(March 29, 2014 at 1:18 pm)Faith No More Wrote:(March 29, 2014 at 11:24 am)whateverist Wrote: But really there is no necessary conflict. Some Christians think the natural world is a kind of revelation regarding the nature of god. We can disagree about the advisability of reading in something beyond nature at the core of nature, but I don't believe doing so should have to impair your understanding of science. Your father seems like a prime example and Jacob here was another until he decided to chuck the god premiss.
I see the conflict in applying the scientifc method to everything but the existence of god. I'm not saying it impairs anyone's ability to understand science. I'm just saying that, in my opinion, it appears impossible to conclude god exists if you truly value the scientific method.
If the scientific method is your only way of determining anything, you probably won't conclude that God exists. The problem is that you're boxing yourself in, setting arbitrary boundaries, and limiting your ability to perceive. You're saying that if science can't prove it, then it's not possible.
