Not seeing is not a proof of non-existence
The only statement of people who deny the existence of angels is; “we do not see angels; how can we believe something that we do not see?” However, this statement does not only mean the denial of angels but many other things along with it. Man can see very few things in this realm and perceive very few objects with his five senses. For example;
Our eyes can see objects at a magnitude of one fifth of 1mm but it cannot see smaller ones. In this case, can we deny objects smaller than one fifth of 1mm?
Similarly, man can see rays that have vibrations between 0, 4 and 0, 7. While our eyes can detect rays of this wavelength via the nerves of our retina layer, it cannot see hundreds and even thousands of lights apart from that. X, gamma, ultraviolet, radar, cosmic, x-ray and radioactive rays can be added to this list. So can we deny the existence of all of these rays that we cannot see and can we justified for our denial?
The forces of repulsion and attraction sustain huge systems with the power and permission of God but they are not seen. Nevertheless, no scientist or a sane person denies the existence of such powers. That is, all scientists believe what they do not see. Have you ever seen someone who denies the buoyancy of water, gravity and the repulsion and attraction powers of stars by saying “I cannot see”?
When we look at ourselves by leaving this realm aside, we will see that the faculties in our body such as mind, imagination and memory are much more than the ones that are seen.
If we tried to count what we could not see, it would definitely take a long time. Man cannot see even one a millionth of this universe. Then, can we deny the remaining nine hundred ninety-nine thousand nine hundred and ninety-nine? If we cannot deny it – we can absolutely not deny it – will it be reasonable to deny the angels that we cannot see? Then, there are two choices:
1- He will deny the existence of angels because he cannot see them and he will have to deny all of the things that he cannot see.
2- He will accept the existence of angels, which is proved through unlimited evidences, as he accepts the existence of many things that he cannot see.
The third way, which is accepting what one wishes and denying what one does not wish, is not actually a way; it is nonsense and deceiving oneself. What underlies under the nonsense of “I do not believe what I do not see” is the mistake of assigning the duty of the mind to the eye. In fact, each sense in man opens the door of a different realm; the duty of a sense is not expected from another sense. For instance, the eye cannot perform the duty of the ear; the nose cannot fulfill the duty of the nose. Man cannot taste food, hear the sound of the nightingale or smell the scent of the rose through his eyes. The eye cannot fulfill the functions of these senses; it cannot fulfill the function of the mind, either. To expect the eye to fulfill the duty of the mind is no different from expecting the duty of the nose from the ear.
To sum up, man does not deny the existence of the things that he cannot see; he proves and accepts their existence acting upon various data, claims and assumptions. Then, he has to accept the existence of angels, too. And it is not something very difficult to accept it since there is so much evidence.