Re: "...and would you WANT to see?"
Originally posted by Punkyhermy
"...If seeing meant that you would have to believe
In things like heaven and in jesus and the saints and all the prophets ?"This is very interesting actually. Beneath the predictable and all too common pretext of mantras like "there is no scientific proof" of God's exsitence, lies I suspect, a strong conviction to NOT want to believe. Because a life lead without belief is admittedly on the surface a whole lot less restrictive.
I don't see anything really correct in that. If I had a reason to believe, if something was shown to me, then there would be no sense in me trying to maintain a strong conviction in non-belief since obviously there would be something to believe in.
Which is all I have ever asked for - proof, evidence. By all accounts God and gods once upon a time interacted with people, showed off miracles, all that jazz. People believed while seeing some degree of supposed visible evidence of God. Yet in modern times we are told "Faith and proof don't gell", "it defeats the point of faith if you have to be shown evidence" and then people say "there is evidence around us, take the Bible, take the things God has done for me" etc. All very mixed.
Well for me I need something more then "just have faith." And I question the comment that "on the surface" a life without belief is a whole lot less restrictive... do you have some proof to support that? Because my life doesn't seem "less restrictive" then some Christians. I am still a functional, happy, member of society.