Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


1 posted on 06/29/2002 7:42:38 PM PDT by Illbay
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: Illbay
The Resurrection would seem tough to model. But from a coin toss near enough to 50/50, to narrowing the odds by conscious choice of successfully crossing a busy street, seeing the universe as a computational system makes Pascal's wager seem a better bet by and by.
2 posted on 06/30/2002 2:32:47 PM PDT by onedoug
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Illbay
Great post!
3 posted on 06/30/2002 5:07:25 PM PDT by Notforprophet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Illbay
Good post.

I marvel at the mystery of how one can proclaim that faith is irrational. Show me a theoretical model of how the universe [or us for that matter] came into existence, and I will show you something that will ultimately be accepted by faith--by the "believer".

A better question is what faith is more rational or reasonable?

It is in this instance or realm, where Christ-based philosophy stands heads and shoulders above the rest. Take the Resurrection for example; it does not suffer for lack of historical evidence--it is generally disbelieved simply because it is "unbelievable".

Well, is it believable that the Milky Way has 200 billion stars in it, is it believable that the keys on your PC key board "aren't really there", in quantum physical terms?

Is is believable that we are even here??

How is unbelief justified in the case of the Resurrection of Christ, in the face of the rest of the unbelievables? To disprove the Resurrection requires more than sheer unbelief.

Brian.

7 posted on 07/01/2002 1:39:50 PM PDT by bzrd
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson