As far as saying it comes from the heart, I guess it is something you are incapable or unwilling to understand.
Ahh! Condescension.
Are you talking about metaphorically or what have you? Because that's a rather elementary concept, and surely we're all capable of understanding such a thing. If not, then please elaborate!
There is more to the human being than what makes us up physically. What I speak of can't be observed in a lab or measured, so it is absolutely meaningless to the two of you. Ergot, this conversation is pointless and meaningless.
Uhm, well our emotions certainly CAN be observed and measured in a lab, that's the thing.
Item7-
You think I say things that I do not. Just because emotions are a product of our heads does not make them irrelevant, they effect us, they are "real". Not physically so, but they do exist within our own minds. This is
obviously never denied by me, I have no idea where you got something so skewed from my relatively simple 3-4 line comments.
So, to more clearly illustrate my point... As if it is required...
(1) Is love in your head? If yes, then proceed to point (2), if not continue.
If love is in fact physically existant outside of yourself, then show an example of this by all means, show a way where love is physically real. Or any emotion for that matter.
(2) Are our thoughts likewise real within our own minds? Yes. Does thought constitute evidence? No. Therefore it can be concluded that just because we thinks something it does not make it real, because reality is observed by us, we don't create our own realities. If you disagree with these two concepts then again, show me how this is NOT the case.
(3) Which ultimately brings us to the final concept. You "know" god exists because of your thought, because of your mind. You're convinced to the point where you will illegitimately proclaim it to be fact. So I ask you. Since mere thought does not constitute fact, what evidence do you have? Surely not the bible, which was written by men, then translated countless times before making it to English and re-written countless times every step of the way, and for which we have numerous different versions of, and from which we also have numerous individual religions all proclaiming to be right. That constitutes no evidence. As always, if you feel I'm wrong point out some evidence! BUT! I emplore you to please look into the definition of evidence before doing so if this is the course you so choose. Different interpretations don't count, it must be clear and concise and intended to mean a certain thing without much room for doubt.
I don't think God is real. That does not mean he is not. In the same way that you DO think God is real, but that does not mean that he/she does.
Do we see eye-to-eye thus far, Item?
I hope I've been more clear in my illustration this time around, so you won't take my words as an insult and you won't have to write in a false argument to replace the one I have put forth.
"George Bush says he speaks to god every day, and christians love him for it. If George Bush said he spoke to god through his hair dryer, they would think he was mad. I fail to see how the addition of a hair dryer makes it any more absurd."
