Evidence for a god. Do you have any ?

[Dimmesdale]

Very well. I think that I am right. I suppose that's once removed from being absolutely right, right? But the thing is, in myself, I know this to be the case. So it's not a matter of pride or humility, but simply of fact. I have the fact at hand.

And I guarantee that you don't have the fact at hand and that you don't really know that God exists. Can you show me I'm wrong?

I can't show you anything if you are dead set on maintaining a certain belief system, such as atheism.... Now, if you widened the scope of your standard of evidence, then I could perhaps begin showing the error of your ways. But if you remain a fundamentalist in your stance, then there is very little I can do for you.

Actually I think everyone does, but they suppress it, or it has been suppressed in them.

Well, first demonstrate that you do, and then you can talk about others.

Some things can only be known on an inward basis... but outward evidence can however augment what is really before your very eyes.....

Once one arrives at a certain point in one's conscious development, the obvious becomes obvious again.

One must realize truth, not just analyze it. Sorry if that sounds dodgy to you, but it's the truth.

And I am not against evidence. I am all for evidence. But I think all evidence can do is to condition the mind to uncover facts which themselves go beyond evidence, and towards the core of what is real, which is within and self-authenticating.

Facts beyond evidence? How does that even work? You can't have facts without some evidence leading to them.

You're basically just speaking theological gibberish, and thinking you're making a reasonable point when it isn't.

That which is, IS. There is nothing to mediate it, besides it's own naked Being. Evidence may help one arrive at certain conclusions, but evidence is not exhaustive; one must finally make that last leap on one's own.

What I say may sound to you like gibberish, but at times deeper meanings are opaque. It is not my fault that you want to dismiss certain less well-understood subjects without so much as a fair hearing....

It may not seem compelling to you in your illusioned state, but that does not mean it isn't compelling to others who come with a different view to the evidence....

Without evidence, it can't be compelling. At least not if you're trying to be as intellectually honest as possible.

At times one's own VIEW is an aspect of evidentiary support. Again, standards of evidence.....

(btw, I can't get the quote function working properly, you know how to fix it?)

You seem to be doing fine here.

Yeah, I'm not redoing this...