Religion, logic, and rationality.
The search for truth, in science, begins with a hypothesis. Ar research study may follow to prove, or to reject, that hypothesis. In the case of religion, we might start with the competing, and mutually exclusive, hypotheses that (A) existence is a random event, or (B) existence is intelligently designed and purposeful.
If we think about how we might be able to reject (B) ... and thus prove (A) ... we immediately recognize that we must begin by comprehending the nature of existence. That is, what is existence? The dimensions of existence that we can perceive are time and space (the known universe). We then confront the necessity that the those dimensions must, by definition, either be finite or infinite. Time is without beginning and endless, or it is not. Space is endless, or it is not. We next are compelled to acknowledge that we cannot comprehend either possibility. They do not compute. We can only perceive through our five senses and the interpretation of our brain, and neither is adequate to comprehend finite or infinite time, or finite or infinite space. An analogy would be the "square circle", a circle composed of straight lines. We can speak the words "square circle", but we cannot comprehend their meaning. That does not mean that a square circle does not exist or is not possible ... it only means that it is does not exist or is not possible within the boundaries of the dimensions of our existence that we are able to perceive.
Given that we cannot comprehend the nature of existence, we cannot reject hypothesis (B). If we cannot reject (B), than it is as rational and logical to accept (B) as it is to accept (A).
JC |
