I also explained in another thread how these reasons for belief connect up with what I believe. But instead of posting those again, I also thought that some people may find it more useful in understanding these reasons to see the intermediate step of showing how to get the the logical implications of those reasons for belief.
- For those who are not physicists this reason may not seem like a big deal because it is not like they look at the world in terms of mathematics anyway. But when it comes to the laws of nature, mathematics is the only way to describe them. So when a physicists says this mathematics cannot be the totality of reality then he saying that the laws of nature are not all there is to reality. It is a rejection of naturalism.
- What kind of God does best serve the purpose of supporting the existentialist faith that life is worth living. Well because life includes some horrible experiences, the existentialist faith is basically saying that no matter how horrible, these experiences have value. They give us something and we become more because of them. The theistic equivalent is to say that all the things in life are a gift of God to us and we grow by them. What does this say about God? That He is a part of our life and in a relationship with us and the fullest relationship would be with something that has at the very least all the same abilities and thus able to engage us most fully. I think there is no doubt as well that maximizing the value of life puts it in the context of an existence that continues to benefit from these experiences without end, and the God this points to is one whose gifts to enrich us likewise continue without end – an infinite God with no end to what He has to give.
- The physicist is pretty much trained to look for a perfect (increasingly accurate) mathematical description of reality. So when you expect the mathematics describing the laws of nature not to be the sum total of everything then you have to expect a failure of mathematics to do so at some point. That is basically what quantum physics is saying that physicists find so difficult. So this is not just about God having a hand in things but about the failure of naturalism in some sense. If you think there is more and it has any impact on our lives then somehow it has to show up in the mathematical description of reality – and it does in quantum physics.
- It is not logic itself which is so confining, because the fact is that where logic leads you depends entirely on the premises you start with. And so perhaps the real trap is only going with what can be known with absolute certainty. And so perhaps this business about escaping the trap of logic is really about comprehending the illusion of certainty. Thus we accept that life requires choices of faith.
- If reality is not exclusively objective then some of it is irreducibly subjective. It means that reality is not the same for everyone despite there being considerable overlap in those experiences we share. And if the above reasons point to a reality beyond the laws of nature – a supernatural, non-physical, or spiritual reality then the considerable diversity of thought with regards to these things strongly suggest that the irreducibly subjective aspect of reality and the spiritual supernatural aspect of reality are pretty much one and the same thing. But wait a minute? If God is real then isn’t that an objective reality? Not if experience of God depends upon something inside of you. In other words, it is not like looking at an object in nature with microscopes and other measurements of science, where everyone gets the same results, because in science what you believe is irrelevant. With God, what you want and believe is essential perhaps for the simple reason that God relates to us so completely that in some ways He is like a mirror – not just showing us as we are, but starting there in order to point to how we can become more.