posted on Oct, 1 2004 @ 08:31 AM
This is a somewhat controversial topic. Question: With regard to the supposed proofs of the existence of 'God'. What would transpire if what fitted
the profile for 'God' refuted entirely all human assumptions about themselves and themselves in relation to 'it'? Humanity has a great deal to
lose, so a great deal of refusal to acknowledge would be the case. Yes?Is it not so awesomely likely that this would be the case? When I say fits the
profile for 'God'. obviously there's a great deal of subjectivity and agenda-laden junk inherent, while such a profile/s are/have been created.
Appeals to logic make a God as humanity wants 'it' to be. Appeals to cosmology can't even begin no matter how ferocious the claims. Appeals to
supposed Holy Spirits becoming words are ridiculous. Feelings and inclinations, dreams about 'angels' and 'Jesus' are the same. Is it not that
humanity hasn't evolved sufficiently far so to encompass what really is the truth? That humanity can't encompass the truth in this moment? That
humanity never will because there is no reason for humanity to do so? Of course there are those who disagree but why? Because they are supposedly
'inspired'? Supposedly 'connected, 'looked down upon'? The more these assumptions are examined the more stupid they should appear, but the
problem is, that they don't.