Greg Koukl - Can God's Existence Be Proved? - Part 2 of 2

Part 2 of 2 - Greg Koukl of Stand to Reason answers the question, "Can God's existence be proved?". Recorded at STR's weekly radio broadcast. For more information visit http://www.str.org.

Category:

People & Blogs

Tags:

• greg
• koukl
• stand
• reason
• str
• religion
• philosophy
• christianity
• jesus
• bible
• faith
• proof
• existence
• god

[YouAreIsrael]

Greg, isn't the first and only real evidence we need is to see God in Christ? We can know God exists and the evidence for His existence in the perfect life of Jesus can we not?

[anewdayproductions]

@Hufflewaffle so says the arbitrary fool.

[Hufflewaffle]

'God' is a metaphor that points to the subjective mystery of life beyond all categories of feeling or thought. God is not some piece of objective knowledge. God is not a 'being' or an 'energy' or anything. There is a reason we talk about "religious experience", You don't 'prove' experiences, you simply express them. That's what people do in ritual and art. Its what nature does! Getting caught up in trying to prove 'god' as an actual objective 'being' is ridiculous. It makes no sense to even try.

[drumrnva]

@SeraphsWitness Well, I get that. To me the problem with things that can't be naturally observed/tested is, how do you have a conversation about them? I don't know the answer, and maybe that's why I became a non-believer. I just don't know how to speak about things outside time/space. I have enough trouble understanding things that are *inside* those boundaries. You've made me think, though. Thank you.

[SeraphsWitness]

@drumrnva Perhaps. I'm just postulating that perhaps there are things beyond what we can naturally observe and test.

I agree with you though.

[drumrnva]

@SeraphsWitness Again, I trust my mind because what other choice do I have? Sometimes my mind isn't 'worthy' of trust. I trust my (limited) perception of science because it has built-in attempts to disprove itself. To me naturalism means coming to the best conclusions with all the information that we can gather. It strives to remove subjectivity. It seems that you're referring to a greater subjectivity here, which I can't deny. But we have to make decisions somehow, right?

[SeraphsWitness]

@drumrnva Cool. I agree.

So whether or not your mind is subjective perception is not the issue... it's whether or not it's worthy of trust. Seemingly, you trust your mind. By what else can we measure truth? Even your perception of science is with the use of your self-proclaimed "subjective" mind. Yet I assume you trust that.

[drumrnva]

@SeraphsWitness I have no choice but to trust my mind. What else is there? I don't believe in 'love' as a thing unto itself, no. It's an action word. Love can only be perceived in actions, in my opinion. Love is part of how we bond, and bonding is how we exist in relative harmony with our fellow humans.

[SeraphsWitness]

@drumrnva Just answering your question. You trust your mind every day to deliver information, don't you?

Love cannot be perceived or tested by the naturalistic senses... do you believe in love?

[drumrnva]

@SeraphsWitness Too subjective.