On Sat, 23 Sep 2000 10:38:11 CDT, Justin Hasselman
<[log in to unmask]> wrote:

>>Brad Cooley wrote:
>>I took a philosophy class in college in which we did a section on the
>> >proof of the existence of "god" or a supreme being.  It was >demonstrated
>>that there was no way to logically prove that "god" >existed.  I was not a
>>philosophy major and never independently >verified the claim, so I cannot
>>say that it is accurate.
>
>There is not way to prove the existence of a god.  Nor is there a way to
>prove the non-existance of a god.  This is why all religions demand that
>their claims be accepted on faith.

I'm afraid that your logic is not very good.

There is a difference between proof and knowledge.

I know that a grape tastes good to me, but I cannot prove to you that
a grape
tastes good to me.

I'm sure we've all seen plenty of scenes in movies (or in our own
lives), where
someone serves bad tasting food, and out of politeness, the guest says
"tastes
wonderful" and then when the host looks away, spits it out into his
napkin with
a frown.

In a similar way, no personal experience can be "proved" - BUT
nevertheless you
cannot convince someone that they are "hallucinating" that a grape
tastes good
to them.

And, in a similar way, millions of people have experienced God.

But, they cannot prove it any more than they can prove that a grape
tastes good
to them to someone who has never eaten a grape.

(more on the other illogical arguments in this message in part 2, but
I wanted
this basic truth not to be diluted.)


--
Cheers,

Ken
[log in to unmask]