(January 12, 2019 at 3:03 pm)LadyForCamus Wrote:(January 11, 2019 at 1:47 am)T0 Th3 M4X Wrote: I know what it is, but would be N/A here unless you're suggesting he did a study. Plus the scope of what he suggested would be not only difficult to study but to conclude, so even if he did the grade would be at the lowest level, but the controls alone would be nearly impossible since it would need to represent the scope of mankind throughout history.
I think Brian is being hyperbolic for the sake of brevity. He can correct me, if I'm wrong, ofc. If you want little personal spiel, it goes something like this:
I have been on these forums for upwards of four years now, and I have never been presented with a positive case for the existence of god that wasn't either logically fallacious, or didn't misrepresent science in some fashion, or both. Unlike many of my cohorts here, atheism is not my preferred position. I would prefer that there be "something else", or something "more", beyond death. The fact is, no one has ever made a convincing case to me. No one has ever made a convincing case for the existence of the supernatural. No one has ever been able to give me a sound, positive description of what the supernatural is. So, I withhold belief until such a case is presented.
You have always been fair and you seem kind, so hopefully I can provide the same back to you.
It's not about what everybody else can prove or what others can show you. It's about you seeking regardless of your own personal biases. I can show you a million things and claim they are evidence, but until you experience God, you will have a reason to say that's not good enough, because that's not God. If our own human determination was the root problem, then how can we assume ourselves to be the solution? Seek the source by the source and its assumed attributes. That doesn't mean others can't assist you along the way, but as much as someone can be helpful, they can also be hurtful. Even if someone means well, they can give you misinformation.
If I wanted to find you (hypothetically), I would need to assume you have an identity, I would need to be willing to seek, I would need to know what attributes you have to recognize you, and no matter who anybody else says you are or where they say you are, I will only have found you when I matched you with what I know to be you. At that point, I will have accomplished my mission and you can hit me with a purse or a brick, or even shake my hand, but the latter is always preferred.
