]
What? No, it's not remotely new. I am disappointed in your response. Do you just not get what I'm saying?
I am telling you it doesn't work. Humble has nothing to do with it: you guys should be more humble in your belief that if a person does A, B, and C, and follows your prescribed formula, it can only end in knowledge of Jesus Christ. Make no mistake, that is exactly what you continue to say. And the assumption is that if it doesn't end that way, the person must have done something wrong. That is what I am saying is hogwash. I've done it. You're not convinced that I've done it, but then -- you wouldn't know, and I would. It might work sometimes. It might have worked for you. But your precept is that it will work every time.
I know it doesn't. I think you ought to stop insisting it does. And suggesting that I (and others) are simply doing things wrong, is to keep insisting that it does. What you might say instead is, "I don't know."
I think that would be an amazing step forward in your lives. I wish each of us in this thread the best. Christian, atheist, and seekers alike.
So am I disappointed with my response. I wrote a better one, but got timed out and didn't think of cutting/pasting it to a fresh reply. . . .
Still, I think you are not fully understanding this supposedly inadequate response and how it really does just sweep away most of the logical/scientific product of Atheistic apologists. In the same way that many theologians from non-Christian faiths just don't see the implications of Robbie Zacharias' comments in regard to "The Empty Tomb" as being conclusive proof that all other religions just don't even claim to have "living" Gods, and in the same way that many mainstream Christian Churches just don't see the necessity for "living" prophets. . . .
My response, brief as it was, dealt with the implications of the nature of human intelligence, the nature and capacity of our soft brain tissues/neural networks for gathering information on the universe and interpreting it all, and the huge impact of emotional elements on what we choose to call our rational processes. Accordingly with these considerations, I advance the proposition that even atheists and agnostics are essentially as deeply invested in their "faith" in their reasoning as any other religionist is invested in their faith.
I would observe that some atheists do a much higher level of critical reflection on the subject of their beliefs than others, and I wouldn't think it very convincing to just take some of the kneejerk denials of the existence of God and use them to assert mocking arguments against the advanced atheist apologists/believers. I know full well I am also working with one of those soft, malleable, impressionable and very imperfect human brains and that the Universe is what it is, not what I may hope it is. Or believe it is.
Still, just as you do, I roll outta bed most days and go to work and organize my life around my unique set of priorities which does include my belief in God. I would not begrudge you the privilege of doing things in your own way for whatever reasons you choose. I don't even really think it's certain my way is the best, it's just my choice. As I said, "my gift".
I'm probably still not getting to the stuff you're looking for. I'll have to make a further effort next time I get a chance to sit down.
That strikes me as being super unusual!