>Point is, you don't have to see something to know that it is real. I look at the Universe and wonder how it all came about. Does it make sense that it "just happened" without some sort of catalyst? In my mind, no.
Too bad, that, about your mind. Which part of "just happened" you don't understand?
> On another front, look at people whose lives have been changed after going thru a Christian conversion. These are examples of indirect evidence (results) as well.
On yet another front, numerous lives were changed after losing religion. Or after people made any other major decision about their lives. You just get married, and your life is changed forever, with palpable results. So "being married" exists, even though you often can't directly see it.
>>Do you think that I deliberately attacked Bret?
>
>I don't know, but it seems to be common for those that do not believe to patronize or talk in a condescending manner to people of faith.
My appologies if I ever sound so. I'm just trying to apply equal criteria to both sides, but since I can't be on both sides... nobody's perfetc.
>Interesting. Your comment about Bret being "still in a phase that is normal for children" would seem to be arrogant by the definition you cite. The implication is that you have "grown up" and he has not. That carries an air of superiority from my perspective.
IMO, applying some of the criteria we usually use to distinguish children from adults does yield that result: critical thinking, independence from seniors etc - people of faith do have this child-parent relation to their deity. What was the name they call it often? Father? The same name is also used for the official of the same religion. So, there's some smoke there, and I think he spotted the fire as well.
Now the whole idea that adults are automatically superior to children is dubious to me. Being physically stronger and loaded with experience doesn't necessarily lead to a hierarchical positioning over the weaker and inexperienced, not in my book. Children are just different persons.
