Re: Answer to Eugenie Scott's views

John W Burgeson (
Mon, 23 Mar 1998 20:03:13 -0700

Will: You wrote:

>> If we cannot by reason nor natural sciences truly detect the
presence of
a God, then I guess it must be through individual relationship with

I am in partial agreement. The mere existence of life, and all we
experience, is, to me, evidence of "something." If I were not a
Christian, I'd probably be a deist on the basis of this evidence.

To be a Christian, one must, (IMHO of course) encounter the Christian God
(more accurately, be encountered by him) individually, supernaturally.

Like many people, I am not real happy with this state of affaires, but
seems to be the way it is, none-the-less.

>> For me, the problem with this scenario is anthropology. All around the
folks have personal relationships with "their" gods.... If personal
experience is the only guide, then a very large number of gods are
allowable. Then you must argue that the gods of all are really your
Christian God.>>

The problem with that argument is that it tries to solve a theological
(which is, I will admit, difficult, albeit not impossible) rather than
inquiring into what it is that is the core of Christianity.

The core, IMO, is a love relationship with Jesus Christ. Not a church, a
set of doctrines, a set of answers. All of these things are interesting
and have their place, but they are simply tertiary (not even secondary)

>>Then comes the problem of psychology--can humans be brought up, or
induced to believe, widely shared ideas that are demonstrably wrong?
History abounds in
such examples.>>

Agreed, Astrology is my favorite example. The tenets of ICR are a distant

>>Can you tell me why your personal experience with God, without reason
natural science, is to be trusted so much?>>

It is not without reasons; it places reason in a subordinate position. It
is not without natural science; I am (was, I am now retired) a physicist
and in other sciences.

Once again on this, Will. I was a non-believer. At one point I put God to
the test. I told him (audibly, and I felt silly doing it, so I did it
while driving alone to work) that I was willing to embrace this Christian
bit IF he would convince me. The convincing, I told him, was up to him,
not me. I'd do the study bit, but most of all I'd promise him

Will -- I was brought up with one precept very much in 1st place. A
promise is a promise. So I meant what I said. That was 30 or 35 years

One day I suddenly realized, somewhat to my discomfort, that the
encounter had happened.

As the years have gone by, I realize more and more that such encounters
are highly individualistic. I've also realized just how real they are.

What about the problems of other religions, psychology, etc.?
Interesting. I have no particular opinions on most of these. Some people
study them closely, and do. That's fine. What I do know -- and I use the
word "know" deliberately, is the fact that God exists, Jesus Christ
lives, and I am his follower. All else is secondary.

On the Meta LISTSERV a guy by the name "Raman," (famous name, but it's
been 90 years since the physicist Raman did his work) wrote about the
three concepts:
trans-rationality (I have seen it also called a-rationality)

That might help in understanding this strange phenomena. And it might

Appreciate the dialog, Will. I'll say just one more thing -- then ring

Jesus's primary command is "love your neighbor." Love, of course, in the
sense of agape, concern for.

What I read from you indicates you are following that command.

That makes us closer than some of my very enthusiastic YEC friends. IMO



You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail.
Get completely free e-mail from Juno at
Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]