How to believe when reason don't want to let you believe?

[NBB]

If you have little faith, then ask God for a little hint, then when you got that your faith will increase a bit, and seek and ask more. Just my thought.

But i tell you, God does exists! and interacts with people personally, and its great, that God is interested in individuals... and he is good. I can tell a lot of experiences with God, for me they convinced me to believe for life.

 

[crossnote]

I don't believe the Bible is a revelation (I'm not saying it can't possibly be, I'm just not convinced that it is). If I were to believe some revelation it would be due to reason telling me it's believable, or some kinda unexplained conviction, which I just don't have.

Fair enough, for you 'Reason' is King even though Reason tells us we still die but can't know what awaits us after death. Whereas Revelation shows we are heading for Judgment and our guilty conscience affirms that.

 

[Sketcher]

Hi, I'm a non-believer who would like to believe. Right now I just don't know if God exists and despite my desire to believe I just can't force myself to do so. I think I've heard all the logical arguments for the existence of God, and while they do make sense all they do is provide a plausible explanation that does not disprove other explanations. Has any of you by any chance been in a similar situation and managed to overcome it? If yes then I would really like to hear how it happened. Thank you in advance.

The issue is that reason makes me doubt that the Bible (or any other holy text for that matter) is God's revelation

Is reason all there is to it? It may be for you, but when I struggled with unbelief, it wasn't really reason that was causing those very strong doubts (full disclosure - I had very strong doubts for a while in spite of a Christian upbringing). I ask because people are very complex, there's reason that feeds into acceptance or rejection of something, but then there's stuff at the lower levels so to speak, that often guides us at least as much, and can also be the deciding factor between two reasonable choices.

 

[Hawkins]

Hi, I'm a non-believer who would like to believe. Right now I just don't know if God exists and despite my desire to believe I just can't force myself to do so. I think I've heard all the logical arguments for the existence of God, and while they do make sense all they do is provide a plausible explanation that does not disprove other explanations. Has any of you by any chance been in a similar situation and managed to overcome it? If yes then I would really like to hear how it happened. Thank you in advance.

It's about that if God exists what channels exist which can lead you to such a truth.

Did you eat any eggs before the age of 10? How can a third person get to this truth? You mom can testify that you ate eggs when you are still a baby, as she is an eyewitness. To truth an eyewitness to get to a truth is a common human practice and sometimes remains the only way to reach a truth.

In a similar manner, God is testified by those who witnessed Him.

My speculation is that a lot of people can't believe God because they are influenced by that atheistic line of reasoning while atheism is a deceptive art relying on the leverage of humans lack of ability to reach evidence. In the example above, atheism requires that evidence to be provided to show that you ever ate eggs before 10 to accept the fact instead of hearing from the testimony of your mom. This is a leverage on the fact that humans lack the ability to get to the evidence in order to deny a fact which can be validate by the testimony of your mom.

Now how about when the mom of your grandpa's grandpa told through her diary that her sons ate eggs since their age of 2, Can you evidence that? Most likely no one can as it lies outside human capability to do so. Humans thus have to rely on faith in her testimonies (through her diary) to get to this fact! There's no other way round. Can her diary contain lies, yes it can. However in case what is said is a truth, you need faith in order to get to such a truth. There's no other way round.

Humans rely heavily on this mechanism to get to a truth of any kind. That's actually why Trump can blame the media for making "fake news", as daily news are in a form of testimonies from eyewitnesses accounts in the end while testimonies are a vessel capable of carrying both truths and lies.

Another deceptive way of atheistic reasoning is that because testimonies can convey lies thus is not a reliable way, only science can be reliable. This is just the same leverage on humans' lack of ability to reach a truth which is not scientific in nature, such as our daily news. In reality, we don't rely on scientific proof to get to the truth behind each piece of daily news. We rely on faith in the credibility of our media to believe what is said instead.

That said. Humans need God because humans lack the ability to tell a future, especially about a future which could possibly affect us such as the one lying after our physical death. We thus need a God to tell us, if such a God exists.

God's truth on the other hand can be reached only by means of testimonies from those who encountered Him, such as how you ate eggs as a child which can only be testified by your mom (as she witnessed). God chooses this way to convey His truth because, 1) it is the most fundamental way for humans to convey a truth and 2) God cannot show up publicly to void His own covenant which requires humans to be saved by faith. The only way He can do is to show up to His chosen eyewitnesses and for their testimonies to convey.

 

[NBB]

I would suggest to be skeptical of people telling you to throw reason out when it comes to determining truth. Believe in God or not, but have good reasons for the belief.

One can have spiritual hunger, and a 'hunch' that God exists, and after one prayer or experience that person could meet God. You don't need very good reasons to believe, after you meet God you no longer have reasons but have experienced God himself, so your reasons can be adjusted to the fact that God interacted with you.

