My thoughts as of late

[Thana]

I don't understand why you're saying that to choose Religion is to reject logic? What do you even mean by that?

And as to your ego getting in the way, Here's a quote that I've found to be very true.

“There is no room for God in him who is full of himself.”

 

[dyanaprajna2011]

It's not exactly that to accept religion would be to reject logic, but the metaphysical nature of religion can be considered 'supra-logical'. There's some aspects of religion that lie outside the bounds of logic. In other words, some ideas within religion reside kust outside the reach of logic.

 

[Thief]

I'm still trying to figure out exactly what I think about the relationship between religion and science. I don't deny the importance of either, however.

I think of science as discovering 'HOW' ....God did it.

 

[Aupmanyav]

“There is no room for God in him who is full of himself.”

Also, 'there is no room for God in him who has abandoned his sense of self'.

 

[Secret Chief]

Crossfire seems to embody both Christianity and zennery without coming to too much harm.

Why not make her a brew in the cafe?

 

[1robin]

It's not exactly that to accept religion would be to reject logic, but the metaphysical nature of religion can be considered 'supra-logical'. There's some aspects of religion that lie outside the bounds of logic. In other words, some ideas within religion reside kust outside the reach of logic.

I will use this post to respond to several of your earlier questions.

1. The fact your asking the questions you are is evidence for God. Molecules in motion wouldn't care about transcendence, the meaning of anything, or moral issues. They are only relevant if a God exists. You can't explain this universe desire for answers by materialism alone. Every list I have seen of the ten fundamental questions of life contains none that have scientific answers even possible. Scientism (not science) is a narrow dogmatic view that excludes all the important issues before hand.

2. Watching every professional debate I can find I have discovered science to be the primary realm by which men of faith defend it. I can list scientific arguments for God until your simply sick of them and the trend is sharply skewed in faith's direction. Two examples:
a. Darwin thought the cell was a membrane containing simply goo. Now we know it is more complicated that a space shuttle. The bible said things change after their kind 3000 years before Darwin. Darwin at best has only confirmed the bible.
b. A debate from last night had a Christian, published PhD in astronomy verses someone I never heard of.
He said when he began his study's there were on average 1 paper per month that could be used to confirm the bible. Now he finds about 10 per day.

3. My faith is primarily based on being born again but science and philosophy are the primary ways I and countless others defend faith. I can give you big time scholars for astronomy, cosmology, legal scholars, forensic coroners, historians, philosophers, etc..... by the score upon request. Papers by the ton, facts by the truck load, reasoning in heaps. Just tell me on what line you need info.

4. Do not despair in totality when you have a crisis of this kind. Faith (true faith) thrives in adversity. We are so stubborn and so distracted by meaningless junk we often need to be shocked to our senses to think clearly about what matters. Unlike Islam Christianity exploded in history without a single sword and spread despite be persecuted in it's own nation and by the greatest empire on Earth at the time.

5. Lastly, there is no conflict what so ever between logic, reason, and faith. Hoards of the most intelligent, curious, and educated scholars who ever lived have been men of faith.