Attempting to equivocate the word "see" is a sophomoric tactic. I'll give you one more chance to demonstrate you are capable of answering clearly and directly without equivocations or metaphors. Let's just stick with trying to get a solid answer to the initial part of my first question for the moment. The dialogue so far...
Q1: Is God visible in the typical range detectable by human eyes? Yes or no.
Q2: If yes, then what is the "right direction" and "correct proximity" to visually detect him?
(April 18, 2016 at 9:41 am)Time Traveler Wrote: 1) You remained hidden for so long. Did you wait to reveal yourself until now because the religious wars between Islam and Christianity, Protestant and Catholic, etc., amused you?
(April 21, 2016 at 9:45 am)Drich Wrote: 1)I'm in plain sight, you just have your eyes closed to me.
(April 18, 2016 at 9:41 am)Time Traveler Wrote: 1) Actually, my eyes are open, and I don't see you O' Lord. Are you saying you are indeed visible between about 390 to 700nm on the electromagnetic spectrum which is the typical range detectable by human eyes? Or are you speaking in abstruse, meaningless metaphors again?
(April 21, 2016 at 9:45 am)Drich Wrote: If you lack wisdom or understanding of a metaphor then why do you not ask?
To "see" even in the English can also mean to understand a process or to know how something works beyond what you can physically see. EG: can you 'see' how that would work, Can you see why "X" Is important. So then why assume we are speaking about reflected light? Even if we were, why assume you were pointed in the right direction with in the correct proximity of what is to be physically seen? What if I told you both were possible if you were simply humble enough to Ask Seek and knock for what to physically look for and understand?
Q1: Is God visible in the typical range detectable by human eyes? Yes or no.
Q2: If yes, then what is the "right direction" and "correct proximity" to visually detect him?
