I know you're not asking me, but I want to answer.What convinces you god exists?
Empirical evidence...the impact God has on human behavior.
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
I know you're not asking me, but I want to answer.What convinces you god exists?
What impact are you referring to?I know you're not asking me, but I want to answer.
Empirical evidence...the impact God has on human behavior.
Any behaviors associated with one's belief in God.What impact are you referring to?
There is evidence that can be assessed.The "burden of proof" doesn't really call for 'proof' in the mathematical sense. The meaning's rhetorical. It asks for evidence, which may then be epistemically assessed.
I know what you mean but that is a slippery slope since you cannot tie God back to that behavior.Empirical evidence...the impact God has on human behavior.
How is a belief in god good evidence for god's existence?Any behaviors associated with one's belief in God.
Well, since you've already established what I can't do, who am I to argue?I know what you mean but that is a slippery slope since you cannot tie God back to that behavior.
In other words, people could have that behavior for another reason.
How is building straw men productive in discourse?How is a belief in god good evidence for god's existence?
That is what happens in a conversation. Sometimes we misunderstand each other. Going straight to accusations is not helpful.How is building straw men productive in discourse?
I said behavior is evidence for God's existence, not belief in God.
I'll thank you to not misrepresent what I say moving forward.
I did not say what you can or cannot do. I only said 'I think' it is a slippery slope.Well, since you've already established what I can't do, who am I to argue?
Thanks for setting me straight.
"Can be", not "is." If I love someone, my behavior toward them manifests as a result of that love. It has nothing to do with believing I love that person.What I was getting at, if you are interested, is that behavior is a reaction to a belief.
Would one be praying in the absence of God?So a behavior that is a result of belief in god would not happen without the belief. So how is a behavior such as prayer good evidence for god's existence?
Sure you did...I did not say what you can or cannot do.
...you cannot tie God back to that behavior.
How is that relevant?Whatever convinces you that God exists is just as valid as what convinces me.
On this we agree.We humans all view things differently.
God can be known and believed on evidence, even though there is no proof.
A person can love god without that god being real if they believe that god exists."Can be", not "is." If I love someone, my behavior toward them manifests as a result of that love. It has nothing to do with believing I love that person.
Yes, if they believed god existed.Would one be praying in the absence of God?
Unless God is a person, you are, again, misrepresenting my statement. Let's do our best not to let that happen a third time.A person can love god without that god being real if they believe that god exists.
Why would one believe in God if one acknowledges the absence of God?Yes, if they believed god existed.
When I said "you cannot tie God back to that behavior" I meant you in a general sense,Sure you did...
But what you say is.How you interpret what I say is not my responsibility.
Perhaps it would be helpful to say what you mean.Only I know what I meant by what I said.
Like I said, I am trying to understand your position. That is what happens in a conversation, no ill intent is intended.Unless God is a person, you are, again, misrepresenting my statement. Let's do our best not to let that happen a third time.
Because they don't acknowledge the absence of god.Why would one believe in God if one acknowledges the absence of God?
Last I checked I was not perfect, so I will make mistakes.But what you say is.
Sometimes one word can make all the difference.Perhaps it would be helpful to say what you mean.
Why are you concluding God is a person?What kind of person is god?
Could it be they don't acknowledge your perceived absence of God?Because they don't acknowledge the absence of god.
Absolutely. That is actually a pillar of my religious philosophy.Do you think it is possible to believe something is true and it is actually false?