Belief in God is rational.
Everything has a cause. So unless there is a first cause, then you would have an infinite regress. And then nothing could exist. Therefore there must be a first cause. Therefore God, the first cause, exists. QED.
Translate
2.10.16
I look at the Middle Ages for new ideas.
"Like the Renaissance looked at the Ancient Greece and Rome for inspiration, I look at the Middle Ages for new ideas. What modernity needs is a drop of the piety and devotion of the Middle Ages."
I concur. Even more, we should investigate what inspired them, which was the notion of pre-classical golden ages in which religion, science, culture and leadership were in unity.
It is worth mentioning here however that the middle ages adopted quite a bit from the classical societies, and were inspired by them. The Renaissance™ used the classical ideal as a means of twisting an otherwise cohesive society toward the individual exclusively.
The idea here that I as referring to is what is commonly known as Rishonim. In yeshivas it is well known that the rishonim [authors on the Gemara that lived in the Medial period] have a level of intellectual logical reasoning that the later achronim do not have. Nowadays in the modern world the medieval period is looked down on. This is sad because in philosophy the middle ages were much much better. They were careful about logic. Later philosophers almost always use circular logic to prove their points. John Locke, Hume. etc. Medieval philosophers would never fall into such traps --though they do use axioms which today we would consider no valid.
The idea here that I as referring to is what is commonly known as Rishonim. In yeshivas it is well known that the rishonim [authors on the Gemara that lived in the Medial period] have a level of intellectual logical reasoning that the later achronim do not have. Nowadays in the modern world the medieval period is looked down on. This is sad because in philosophy the middle ages were much much better. They were careful about logic. Later philosophers almost always use circular logic to prove their points. John Locke, Hume. etc. Medieval philosophers would never fall into such traps --though they do use axioms which today we would consider no valid.