"Bad skeptics doubt. Good skeptics doubt their doubt."
Why do most people believe in God?
Perhaps, it's because God, an eternal being is as likely (to them) or a better explanation than a universe birthed out of (either nothing [which is something] or) something (e.g. reality) which is eternal. What is this eternal thing? Even if we're a multi-verse of ever exploding and collapsing universes, something without end, it's very difficult for the average individual to believe that any of these possible scientific explanations are any more credible than a God.
It's a far better life to have hope in a purposeful life, than a damnation of universe where, in the long-term, nothing matters.
But you can't just "create" a God to explain things! There's so much we don't know about the universe we live in, why could the possibility of intelligence of some sort, not be a consideration worth contemplating? Are we really that pretentious to believe that we are the peak of intelligence in this universe, or that our true comprehension of reality couldn't include something manufactured rather than spontaneous? Isn't our existence and our ability to create one of the best arguments that a similar being is out there having created us? In Geology, Uniformitarianism suggests what "laws" we observe in one layer will occur in the other layers. In essence what is true here (our existence) suggests it occurs everywhere. The idea of a God, who creates beings, like we procreate seems plausible even in the realm of common sense science (rather than real science which currently lacks evidence to test such possibilities). Creationism is everywhere: people, animals, plants, even the universe is always creating.
Even if you disagree with what I'm saying, I do believe it's this above conflict (argument) that leads many people to continue to support the idea of creationism (deity created reality) rather than a completely scientific Godless explanation. One answer provides, maybe not all the answers, but at least (the concept or emotion of) hope, while the other tends to leave us at a dead-end (psychologically and physically). I suppose for many skeptics, the religious answer provides a similar problem. "Who made God?" Was he a part of race of intelligent beings that created worlds and universes, and if so, who made his universe, thus we arrive at the same problem? Or do we simply accept the fact God is, as is the universe, forever?
Perhaps they're one in the same?
Now lets examine another possibility. Humans, through their off-spring obtain immortality. We the children of God have given him immortality, perhaps the creation of the universe, and that which we as a species creates, is just evidence of a process of ever evolving creation?
There is of course another answer. One in which is equally difficult to comprehend, but certainly makes more sense in both cases. We humans like to organize things, we like to have a clear, and concise explanation that makes sense. We apply the laws of physics, the rules of the universe to our scientific methods in order to try and understand things. The concept of time is one of these debated topics, much like God, that has no clear answer. As humans we want to believe the universe was created at one point and ends some time in the future. But I ask this, what if time is not linear? What if we don't need an explanation for why the universe was created, (or God)?
Consider a simplistic model such as time being in a circular fashion, or even a figure-8, and try to tell me where it begins and ends. Now consider the possibility that there is no past and no future, but that every event is happening at the same time, yet the way we perceive it is through our own linear lens. Like a video game programmed with every possibility, but we only play a level at a time. I like to think of time a maze, and we the rats wandering through the maze are only capable of seeing the x-axis (walls, and corridors, etc.), but the observer from above can see all of time, all of the maze, in an entire picture. From this viewpoint it becomes relatively easy to see both the past and the future, even if the maze happens to begin and end at the same point (the key to the present is in the past). If the maze is space and time, then everything is happening at once.
So let's say God exists. Let's say he creates man and places him in the maze. Why?
Companionship. The maze is opportunity.
He did not create a "pet" (or a rat) he created a species capable of (perhaps one day) being his equal in Genesis 1:27, he created us in his image, but here's where things get interesting. If you were to create a companion, and you knew what you created, (for instance, he could have instantly made us Gods) then that companion would be very boring. Like throwing your own surprise birthday party, it's not going to a surprise. Perhaps God needed a companion to evolve on his own, to earn his place beside God rather than be simply given it. Much like we test our own children to be ready for various moments in life (we wouldn't hand the keys to a unlicensed driver), what if science is simply a path to understanding all of this, and that life is test to decide if and when (if ever) any of us become enlightened enough to become a being capable of understanding God. Of course this clearly means, some of us won't be making it. Quantum physics, a set of, what seems, contrived "rules" that govern our test, seem rather biased towards our existence rather than random. Change one law, and our entire existence spins out of control.
Why does God not rescue the hungry in Africa, or save people from a burning building? Because the point is for us to save ourselves. Mankind has the ability to feed every individual on this earth, and trade corporate profit for safer homes, but some of us have failed to pass these milestones. The result of evil on this earth is the result of our own misuse of our capabilities. How can we blame God for his inaction, when its clear, most of us have the capability for doing much more good in this world, and we choose not to? Despite the pain to "guinea pigs" in a lab, mankind like his Lord, pursues (often) unethical treatment of animals for the betterment of mankind (a higher purpose). From our petri-dish of an ocean we crawled out from, to our laboratory evolution into test-tube monkeys, our creation continues to mimic the growth of a life-form with a single goal: becoming more. Interestingly though as we perpetuate ourselves to become more, we do so without the outcome being defined by the creator. If this is true, even God does not know what we may become. The reason for this I will explain in a moment.
While none of this amounts to any scientific proof, nor do I claim to want to prove anything. This does provide religion with a reason that we would evolve, rather than simply deny a scientific process we which has been proven true.
Consider the companion you would like in your life. Do you want someone to praise you, and be fearful of you? Or would you prefer your equal, someone who motivates you and challenges you. If God's goal of mankind is companionship, (which is the only explanation that makes sense to me), then he would not want, in my opinion, someone of what we typically think is the stereotypical Christian (sitting in a pew, praising God). God, if I was him or her, would want an individual of free-thought, and who is altruistic by nature, not simply because of the threat of Hell. He wants individuals of action, and who can recognize their autonomy. Perhaps, even the road to Heaven is through atheism?
Real companions are loyal to not just you but to truth and your best interest: “A friend loves at all times and a brother is born of adversity” (Proverbs 17:17)
If existence is a test, perhaps one must lose blind-faith through no faith before they're ever truly ever able to believe the truth? The truth that the reason you will never be able to prove God's existence through science is because that IS the test. To find the one element of our lives that doesn't conform to the rules of this universe, much as time in linear sense, doesn't explain a the creation of reality. God is that incomprehensible scientist in a lab somewhere with his rats in maze, desperately hoping one of us figures out that even though there is no proof for God, that he is looking down upon us, waiting for us to be ready to be his equal. Waiting for that one rat to look up, with his beady black eyes to stare into the face of God and to say "I now know you".
There's no doubt the literal God of the Bible is a man-made creation itself, oral stories, edited and passed down over centuries before finally being compiled. Just because we consider the possible of higher intelligence, and the existence of God does not mean the accepted interpretations, often preposterous claims that conflict with proof don't contain an essence of a truth once witnessed but now lost in translation. There are so many variations of belief, even spouses of the same faith of denomination often disagree with one another, but if we simply assume human corruption and fallibility in the perpetuation of the Bible we still have major anthropological evidence of a story of a God who came to earth (or son who came) to show us how to play the game, to make our way through the maze. Who performed enough miracles to convince enough people who witnessed such accounts to consider these truths.
The answer to the maze is sacrifice.
"Sending his only son", was an example for us to realize that the key to heaven is as simple as, instead of living for ourselves, we must live for others.
Yet how often in this life, even by many Christians is this ever followed?
Even if you're not convinced of God, his message should be clear to everyone. Strive to be more, to do more, and to find your way out of the maze, even if you find the end is where we begin again.
