>Moorad Alexanian wrote: Dear Christopher,
><BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE>
>
><P>I believe that the logic of the human mind would lead to a unique supreme
><BR>being. Witness the attempts of physicists to seek a unifying theory
>making
><BR>all forces manifestations of a unique one. The latter is consistent
>with the
><BR>notion of a unique, supreme being. Note that Moslems and Jews cannot
><BR>understand the Trinity we Christian believe for that very same reason.
>
><P>Take care,
>
><P>Moorad</BLOCKQUOTE>
>This was Aquinas's contention in that he reserved faith only for those
>who could not follow the arguments for God's existence. Such an assumption
>placed upon human finite logic is fundamentally flawed from two points
>of view: philosophically, Godel has shown logic to be unworthy of
>such a quest in that antinomy lurks throughout its foundations;
>theologically, reason thereby obviates the need for faith which is
>very problematic biblically since "without faith it is impossible to please
>God" and "by faith do we understand that God created the world". If your
>assertion is true, then faith is superfluous.
>George Andrews Jr.
>Assistant Professor of Physics
>LeTourneau University
>andrewsg@letu.edu</PRE>
Dear George,
I am afraid you are not making the distinction I make between "logic" and
the "logic of the human mind." The former is formal/mathematical logic;
whereas the latter is something akin to human common sense or intuition. As
far as I am concerned no one can prove the existence of God--can Romeo
and/or Juliet prove the existence of Shakespeare? On the question of faith
vs. works, I come totally on the side of faith. Making works important is a
manner for humans--e.g., the priesthood, elders, etc.--to control other
humans. Therefore, using your brain is a form of works which would obviate
the inherent ability of man/women, through his/her spirit, to know God.
Take care,
Moorad