You miss the point totally.<quoted text>
I'm sorry HOG, I look at reality and easily recognize it. If there is a rock in front of me I can see its there and do not try to deny it.
The idea is that whichever way one chooses to interpret reality can be justified.
Thus nothing can convince you to believe what you dont already choose to believe; you can describe reality how you choose and associate your own meanings and values.
Reality conforms to meaning, as long as the elements in the reality are represented by elements in the idea.
That figment of imagination is the mind's representation of the approximation of the Nature/Character of the Agent which is the Source of its potentials....This is an unseen unknown creature that is a figment of imagination.
That conclusion is fundamentally illogical; for you cannot say that there is no way to prove "X".There can be no proof the He exists and there is no way to prove Him, so the logical conclusion is He is a non-entity.
The nature of the evidence required to support a claim is dependent upon the nature of the subject/element of which the claim is made: as such, we test for evidence of wetness with things that are dry.
All attributes of God have manifested in the natural world.
There is no science to test that; so you can make no objective conclusions on the matter.In our world there is no magik or supernatural....never was.
All of those things which you mention have totally difference meanings than the ones you think you know.If you think there is magik than you probably believe in angels, demons, spirits, hell and heaven, a Satan that controls our world and all that other crap....that's really creepy for a grown man/woman to buy into.
The word "Satan" for example simple means "accuser"; so one is present in every criminal court.*shrug*
You are only kicking against pricks.