(August 21, 2013 at 10:03 am)Drich Wrote: Just as the lost son did. He said 'he had no father.' You say you have no "Father." There is no difference in your final conclusion.
Whether you take the interstate to your favorite spot on the beach or the back roads your final destination is still your favorite spot on the beach. if you believe your lie (that you have no Father) you can never go back. If you accept your statement for what it is, then if you ever want to go back the possibility still remains.
Thanks for clearing up my confusion. So you are not being insincere and condescending. You really are that stupid.
The big difference between my conclusion and the son's is that he did not say that the father does not exist. All evidence suggests that while the son knows that his father is real, that he exists and he is simply choosing to refuse to let him play any role in his life. When I say "there is no father" I'm literally implying non-existence.
I'd say that your assumption here - that the statement "there is no father" is a lie I'm telling myself - is disgustingly condescending. But I understand now that you don't mean to be condescending, you are just too stupid to get that fact.
