Summary of your religious beliefs

[muon2]

God: Do you believe in God? Is there more than one God? Is this God all-knowing and all-powerful? Does God interfere in your daily life? Does God talk to you?

I think that viewing these questions in this way leads to inherent confusion and contradictions that don't get at the nature of my belief. At the core I conceive of God as being everywhere at all times.

Invisible physical fields, like the electromagnetic and gravitational fields, are everywhere at all times. They each comprise one universal field, yet they each manifest themselves as multiple particles when the situation is appropriate. For example the electromagnetic field manifests itself as physical photons, such as the ones moving from the screen to your retina to convey these words. Those photons are many, but the field is one - and they are and remain the same thing! The gravitational field is everywhere at all times, and its force is universal. Gravity controls the movement of every object in the universe, even as the movement of those objects in space and time inform the nature of the gravitational field.

So, if God is ever-present like a physical field, why shouldn't God similarly be manifest at times as multiple entities that are still part of the one? The absolute question of God as one or many would be no more applicable than it is in discussing electromagnetism. If God is everywhere at all times, then it can naturally follow that like gravity God can exert an influence on all things even as all things in the universe provide information to God. Is that all-knowing and all-powerful? It might or might not be depending on what those terms actually mean to the person asking.

[muon2]

Why do you follow this religion (or lack thereof)? A series of ~experiences~ in my late teens and early twenties. All stuff very specific to me individually. Life got a lot sweeter when I stopped trying to reverse-engineer arguments from first principles.

Interesting. For me it was quite the opposite and life was "sweeter" when I could look to first principles in the manner of Descartes. In a college class on the Early Middle Ages I found Augustine's view that religion should not contradict science or reason to be particularly enlightening.

[muon2]

Why do you follow this religion (or lack thereof)? A series of ~experiences~ in my late teens and early twenties. All stuff very specific to me individually. Life got a lot sweeter when I stopped trying to reverse-engineer arguments from first principles.

Interesting. For me it was quite the opposite and life was "sweeter" when I could look to first principles in the manner of Descartes. In a college class on the Early Middle Ages I found Augustine's view that religion should not contradict science or reason to be particularly enlightening.

I certainly don't disagree with Augustine on that point. But there's little support for the idea that any one particular religion is more or less consonant with scientific observation or generally-agreed-upon philosophical axioms than others.

     There's also the issue of determining what the proper conclusions are of science and reason. There are opinions that are commonly accepted in biblical scholarship that subtly presuppose the falsity of traditional Christian beliefs. Thus I see many Christians unknowingly deny important teachings as part of "not contradicting science or reason". I won't go into detail about these points since I don't want to derail this topic, but this presents a substantial epistemological problem.

Perhaps taking this a bit further from the rails than you intend, but I think the error some would make is claiming that there is a proper conclusion for scientific reason applied to religion. Historically science sets goals, but not conclusions. I feel that analogy can be a better approach as a scientist's tool for reason and analogy has a strong record in theological discourse.

I don't see analogies as a means of proof per se, but as a means to reject falsification of religious claims. That's important since reason tells us that there are inevitably definitive statements that cannot be determined to be either true or false. Thus such statements must either be accepted or rejected on faith alone.

[muon2]

Why do you follow this religion (or lack thereof)? A series of ~experiences~ in my late teens and early twenties. All stuff very specific to me individually. Life got a lot sweeter when I stopped trying to reverse-engineer arguments from first principles.

Interesting. For me it was quite the opposite and life was "sweeter" when I could look to first principles in the manner of Descartes. In a college class on the Early Middle Ages I found Augustine's view that religion should not contradict science or reason to be particularly enlightening.

I certainly don't disagree with Augustine on that point. But there's little support for the idea that any one particular religion is more or less consonant with scientific observation or generally-agreed-upon philosophical axioms than others.

I think there are some that are less consonant than others (eg young earth creationism). But I also find that there are those who think that because some religions are less consonant with scientific observation then religion in general is not consonant with science and reason.