No ratings.
A Correspondence with David Ohayon |
February 24, 1993 A NEW BEGINNING with Greg Laurie P.O.Box 4424 Riverside, CA. 92514 714-687-6595 Dear Muzzy, On behalf of Greg Laurie and "A New Beginning" may I both thank you for writing and apologize for our being so slow in responding to your letter of December 31, 1992. We are glad that you are listening to our radio program, and we are thankful that you are interested in matters of ultimate importance. In your letter you raised many different issues. (1) Doubts as to the Divinity of Jesus Christ or the likelihood of God, especially in regards to miracles. (2) The existence of flying saucer men, in regards to the Old Testament and New. (3) The existence of Fairies and Leprechauns as an example of mythical creatures. Let me say that although there are a small number of Theologians who may be sympathetic to your objections about salvation and virtue in regards to salvation outside of Christianity, why argue over Biblical exegesis when one doesn't even believe that there is a God? It seems to be a clear case of putting the proverbial cart before the horse. Your second issue dealt with your objections that the Bible claims were not open to empirical verification an were therefore suspect, if not nullified. I know not one single philosopher today who holds to an exclusively empirical verification criteria for testing truth. Fairies and Leprechauns do not have the testimony equal to the Bible. I put it to you Mr. Muzzy, how would you prove empirically that Napoleon ever existed, or that you had ham and eggs for breakfast? But few would be so naive as to claim that Napoleon never existed. First of all it follows logically that if a God(who created the universe)does in fact exist, then producing miracles shouldn't be a big problem for such a God. It seems to me that your suggestion that exterrestrial people were involved in the Bible miracles, implicitly denies the existence of God, and therefore human claims to miracles must be explainable in terms of naturalistic causes(in this case, deception, fraud, psychological explanations, etc.). Now that a rational component for testing truth has been justifiably introduced, we can rationally argue for the likelihood or unlikelihood of there being a God, and indeed, that is what much of the whole of the whole history of philosophy has consisted of. If you want to review the sophisticated arguments for God's(or a least a creator of some sorts)existence, I would turn you to the works of Plato, Aristotle, Augustine, Anselm, Aquinas, Descartes, C.S.Lewis, Alvin Plantinga, and Richard Swinburne. Maybe you will find them compelling enough to take you to what Thomas Aquinas called the "Vestibule of Faith." Sincerely, David Ohayon DO:ja |