| I ran into the same problem in the science section when my posting read "A new theory about the origins of the universe" (or something like that).
Right away a number of people started to debate that I did not post a theory, and that the word "theory" was this or that.
Now the Random House Dictionary had different meanings for the word "theory". Number 8 said that a theory is "a speculation" or "guess".
But guess what, they would not debate the idea I was presenting because they said it was wrong to call it a theory. As they said a theory must come after a peer review and must contain some predictable test and so forth, along with some physics to demonstate the "logic" for the theory ( the Guess).
However.
"God" is a concept often used in religion and phylosophy and most people who speak on those topics have a basic "meaning" in mind as they speak. The god concepts are not all that different from one another.
"God" as a topic is not a scientific idea nor one having to do with technology. The standards used for trying to prove a science theory would be different then the standards used for debating a religious idea or a concept proposed as a philosophy. The trouble is that people come into the religion forum and try debate the words and their meanings in the same way as one would for a scientific theory. But science has a different way of obtaining their evidence then those who do so via experiencing faith or belief.
Which is like trying to fix a car with things you use in the kitchen to cook with. Cooking and car repair are two different things, as is science and religion when it comes to "knowing" what to do. |