nsTeam2RO, nsTeam2RW, nsTeam2_talkRO, nsTeam2_talkRW
13,254
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 82:
Line 82: +
Debate:How should we view the fact leading scientists do not believe in God? (view source)
Revision as of 03:29, June 19, 2008
, 03:29, June 19, 2008There /is/ evidence for God's existence.
It is not relelvant to some poeple. Personally I believe in the evolution theory and God at the same time. I think that there is already enough evidence to support the evolution theory. But I follow God's teachings on life, not where life came from. Please do not be offended but there is no evidence of God's existence. It is only a matter of faith. But for "scientific" topics like evolution I think I'd rather believe in science. [[User talk:Faizaguo|Disagree?]]--[[User:Faizaguo|Faizaguo]] 12:42, 18 June 2008 (EDT)
It is not relelvant to some poeple. Personally I believe in the evolution theory and God at the same time. I think that there is already enough evidence to support the evolution theory. But I follow God's teachings on life, not where life came from. Please do not be offended but there is no evidence of God's existence. It is only a matter of faith. But for "scientific" topics like evolution I think I'd rather believe in science. [[User talk:Faizaguo|Disagree?]]--[[User:Faizaguo|Faizaguo]] 12:42, 18 June 2008 (EDT)
: I'd say that God's existence ''is'' relevant to everyone, although not of ''interest'' to some people. Which "God" do you believe in? It can't be the God of the Bible, as that God is inconsistent with evolution. And if you don't believe what God said about where life came from, why believe His other teachings? If He got one part wrong, why think that He got another part right? As for no evidence for God's existence, don't be offended, but you are quite wrong. The very fact that we exist is evidence for God's existence, as naturalism, the only alternative, has no coherent explanation for it (the Big Bang: First there was nothing, then it exploded!). Claiming that evolution is science is begging the question, as science is about observing, testing, and repeating, things, none of which can be done with molecules-to-man evolution. Rather, evolution is a story about the ''past'', a claim about ''history'', not science. [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 23:29, 18 June 2008 (EDT)