 

[jacks]

You've gotten some good advice here, though none of it may work for you. Everyone is different (or at least there are lots and lots of types) and what might lead you to God, who can tell? Personally I'm convinced that if someone doesn't close off their minds and sincerely keeps asking questions they will eventually find God. Relax and keep looking with an open mind.

 

[NBB]

Meeting God would be a sufficient reason for belief. But I bet we have a different view of what meeting God is.

I don't mean in heaven or some being appeared to me, but i mean receiving from him his spirit in a way you can't just say it was not God. Actuallly this kind of experience is more proof than if a being appeared or something.

 

[Albion]

I would suggest to be skeptical of people telling you to throw reason out when it comes to determining truth. Believe in God or not, but have good reasons for the belief.

"Please read and agree with this thread before posting in the Christian Apologetics forum."

 

[klutedavid]

Hi, I'm a non-believer who would like to believe. Right now I just don't know if God exists and despite my desire to believe I just can't force myself to do so. I think I've heard all the logical arguments for the existence of God, and while they do make sense all they do is provide a plausible explanation that does not disprove other explanations. Has any of you by any chance been in a similar situation and managed to overcome it? If yes then I would really like to hear how it happened. Thank you in advance.

There are two possible explanations for the existence of the universe.

1) God created the universe

2) Science does not offer any real explanation

Science claims the existence of a singularity of infinite density that expanded into the universe we know. But science cannot explain how that singularity came into existence. An entity of infinite density just suddenly appeared? Well that is not really an explanation, science does not know why the universe exists.

So there is but one rational explanation, God did indeed create a terribly complex and profoundly immense universe.

God is spirit, which means that God is not a physical entity like us. God is beyond space time. God can do anything He choose to do, precisely because He is not limited by physical barriers. Spirit means unlimited.

Jesus did rise from the tomb on the third day. That is what the apostles said and there were over five hundred witnesses of the risen Christ.

The concept of God is really a forced conclusion that one must accept. Resistance is futile, there is no other option.

 

[klutedavid]

how can you demonstrate there are only two possibilities for the existence of the universe? It is a fallacy to say just because I don’t know of any other reasons the universe exists then a god must be the reason.

“I don’t know” is a better answer than an answer that cannot be demonstrated.

So are you aware of some other reason for the existence of the universe?

Natural or supernatural?

I regret using that word, 'natural', as it does not have an agreed definition.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

Hi, I'm a non-believer who would like to believe. Right now I just don't know if God exists and despite my desire to believe I just can't force myself to do so. I think I've heard all the logical arguments for the existence of God, and while they do make sense all they do is provide a plausible explanation that does not disprove other explanations. Has any of you by any chance been in a similar situation and managed to overcome it? If yes then I would really like to hear how it happened. Thank you in advance.

Yes. I have. It happened by my coming to understand that the use of logic is limited for any one human being, especially where things like language, the human mind, meaning, epistemology, the nature of written history, and God all come into play in our attempt to "encounter Jesus."

 

[Marcie]

Yes. I have. It happened by my coming to understand that the use of logic is limited for any one human being, especially where things like language, the human mind, meaning, epistemology, the nature of written history, and God all come into play in our attempt to "encounter Jesus."

I'm sorry, but could you please elaborate? I'm not sure what you mean. I agree that our senses and minds are limited, but how does it lead to God?

 

[2PhiloVoid]

I'm sorry, but could you please elaborate? I'm not sure what you mean. I agree that our senses and minds are limited, but how does it lead to God?

Oh, my dear, Marcie, I didn't say that realizing our limits in and of itself leads to God. No, but I am implying that the whole notion which a lot of us begin with about "being lead to God by our best rational lights" is what you first need to contend with. Because epistemologically speaking, if Christianity is true, then that is not "how" it happens. Of course, many of us more rationally and logically oriented people would very much prefer that it does happen that way.

So, in essence, you're going to have to "clear away" an existential space in your conceptual grid so as to make room for religious faith rather than seeing the process as one involving some linear, Lego like structure upon which we build and climb to the top to somehow reach "God."

I know that what I've just said above is too short to serve as an explanation, but I'm just tipping my epistemological hat so you see the direction that I'm referring you to.

 

[Marcie]

So, in essence, you're going to have to "clear away" an existential space in your conceptual grid so as to make room for religious faith rather than seeing the process as one involving some linear, Lego like structure upon which we build and climb to the top to somehow reach "God."

If by "religious faith", you mean faith which is not based on reason then I might just be unable to do that. What makes it harder is that this faith requires certainty, as you can't really say you believe in God if you're only 99.99% sure that God exists.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

If by "religious faith", you mean faith which is not based on reason then I might just be unable to do that.

As a philosopher who studies psychology and epistemology, I'm going to have to disagree with you. In my non-expert yet still studied view, "faith"---specifically Christian faith--- should more appropriately be seen as a part of an existential "response" toward the person of Jesus Christ. This response surely involves the capacities of the human intellect, but it will neither end with this, be exhausted by it, nor will it necessarily enable or allow us to reach a state in which we feel compelled to trust God through Christ.

