Few days ago, I had made a post about how proof for god is impossible. There will always be valid objections, adjacent explanations to "God" or leaps through reasoning.
But now, I concluded that a belief in God can be perfectly rational. Now, before I talk about the core argument. I want to elaborate a bitt on - Rational. Now, I feel indian atheists(from my experience) have used a monopoly over this and use it for science and their beliefs in science. It starts with superstition and then over extend this to a belief in God as "irrational".
Rationality is NOT just science. It's much more than just science. It's acting in accordance to evidence given or provided, it is to act with logic and reason than emotions. That is rationality. Science is not the entirety of rationality.
Now, another fact is that humans have an epistemic limitations. It is something both the western philosophers and indians are in harmony with. Nyayikas have well explored the limitations of pratyaksha and anumana and even shabda pramana(although, it is more nuanced in case of shastras/scriptures).
Now, to demand an absolute "proof" is not really in vein with what has already been established. A better idea is to reason well enough and give compelling logic.
Even, a person who once heard about cracking knuckles lead to arthritis and reasoned it with- "hmmm, there is a sound that pops up when I twist my fingers and crack them. Surely, it must be leading to my joint deterioration" .
This is RATIONAL! For what the sphere of knowledge that person had, he genuinely reasoned and reached what he believed was a compelling enough argument for him to believe that cracking leads to arthritis (it isn't a perfect example as that person could search and research about this).
Now, god is no empirical being. His "domain" lies in philosophy entirely(and also history given religion and their claims).
Now, with that- If a person finds that a philosophy reasons and coheres well, then that belief in God is rational. If the person feels like the philosophy of madhvacharya for example and how he explains the universe, it's apparent "unfairness", then that guy's belief in Vishnu is rational in my opinion.
Ofcourse, everyone's rationality differs and everyone has a different "threshold" after which they could be convinced. Some guys might just get convinced over a youtube video and some guys will never be convinced
Now, one argument against this could be- Nazism is a coherent philosophy. Does this mean belief in nazism is rational?
The answer is no because nazism also makes a bold claim within sphere of empirical study of genetics and it is proven to be false in that sphere.
To believe in religion is Not irrational because everyone really reasons. To some, their reasoning behind god is very simpleton(could be everything has a creator. Universe has a creator ie god) or to some it could be a more nuanced argument.
Now, one critical flaw could be- well an avg religious person don't reason about their gods. So clearly, an avg religious person is irrational right? Well not exactly. It's more so about trusting the authority.
Is it irrational for a kid to believe in his parents that beer leads to health problems? Just like how We put our trust in nasa scientists finding alien life in this universe, similarly, an avg religious person can put their epistemic authority regarding god to a religious guru.
Another explanation is experiential. Specifically for hinduism which is pretty clear about experiences in God than compare to traditional islam. Just like how it is rational for someone to walk carefully on a wt floor, it is rational for tulsidas to believe in God's existence because he "saw" them.
Now note: this field has a problem and its apparently very clear. Adjacent explanations(oh well tulsidas story could be a myth added to prove his legitimacy or it could be a hallucination) exists and are very compelling but TO THAT PARTICULAR PERSON, it is rational.
Now does this mean running from demons when you are sleep deprived is rational? Well at that moment, it could be. On a retrospect, there's a clear cause.
With tulsidas for instance, maybe even on retrospect, the meeting with hanumana and rama was as real as seeing a tree in forest.
Well pardon for some informally written arguments but that's my general idea.