That which cannot be sensed by man’s five senses is regardless of that state still in existence, or is it? It would be rash to consider the wind or the cold non existent simply because we cannot see them for, we can feel them. It would be unwise to consider odors a figment of the imagination simply because we cannot feel, see, or hear them for, we can smell them. It is absurd to consider that the atom does not exist just because we can’t justify its existence using any of our five senses yet, so many of us justify that God does not exist simply because of our inability to find Him or to establish his existence using our senses. This method of “reasoning” ignores the limits of our physical ability, conversely it also limits the vast potential of our spiritual ability.
The existence of God and religion have nothing to do one with the other. That you may be a Christian or a Muslim is but a choice made based on data examined by you and believed to be true thus accepted as the answer to the question. Regardless of religion there is but one answer out of two possible ones, God either exists or He does not. That religion is based on a combination of story telling and events witnessed by select people, some factual and some perhaps not, is not up for discussion because it is a fact. That a particular religion is right and conversely others wrong is arbitrary and speculative. The real question then still remains, does God exist or not?
As so eloquently stated by Albert Einstein, the laws of physics tell us that cold does not exist, it is merely the absence of heat. Darkness does not exist, it is merely the absence of light. Yet, most people believe that darkness and cold do exist since they can “see” darkness and “feel” cold but, therein we find the limits of our senses. You cannot feel cold you can only feel or sense that heat is missing though you may not be aware of that specific fact it is none the less true. You cannot see darkness for in reality, despite your understanding of what is in your sight, you are actually seeing nothing, you are simply sensing through sight that there is an absence of light. If our perception of reality based solely on our senses can be so warped as to confuse a lack of something real with reality itself, then, how can our senses be trusted to answer such a difficult question?
That evolution can by itself explain the origin of man is but another absurd notion proposed by man based on physical evidence which completely ignores the spiritual evidence that cannot be explained by science. If physical evidence alone is to explain our origin then we are to assume that God has left physical evidence of his existence for us to find or that our creation was but the physical culmination of a set of circumstances and events also rooted in the physical world. Such a humanly or scientifically designed method can only get us to the physical origin of man. Hypothetically one can say that man was either created or otherwise evolved but, from what did man evolve? Regardless of the hypothesis used to begin the investigation there must be an origin, an Alpha if you will. If the physical origin of man can be traced then whatever it is traced to still requires the question as to where that origin came from and, the origin of that origin and, so on and so forth. Nothing can evolve from nothingness, scientifically speaking, therefor I find it more rational to believe in God than to dismiss His existence. The very fact that evolution completely dismisses the spiritual provides me with sufficient basis for the dismissal of such a method. Given that matter cannot just come into existence from nothingness coupled with the lack of spirituality in evolution it is my opinion, based on fact and not faith that, evolution is an incomplete theory which at the very best will result in arriving near the origin of man as a physical being and nothing more. This method cannot and will not answer the most important question. Does God exist?
Spiritual evidence which does exist is usually confronted skeptically by the scientific and humanistic factions of society. Cancers disappearing suddenly from one day to the next have left doctors world wide, in myriads of situations, baffled and without explanation. Phenomena such as suddenly moving objects without apparent natural forces that explain the movement have been documented and cannot be ignored. Precise predictions of future events by people such as Edgar Cayce are still unexplained. Humanists and scientists explain accurate predictions of future events that have not yet happened as a power of our brains that we have not yet completely discovered or understood but, we are talking about future events that have not yet happened and are susceptible to change by our actions at the present moment. To explain such phenomena so simply is to deny that a spiritual sense exists, that nature is not the end all of existence, and that there is much that cannot be understood in the physical sense.
Spiritual advancement is more important to mankinds’ future, in my opinion, than scientific advancement. In reality I believe both can be advanced simultaneously but, I believe we have to give up our arrogant ways as people and accept that much more investigation is needed of the spiritual than is the current trend in the world today. The current trend of humanism and opposition to religion and spiritual enlightenment is a limited theory which will stagnate our evolution as a whole. Advancement of the human race is fragmented when spiritual evidence is ignored and only scientific physical evidence is supported. Given that there must be an origin to all origins I have no choice but to rationally believe in God and thus I have ease with which to confront my mortality. I am at peace with death because I consider it to be a transformation and not an end. I have no need for unnecessary violence for I am at peace. I have no desire for that which is not mine for that which is physical does not attract my attention nearly as much as that which offers me peace. I believe in God for my conscience cannot be explained any other way. There is no scientific explanation for the human conscience just as there is no physical explanation for the origin of man or the universe. The only explanation is God and I will not be so arrogant as to deny his existence while participating in the very creation that He provided me, this thing we call life.
It occurred to me recently that the comment “you lie” by Representative Joe Wilson has been met with sharp criticism by those who would have an epiphany of monumental proportions if they would just stop to think rationally for a minute about the situation. Given the fact that the Congressman acted out so naturally coupled with the lack of credibility of the target of his verbal discharge at the very least a minute instance of rumination is in order. Are they indeed or, are they not, the most religious among politicians those from the conservative right? Are conservatives not widely thought of as the “Christian Fanatics” of our political system? Whether or not they indeed are is not the important thing here, the important question is actually why followers of Christ would choose to come out against a fellow believer in an instance of moral directness not seen in American politics often enough? 