(June 23, 2015 at 9:28 am)Drich Wrote: That once 'science' can explain a 'natural phemona' works it can no longer be of God. My question to you is why is that? Why can't 'science' be the how God does what He does, rather than the so called 'proof' their is no God?
Why would god want us not to believe in him? Why only show your interventions through the means of natural events? Which is more likely, that these so-called divine interventions are actually natural events, or it is god's pathetic attempt at getting our attention? If god knew that these scientific processes would come about, why not leave a series of strong evidence that couldn't be refuted of his existence? Why not reveal yourself to the world in a manner that couldn't be denied? We know you won't actually think about these questions, but these are the type of questions that go through our heads. Questions, a rational mind uses to try and figure out if a claim about the supernatural is true or not, since we have no means of actually testing it.
Your questions are an attempt to solidify your already, practically unshakeable beliefs. You're taking what we know in the natural world, and trying to mold all of these facts around your god belief as best as you can to try to convince yourself that he exists. Nice try.
Anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that 'my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.' -Isaac Asimov-
