I’m about to go to sleep, but I keep thinking the question of one person in the fellowship meeting last night. The question was basically simple, she doesn’t know on how could she share about God to the scientists or historians who are in most cases always uses facts and their knowledge to disprove God’s existence?

I contributed to the discussion by sharing my opinions, but I haven’t got the chance to get to the end, because some misunderstanding by some people of what I’m trying to say. I said that I think believing in God wasn’t the real problem these days, because most of the people, even if they are an atheist, do believe that there must be at least a super-being who started everything. And I said that the more difficult problem is to understand which of the believes of God, is the right believes? Wait, what do you mean by that?

I started with the analogy of using the Holy Bible. I said that Holy Bible, is an amazing book, which of course everyone agree, not only that it could save people, but it also kills people. All Christians believe to one book, the Holy Bible, but why are there many of the Christian denominations? Obviously, the answer is because there are many ways the people interprets the Bible. So I said that the more difficult problem is to find the right interpretation of the Bible rather than just knowing that God (or super-being) exists. Between 1905 and 1291 for example, the Holy Bible is being used to justify killing by the crusaders. Then by the puritans in the American history. Then the witch hunting (DO YOU KNOW THAT: The way they test if you’re a witch is to drawn you, if you’re not drawn when being drawn, then you’re a witch, if you’re drawn to death, then you’re not)

So in most cases, people will not be like, “I don’t believe that God exist (or the super-being)”, but instead, they will most likely to believe in the deism approach (which also called the intelligent design). Which in my opinion is the only believe that could make everything fits together to the scientific facts. I remembered one time when I was discussing a similar topic with my friend who does not believe in the similar idea, that we basically is just another accident that’s made by God. It’s either by his fart or cough, then the universe is created. The argument that is made by many Christians is that if that is the case, then our life will not have any purpose, which in my opinion is correct. But I think by just saying that, it doesn’t mean that would add any insights to the discussion!

If we analyze both of the arguments further, we should see that both of the arguments have the same probability of being correct! Christians may defend their argument as well as the counter-parts, but please, look on the others perspective (i.e. Christian, try to see from your counter-part believe, and vice-versa), what happened if at the end of the world, your counter-part’s opinion is the truth?

However, since both of the arguments have the same probability of being correct, I do not believe in the accident argument because that would make my life meaningless. Either way, if at the end of the world, and at the end of my life in fact is truly meaningless, but at least I have enjoyed a meaningful life.