I was raised catholic my whole life and was religious most of it until I started college and started studying biology and physics.

The universe is simply just too vast for any idea of a traditional God figure seen in conventional religion to hold. We are simply a species of chemical scum on a tiny tiny rock in a universe that is simply so vast it is impossible to comprehend. In other words we are incredibly insignificant which is like the antithesis of religious teachings.

Thats not to say I'm opposed to the idea of a higher power of some sort, maybe something like a higher dimensional being as there are some strange things in physics that just do not make sense, but when it comes to the idea of God in the traditional sense of modern religion i definitely reject it.

I don't necessarily hate the idea of religion as it does provide a moral compass for some people (albeit a flawed one) and it keeps people sane. However, when powers abuse and exploit religion for conflict or other unethical problems that's when I have a huge problem with religion. That and the fact that people try to use it as a way to deny tentative truths of science lol.

I'm not sure what you're trying to say.

Are you proposing this is the reason that is given for why we should believe them..?  Or are you suggesting this is actually a good reason to believe?

I have a problem with this post. Although it is true that we have yet to truly bridge biology and psychology which is the frontier of consciousness we have made up a lot of ground in the area and are still actively finding new developments that I'm sure will lead us to an answer one day or another. This will echo other arguments in this thread which argue that just because we don't understand something doesn't mean it is the work of God. Consciousness still obeys the laws of physics whether we want to or not which is why the free will controversy in philosophy is a thing in the first place. 

Pain was another thing that seemed unexplainable for years but eventually neurobiologists were able to piece together that puzzle. Was it the work of God then too?

First one, I guess. I first just declare that the "good" each religion pursues is based directly on what their creators told, which could or could not be based on the very words of a high being. However, for us and our limited scope, it's at least clear the "good" of each religion is based on man-made values, because the intervention of a deity cannot be proven. In the past that may have been useful for religious people to spread their teachings, but today it's not enough to justify religions as "good". 

Sorry if I'm not being clear, I have issues with English being a third language and also have comprehension issues of my own, but I like religious debates. 

No worries.  It's a complicated topic.  Most people have difficulty discussing it even in their first language.  If this is your third, that's quite impressive.

For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life.