My defination of God

[Myles]

The question that only remains is how you accept that

It's simply a question of accepting what we know of reality and keeping an open mind about what we don't yet know, or may never know.

 

[codanblad]

to myles:

what we have here is a failure to communicate lol. i actually agree with you. people are just filling the gaps of knowledge with 'god', and i agree that history shows that. rejecting science just because it doesn't claim to have all the answers is foolish (whoever does that anyway).

i didn't realise that your post 17 was in agreement with me, can you see how its meaning is kind of ambiguous? read my posts 13, 14 to see where i've been coming from. also, i failed to mention that my definition of god, is only under the assumption that god exists. and i don't necessarily believe he does.

 

[Myles]

to myles:

what we have here is a failure to communicate lol. i actually agree with you. people are just filling the gaps of knowledge with 'god', and i agree that history shows that. rejecting science just because it doesn't claim to have all the answers is foolish (whoever does that anyway).

i didn't realise that your post 17 was in agreement with me, can you see how its meaning is kind of ambiguous? read my posts 13, 14 to see where i've been coming from. also, i failed to mention that my definition of god, is only under the assumption that god exists. and i don't necessarily believe he does.

I understand

Myles