• 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:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Proof of God question

Muffled

Muffled

Jesus in me
Unveiled Artist said:
I can't figure the name (found it @ 9-10ths_Penguin) the moment but an RF member posed this thought:

If experience proves God exists and no experience proves God does not exist.

Sounds like an oxymoron to be honest.

Does this make sense to you and do they both invalidate themselves?
Click to expand...

I believe the null hypothesis can't be proven. So no personal evidence of God is simply not evidence.
 
9-10ths_Penguin

9-10ths_Penguin

1/10 Subway Stalinist
Premium Member
Muffled said:
I believe the null hypothesis can't be proven.
Click to expand...
The null hypothesis is never "proven." The idea is that if you can't reject the null hypothesis (i.e. that whatever effect you're hypothesizing isn't real), then you can't (rationally) say that the effect is real.


So no personal evidence of God is simply not evidence.
Click to expand...
Is it that you reject personal experience as evidence generally, or is it that you only reject personal experience that doesn't support the conclusion you want?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top