Originally Posted By: Warren

Yes I could certainly evidence divine nature as experience, some experience more than others but all more or less. That's what I would call being and do mean everyone's being, not just mine.
You could and by an association to the claim assume since everyone has an experience that God is evidenced in experiences.
The experience of poverty, fear, isolation from family and friends, the experience of depression, these are not evidence of God to one who seeks God in all things and where one measures God in the experience as more or less God within the experience. Anyone can claim to have a God like experience but then if it does not remain with them and within every other experience as God regardless of the experience and the feelings that come and go, then it is by the belief, opinion and psychological association to a personal idea that God becomes attuned to ones mind as something personal and as a thought or feeling only.
Since God cannot be contained in any experience why would you assume God can be evidenced in an experience rather than in ones own heart?
Isn't divine nature by measure really a projection of your own ideals upon the experience when you say there is more divine nature in some experiences than others? How do you measure God or the nature of God?
Originally Posted By: Warren

Anything above and beyond what I or we experience as sentient beings (above the level of lemmings) could be anything, but am just saying that since naturalism should be sufficient to explain it there would be (by the law of parsimony) no need to believe in supernaturalism except perhaps as a term for naturalism that is not yet understood, which some have called cryptonaturalism.

Something not experienced which leaves evidence lacking and inspires doubt.
I was addicted to the Hokey Pokey, but then I turned myself around!!