I can understand your concern, but as a rational person myself who has studied the Bible and some amount of the discipline of Hermeneutics involved in understanding it, I'd assert that reason is always a part of the faith response.

However, as I've already briefly related, reason itself isn't and never can be the sole dynamic at work in the human mind which will bring any one person to a point where he or she is willing to place "faith" in Christ as Lord and Savior. No, the epistemological economy, so to speak, which the Biblical epistemology includes, requires some amount of rational effort but rational deliberation should be recognized as only one component of "faith" and it can never by itself be the determining factor. On some level, you'll have to include your intuitions and emotions into the overall calculus of belief and faith.

What makes it harder is that this faith requires certainty, as you can't really say you believe in God if you're only 99.99% sure that God exists.

Actually, no, faith does not require the concept of "certainty" that is so often proffered in today's society and some churches. Should there be some conceptualization of confidence within faith? Well, of course, but the faith or trust that we as Christians place in God and in Christ will not be of the sort that believes simply and directly because we "have all of our questions answered" or because we "think it's all just nicely and logically packaged." Rather, despite some of the required use of rational thought we all have to utilize when engaging whatever it is that the Christian faith is, we'll find that some aspects of Christian Theology are beyond us. And that's just something we have to deal with, each in our own way.

I'd suggest to you to reconsider the extent and the praxis by which you use rational thought. It's one thing to be highly proficient with logic and critical thinking on a 1st order level, but it's another thing when logical and rationality are delved into on the level of the 2nd order (or when we "think about our thinking ...")

Feel free to ply me with more questions. Like @Silmarien above, I have a more expansive way of addressing these issues than you'll find in the typical church these days, Marcie.

 

[Marcie]

Feel free to ply me with more questions. Like @Silmarien above

I probably will later on. First I gotta do some reading and wrap my head around some things. Thank you for help.

 

[xianghua]

Hi, I'm a non-believer who would like to believe. Right now I just don't know if God exists and despite my desire to believe I just can't force myself to do so. I think I've heard all the logical arguments for the existence of God, and while they do make sense all they do is provide a plausible explanation that does not disprove other explanations. Has any of you by any chance been in a similar situation and managed to overcome it? If yes then I would really like to hear how it happened. Thank you in advance.

do you think that a robot with DNA (a penguin) is evidence for design?

 

[jacks]

I'm in the same boat as OP. I am opening my mind but there are still reasons such as why God if there is one, is not doing anything or why is he doing this to me (when i experience tragic/sad/unplesant) events etc. I pray i find answers but ironically, i'm not sure if prayer would work or if it is just a psychological effect of trying to calm my mind down

I don't have the answers to your questions, but here is a couple of thoughts. When we wonder "why is he doing this to me" perhaps we should also wonder "why not me?" Are any of us so special that no grief or tragedy should enter our lives? Is there anyone who doesn't face these things? Also many questions about Gods existence boil down to; "If there is a God He should do X, since He doesn't do X then there is no God." These arguments don't stand up to much scrutiny, since nothing claims we know the mind of God. Even your dog or cat may not understand your reasoning for things, this doesn't mean you have no reason, let alone that you don't exist.

Again, these are just my thoughts, everyone's journey and logic is different. So you can take what I said with a grain of salt, just keep looking!

 

[Marcie]

I did have problems with the epistemological question of whether we could know something like this for a while,

Could you please tell me how did you deal with this one? What if our mammal senses, thought patterns and what we call "logical reasoning" are simply not appropriate tools to properly explore and understand reality? What's good enough for homo-sapiens sapiens to get food, shelter and even build cities and stuff doesn't have to be good enough to comprehend the reality on a grand cosmic and quantum scale.

 

[Silmarien]

Could you please tell me how did you deal with this one? What if our mammal senses, thought patterns and what we call "logical reasoning" are simply not appropriate tools to properly explore and understand reality? What's good enough for homo-sapiens sapiens to get food, shelter and even build cities and stuff doesn't have to be good enough to comprehend the reality on a grand cosmic and quantum scale.

For me, that argument finally fell apart because what was good enough for humans to get food, shelter, and build cities actually has been good enough to at least grasp at reality on the grand cosmic and quantum scale. Science has never been an impediment to faith for me--it was actually something of a stepping stone, because it is too powerful a vehicle for knowledge for me to really believe that our deepest intuitions about reality (i.e., the presuppositions about logic and causality that underlie the whole scientific project) are false.

This is the sort of thing that you'll see top-notch physicists who are also theists say: most think that physics gives us genuine knowledge of physical reality, and that has consequences for what our minds are capable of (and also for what reality really is). One person you might want to look into is John Polkinghorne, who is an Anglican cleric-scientist. Another who I found extremely useful when I was struggling with this question was Mariano Artigas, who was a Spanish physicist, philosopher of science, and Catholic priest. The Mind of the Universe is a fantastic book by him that touches upon some of these issues.