@Setanta,
Setanta wrote:
In dubious battle . . . your remarks presume the existence of a deity, which you have not demonstrated, and assume the existence of "Lucifer" which you have not demonstrated, and assume the existence of "angels" which you have not demonstrated. You assume the reality of "yen[sic]/yang" and "karmic justice," which you have not demonstrated.
In short, and not to carry on with your nonsense too far, you are offering your opinion, based on superstition. And you offer your opinion as though making statements from authority. There is no such authority, and you offer no substantiation for a series of extraordinary claims.
If you obfuscate your own ability to understand these terms and what they refer to, don't push the ignorance you cultivate into the discussion by insisting there is no 'proof' they exist.
'God' and 'angels' are just a way of describing/visualizing the forces that create and structure/discipline the universe. Everything is not randomly borne into existence and arranged. Energy and causation occur in patterns and the evolutionary processes of living organisms are part of that. Everything taken together can be referred to as 'the creation,' and evolution and other patterns of nature are patterns of causation and energy.
If you argue about using the words, 'God,' 'angels,' and 'lucifer,' to talk about 'the creation,' you are just obstructing the discussion to insist on abandoning that language in favor of some other language. Doing so doesn't prove anything doesn't 'exist.' It just changes the terms, just as calling 'spirituality' 'psychology,' 'culture,' etc. changes the terms to refer to the same phenomena in different ways.
The underlying phenomena simply exist, though. They don't need to be 'proven,' because we wouldn't be able to use these terms to refer to them if there wasn't something to refer to, however nebulous.