Are you saying that everything could be subjected to scientific scrutiny? Can Science tell us how to live a 'well-lived' life? Is a well-lived life subject to scientific scrutiny? How about rationality? How does science account for a 'rational mind' evolving from an irrational universe? Can 'morality' be subjected to scientific scrutiny as well?

The subject is not "untouchable". Your a smart man. If you use your logical reasoning and ask Philosophical/ religious questions on the subject, you will arrive at the conclusion that the only 'logical' answer is a God exists.

If you try to tackle the questions from a scientific standpoint. Then, ofcourse you wont arrive at the same conclusion (So far as we know. Who knows though in the future). God won't be God if he could be subjected to empirical testing. You don't ask the spilled milk how it got there.

So, no, the subject isn't "untouchable". You are simply using the wrong method to try and "touch" it.

Science is concerned with things that exist and how they work, so if you say he exists, then he is subject to scientific scrutiny. So far, nothing really is in favor of his existence and people seem to just come up with ways to make the subject untouchable.

I didn't concede anything. I did not say that God had no empirical basis. I'm sorry if my comments were phrased sloppily as to be misconstrued that way.

God, ofcourse, has "empirical basis", because a lot of our notions about Him were gained by 'experience'. What I meant to say, and would concede to, was that we will probably never have 'empirical evidence' of His existence. I alluded to the 'spilled milk' argument on this. If the material universe can encompass God, then he wouldn't be God. I don't think there is anything new about this 'concession'.

Like I said, on the existence about God, it is a Philosophical and religious 'question' and not a scientific one.

- The problem lies in the way you ask the question. You, seem to be asking it from a scientific point of view. No one can blame you for choosing such a path to take, since we all have a propensity to adhere to the restrictions of our materialistic world view.

The evidence, however, becomes more palpable once you realize that the question is not a scientific one, but a philosophical or religious one.

You, ofcourse, cannot find within this universe evidence of anything that transcends this universe.

Why is there something when there can and should, if you subscribe to an atheistic worldview, be nothing? Why is there rationality when there can and should, if you subscribe to an atheistic worldview, be nothing?

The question is not scientific. It is philosophical and religious and should be derived as such.

Thus, God does exist.

-arvin, nagbabalik. haha!
HAPPY HOLIDAYS
new link din. update. update!

Roxanne P. Flora
09062819274
roxannepflora@yahoo.com.ph

Things are as real as people want them to be.

I quite agree with you that we ought not to resist evidence that may at first sight appear unwelcome or unsettling. But this is not really a deep agreement, for we immediately go on to differ over which one of us is failing to honor this quite obvious principle. You say that there is no compelling reason to believe in God. But ask yourself, why is there something instead of nothing? Is that not compelling reason enough?

It seems to me that it is either 1.we created ourselves, 2.we existed eternally, or 3.we were created – are the only options we have that could answer the most important cosmological question of all time : Why are we here?

"The "jump" in belief of a God to the Christian God is tricky. But Rick Warren explained his "jump" profoundly : "We both stand in a relationship of faith. You have faith that there is no God. In 1974, I spent the better part of a year living in Japan, and I studied all the world religions. All of the religions basically point toward truth. Buddha made this famous statement at the end of his life: "I'm still searching for the truth." Muhammad said, "I am a prophet of the truth." The Veda says, "Truth is elusive, it's like a butterfly, you've got to search for it." Then Jesus Christ comes along and says, "I am the truth." All of a sudden, that forces a decision."

Jesus forces you to make a decision. Its either you believe or you don't. Its either this mild, meek, wonderful, and generous man who imparted such great wisdom on human morality was the worlds biggest hoax. Or he was the real deal. No other religion forces you to make a decision like that. You either believe, or you don't.

The jump from the "existence of god" argument to the "how the christian god is the REAL god" is just so vast that I often feel like that the christians hijacked the concept to a certain extent.

You've just articulated to us, rather eloquently, your own personal version of 'Pascals Wager'. Blaise Pascal proposed this idea that in the end believers lose nothing either way, as opposed to non-believers having a 50-50 shot at losing everything.

I admire your convictions. However, lets pray that others do not stop there. Continue seeking God, and he will give you more reason to believe in him other than the fear of being at the losing end of the wager.

No one can ever prove Gods existence empirically. He is beyond anything that is empirical, since he created everything. Therefore nothing can encompass Him. When you go to the kitchen and see spilled milk, you don't ask the milk how it got there. The milk is the accident!

Atheists,

No one can prove to you that God exists. Only you can prove it to yourself. Seek Him with an open heart. Lose the pre-suppositions and seek him. Contrary to what Atheists believe, us Theists are not suspended in a state of wishful thinking. Alot of the people who espouse to have felt God's presence in one way or another have done so because they sought Him out with an open heart.

"It’s still pretty much the same time – the dangers have changed, but we still live in a dangerous world. We still are exposed to factors that make life scary and downright random. But regardless of the time frame, wanting something to be real doesn’t have any effect on the veracity of the existence of a particular entity. People don’t necessarily understand that, but what the hell,right?"

- yes, that's right, the reality of this world is harsh, but that's really how it works.
and I'd rather have a hope that someday our God will bring salvation in this world than not. It's not out of fear, it's about the joy and excitement that God will come for us. This excitement what pushes a lot of people to live and more importantly to have a deeper meaning of their lives, that we're not just beings who accidentally sprung out of this world, but we are beings who have a pupose.

let's take for instance that in the end of the world, it happens that there is really no god, it's just fine, I lose nothing, but what's exciting is that at the end of time and there is really God, then that's gonna be the most wonderful thing that will ever happen to this world. I would opt to believe because I'm gonna be in a very safe side. though hypothetically thought, it might seem it's a coward position, but it's not, it's taking side in this world, because it's only either you believe or deny. I choose to believe eventhough no man and science can ever explain the fullness of the diviness of God. I choose to believe blindly because I know no matter what this world brings, I will be safe with myself taking side with HIM. It's all about spirituality and how you experience the goodness of God in our lives. This is something no one can ever explain. How happiness with God is not temporary or incidental in an event but forever felt. How through our experiences that we feel the goodness of God.

It might seem what I said is just wanting to make God real, but I believe not, it's just how I can simply tell of Him in my own words. I'm not in the position to declare the fullness of God because I simply can't and won't know. But one thing is for sure, God has always made ways to reveal himself to people, like to apostle Paul. He has a special time being prepared for you just like the prodigal son.