island, but then no man is a potato salad, either.
--- GEcho 1.11++TAG 2.7c
---------------