>
>Frank Masingill was probably misquoted, but here goes anyway...
>
 FM> Somehow, Day, because of your familiarity with classical philosophy
 FM> (perhaps in many ways exceeding mine) I cannot think that you could
 FM> imagine the symbol "god" or "God" to be other than the tension in man's
 FM> consciousness from the time of its formation as "HUMAN" as opposed to
 FM> his mere humanity - in other words that you conceive the Divine as an
 FM> existent thing rather than as that in our consciousness that man has
 FM> always symbolized as "immortal" and which Aristotle called the
 FM> intellect as that aspect of consciousness in man which immortalizes.
 Conversely, one of the principle logical "proofs" of God's existence 
 (qualified, here) is that anything which can be imagined in the 
 consciousness of Man alone cannot be God, and since there are many things 
 which are not ONLY in the consciousness of Man, but have a concrete reality, 
 then whatever is the greatest of these must be God.
 
 Aside from this, however, how can any proof be brought to bear upon the
 premise that God is _non-existent_?  Perhaps it is not God "Himself" which
 is non-existent, but rather our conscious conceptualization of what God
 really is, which is non-existent?
 
... All general statements are false.
--- GEcho 1.11++TAG 2.7c
---------------