3 ms·

I'm a religious person in that I believe in the existence of a God but even still I think Mr. Collins ideas are unfounded. The truth about God is, if he/she do

I'm a religious person in that I believe in the existence of a God but even still I think Mr. Collins ideas are unfounded. The truth about God is, if he/she does exist, that existence is outside our natural physical laws. I think religious people fall into this trap a lot. In trying to "prove God exists" they are really trying to prove atheists wrong. But the truth is, and I say this as a religious person, atheists are right. Believing in God is irrational. That's the point. Religion is built on the proverbial "leap of faith." It is in having faith that religion provides any value to its followers. So if a religious person feels the need to go around trying to prove God's existence they are sort of missing the point.

deleted 18y ago
[deleted]
Radix 18y ago
As someone who was raised christian I still don't understand this. Why knowingly and purposefully believe in something that you do not hope to rationalize. (OTOH, I'm always glad to see religious people who actually and clearly follow their beliefs.) edit: removed edit
jimbokun 18y ago
As opposed to "irrational" I would be willing to settle for "unscientific." There might be knowledge unattainable through observation and experiment, but attainable through revelation from someone not subject to our limitations. Such a belief is obviously unscientific, but I do not think "irrational" is accurate. I think you would need to find some incompatibility between premises and conclusions to claim that.
jeremyawon 18y ago
i can't think of anything a leap of faith in the existence of god provides which couldn't otherwise have been rationalized. god tells one man to kill his neighbors, and another to befriend them. don't we determine the value of each religious practice by rationally evaluating their effects?
zzzmarcus 18y ago
He's not trying to prove God exists, he's trying to show how an active God, one that is still involved in human affairs, can exist without breaking the laws of science and nature. He's making it easier for people who believe in evolution, relativity etc. to reconcile their faith in God with their faith in science.

deleted 18y ago

[deleted]

Radix 18y ago

As someone who was raised christian I still don't understand this. Why knowingly and purposefully believe in something that you do not hope to rationalize. (OTOH, I'm always glad to see religious people who actually and clearly follow their beliefs.) edit: removed edit

jimbokun 18y ago

As opposed to "irrational" I would be willing to settle for "unscientific." There might be knowledge unattainable through observation and experiment, but attainable through revelation from someone not subject to our limitations. Such a belief is obviously unscientific, but I do not think "irrational" is accurate. I think you would need to find some incompatibility between premises and conclusions to claim that.

jeremyawon 18y ago

i can't think of anything a leap of faith in the existence of god provides which couldn't otherwise have been rationalized. god tells one man to kill his neighbors, and another to befriend them. don't we determine the value of each religious practice by rationally evaluating their effects?

zzzmarcus 18y ago

He's not trying to prove God exists, he's trying to show how an active God, one that is still involved in human affairs, can exist without breaking the laws of science and nature. He's making it easier for people who believe in evolution, relativity etc. to reconcile their faith in God with their faith in science.