Ok interesting...I'll respond to these 3 hypothetical points:
1. If you 'experience God through others' but that's not actually evidence that he actually exists then why do you believe he does?
2. if 'live itself is god' then what's the difference? Aren't you basically calling 'energy' "God" or something like that? Just using different words...kind of like pantheism, etc?
3. If God='love and understanding' then aren't you simply using the word "God" FOR love and understanding? I mean isn't it just using different words again? In which case what's exactly the difference in actual REALITY? If there's still no evidence that any "God" actually exists..then what's the difference?
Haven't we already god words for love and understanding...E.G: Love and Understanding? Lol
- isn't love and understanding love and understanding? Where does God come into it.
The first 1 isn't evidence the other two seem kind of meaningless because they appear to just be sneaking in the word "God" to mean things that already have meaning...as if it supports God's existence when they're really just using "God" to mean stuff that already exists...so that's not reason to believe (i.e evidence) that he actually exists anyway. It's just bullshit.
EvF
1. If you 'experience God through others' but that's not actually evidence that he actually exists then why do you believe he does?
2. if 'live itself is god' then what's the difference? Aren't you basically calling 'energy' "God" or something like that? Just using different words...kind of like pantheism, etc?
3. If God='love and understanding' then aren't you simply using the word "God" FOR love and understanding? I mean isn't it just using different words again? In which case what's exactly the difference in actual REALITY? If there's still no evidence that any "God" actually exists..then what's the difference?
Haven't we already god words for love and understanding...E.G: Love and Understanding? Lol
- isn't love and understanding love and understanding? Where does God come into it.The first 1 isn't evidence the other two seem kind of meaningless because they appear to just be sneaking in the word "God" to mean things that already have meaning...as if it supports God's existence when they're really just using "God" to mean stuff that already exists...so that's not reason to believe (i.e evidence) that he actually exists anyway. It's just bullshit.
EvF
