I'm still awaiting on your perception of God dear man. You know the one that has no evidence to support your claims.
Science supports basics such as relativity.
Off Topix: Embrace the Unexpected in Every Discussion
Off Topix is a well established general discussion forum that originally opened to the public way back in 2009! We provide a laid back atmosphere and our members are down to earth. We have a ton of content and fresh stuff is constantly being added. We cover all sorts of topics, so there's bound to be something inside to pique your interest. We welcome anyone and everyone to register & become a member of our awesome community.
Do you believe there is a God??
- Thread starter Wonko
- Start date
I'm still awaiting on your perception of God dear man. You know the one that has no evidence to support your claims.
Science supports basics such as relativity.
I can give you my perception of God, and then we'll see if J agrees.
That which is Self Existent of Itself, the Uncaused First Cause of the Universe, the Single Greatest Thing conceivable by the mind of man.
That which is Self Existent of Itself, the Uncaused First Cause of the Universe, the Single Greatest Thing conceivable by the mind of man.
Thank you!
So it's alright to blindly believe in a god when there is no hard scientific evidence to proof or disprove!!! seams like double standards to me :tongue:
Science isn't consistently wrong, it is consistently evolving, always questioning and requestioning striving for better understanding. It just doesn't discover something and stop at that, it challenges and investigates it's own findings.
Where religion seems to get one belief, sticks to it for centuries, doesn't question it or challenge it and labels it as faith.
Right, and when something can be provable over and over again, that is when we tend to consider it fact. Like for instance, when I hold a ball in the air and let go, it will fall to the ground because of what we call gravity.
Last edited:
I'm still awaiting on your perception of God dear man. You know the one that has no evidence to support your claims.
Science supports basics such as relativity.
relativity is just a human made theory...
that just makes you a slave of science if you must and need "scientific evidence" of something to have faith and/or to believe in something...
what's the double standard?
this is god vs science.., no religion or books involved...
yes, science is constantly wrong, what do you think science is? guessing, trail and error... like i've said before... and science does stop at something if they like the answer as such, or unless a human finds something new, or thinks he/she does at least... just because the human race is evolving, like their technology and science, doesn't mean it's not constantly wrong when it's evolving...
this has nothing to do with religion, this has everything to do with god, and that science can't and will never disprove god, but at the same time humans and their science will always be wrong because they strive for knowledge and understanding but a lot of times think they know and understand when they don't...
Again I asked you a question. What is your version of God. You continue to ignore this. Yet still continue to go off on a tangent.
Yet this is the basis of the thread.
I'm grateful that others do not seem to have the issue explaining their version of a faith they believe in. So why do you?
because that's not what we're talking about here...
Actually it is. More so than science. Do you believe in God?
not really, i thought people we're doing the god vs science thing...
but now the bible, books and religion got thrown into it for some reason...
Really, I asked you based on the topic. what is your version of God. You still refuse to answer that after several times of being asked.
Would you like me ASSume you don't know yourself or would you like me to be, as I am asking you directly? For fear of reputition. What is your version of God?
you asked me and it has nothing to do with what we're talking about, that's why i ignored it...
why are you so interested anyways?
you, with science, think science has all the answers, and/or that only science is the way of the world and how to explain something and the universe... but with you and science, you're not even sure what all of it is, and most humans on earth just go along with most of it that the few says what is what... you can't trust science because it's guessing, trail and error... and even when humans think they know something, they don't...
and i don't care about my reputation and i fear nothing...
you asked me and it has nothing to do with what we're talking about, that's why i ignored it...
why are you so interested anyways?
you, with science, think science has all the answers, and/or that only science is the way of the world and how to explain something and the universe... but with you and science, you're not even sure what all of it is, and most humans on earth just go along with most of it that the few says what is what... you can't trust science because it's guessing, trail and error... and even when humans think they know something, they don't...
and i don't care about my reputation and i fear nothing...
Omg! You are arguing on the basis of arguing. Which makes so logical sense.
The thread title.
A question whilst you are trying to debate your points is what is your version of God? You are willing to dispute science, yet not establish your theory of God.
If you truly have no fear. You'd answer one simple question!
See you won't even base your theory of God. From that point. What you say becomes moot to me
Similar threads
