Everybody who has ever lived believed in at least one thing. It could have been that the sun rises in the east or something such as believing hard enough will allow a person to pass through any solid wall as if it weren't even there. One of those beliefs is based on fact, and the other is based on delusion. The laws of nature will not allow a person to simply walk through a solid wall. In other words, some beliefs are rational and others are not.
Some believe that belief in the existence of God is not rational; however, I believe that belief in the existence of a greater being called God can be a rational belief. For something to be rational it must be based on fact or logical reasoning rather than emotions or feelings. Belief in the existence of God because it makes you feel better about what you do in your life is not rational because it is based on feelings, but belief in the existence of God can be rational because the belief can be backed up with facts and logical reasoning in the following way.
The world is a dynamic, ordered system of many different and changing elements. Their natural properties are ordered to interact with each other in stable and mutual relationships that we define as physical laws. For example, all particles that have mass are ordered to move toward all others according to the law of gravity. Another simple example is that hydrogen atoms are ordered to combine with an oxygen atom in the ratio of 2:1, thus implying that every oxygen atom is ordered to combine with hydrogen atoms in the ratio of 1:2 (a mutual relationship).
In such a mutually dependent, dynamic system, the nature of each part is defined by its relation with others, and so it requires the others for its own ability to act. Modern science has proven that our world is not just a bunch of unrelated laws, but rather an intertwined whole. In other words, the parts can’t be understood if they are separated from the whole.
The following argument can be made from analyzing the above description. In a system such as our world no part can be self-sufficient or self-explanatory because every part relies on the other parts. A part cannot act unless there are others to interact reciprocally with it. Any part could be self-sufficient if it was the cause of the rest of the system, but that is not possible because no part can act without the others. The system as a whole can’t explain its own existence since it is made up of the parts and is not a separate being that is independent of the parts. So, the existence of the system can’t be explained by the parts or the whole.
The above argument is rational because it is based on facts of science and logical reasoning. From the argument the following conclusions can be drawn. A system such as our world needs a unifying efficient cause to hypothesize it in existence as a unified whole because the parts only make sense as a part of the whole, and neither the parts nor the whole can explain their own existence. That cause...