Faith is Dangerous

[Nakosis]

With all due respect, I could say all the same things about non-belief, especially the part about gambling.

Sure, if you are going to disbelieve something based on an idea that is immeasurable or that can't be tested.
So for me, the point is to wait for additional evidence which can be tested before choosing to accept something as true or rejecting it.

Sure, I have some ideas that I accept as truthful enough to continue to rely on.
They have a consistent history of working and as of yet, as far as I'm aware, haven't been falsified.
However, it is possible tomorrow someone will come along to disprove/falsify any one of them.
At which time, I'll know the idea is no longer reliable.

 

[Trailblazer]

So for me, the point is to wait for additional evidence which can be tested before choosing to accept something as true or rejecting it.

I do not believe that there will be any testable evidence for God forthcoming.
Although there are ways to test a prophet, that is not the same as scientific evidence that is verifiable and repeatable.

 

[Nakosis]

We can measure most things through experience.

Religions, myths, traditions often are, at least in part, distillations of learning from experience repackaged in story form.

Ok, but personally, I've found these to be unreliable. So always I'm skeptical about accepting anything of this nature.

Worldviews are an essential part of cognition, we literally can't avoid fitting our experience of reality into categories and narratives that shape how we see things.

Some worldviews may do this less radically than others, but we are all significantly impacted by them.

My "worldview" is based on what I can prove to someone else to the point they have no argument against it. Got to force them into submission into accepting the reality that is support by reasonably irrefutable evidence.

What you call worldview, I'd call the undeniable facts of reality.
I've let go of the storytelling part as any kind of factual reference.
Entertainment, sure. It is fun to imagine some fictional reality to explain the reality we experience, but I know it is fictional. Not something to be relied on.

 

[Nakosis]

I do not believe that there will be any testable evidence for God forthcoming.
Although there are ways to test a prophet, that is not the same as scientific evidence that is verifiable and repeatable.

Well, so, I guess I'm out of luck then.
I accept the consequences of my skepticism.

 

[Trailblazer]

Well, so, I guess I'm out of luck then.
I accept the consequences of my skepticism.

We can only believe what we can believe. If something is not believable to us we cannot believe it.
I do not speak for God, but I think God takes all this into consideration.

 

[Augustus]

My "worldview" is based on what I can prove to someone else to the point they have no argument against it. Got to force them into submission into accepting the reality that is support by reasonably irrefutable evidence.

What you call worldview, I'd call the undeniable facts of reality.
I've let go of the storytelling part as any kind of factual reference.
Entertainment, sure. It is fun to imagine some fictional reality to explain the reality we experience, but I know it is fictional. Not something to be relied on.

We cannot transcend narrative and ideology as it is inseparable from cognition.

We have expectations about how things should be, or how we or others should act. We categorise experiences and memories in line with such expectations.

We don't even visually see things as they are, our brain is filling in gaps based on experience and heuristic learning, never mind more complex aspects of meaning making.

We can see the world as a series of unconnected facts that we experience objectively and then deduce meaning from rationally.

To believe we can is just another fiction/worldview

 

[Augustus]

Would you say this accurately described mathematics, logic or most of the methods of science?

Sorry, I don't quite get your meaning. Can you clarify please?

 

[Nakosis]

We cannot transcend narrative and ideology as it is inseparable from cognition.

We have expectations about how things should be, or how we or others should act. We categorise experiences and memories in line with such expectations.

We don't even visually see things as they are, our brain is filling in gaps based on experience and heuristic learning, never mind more complex aspects of meaning making.

We can see the world as a series of unconnected facts that we experience objectively and then deduce meaning from rationally.

To believe we can is just another fiction/worldview

Ok, I think your view is limited, no offense. We can't see beyond our own experience.
My experience is different.
Although I have previously held your view. Now I don't.

 

[rational experiences]

If God existed how a human pretends it would.. he would be a father who wanted our life to be spiritual but machine scientists just men chose differently.

All said only by human's.

And now between his memory and yours is a massive man X men nasty behaviour. With science practice being high on the list with human greed and control.

As you used science invention many times in your own lack of self control. You then claim what's missing in your life science took its place. Control change invent. You say create you only remove destroy.

Father was a spiritual man. It's why you can't find God as you lost your own morality. God by human terms who you used to be as the human.

 

[Wildswanderer]

Correct, I don't understand the attachment to faith.
I don't mistake it for delusion, I see it as gambling.
I don't want to take anything away from anyone but if their happiness is dependent on their faith then their happiness is protected by a thin shield.
Many other more robust ways to support happiness.

Actually not. Religion makes people happy. Everything that we think is true is a belief. In this sense all happiness depends on our belief system which is our religion whether we call it that or not.

 

[rational experiences]

Faith.

My human mother. Not a human man's space womb maths thesis nor his bio life attacked evicted biilogy. Nor his filth comments mother abomination....or Ababa father's cloak heavens coloured gases as many lying.

A humans man's science thesis.

Mother said two spirits as human's the highest consciousness lives on earth. A human says by dominion I own the highest consciousness.

One human correct the other human never correct. Faith in the truth.

Can you guess it was never my mother? A human.

It was mans theories thesis about maths and God. Fake mother.

Mother said the brothers who false preach...it's science. It never existed.

Natural created creation did.

A group of men claim their truth is life's destruction on earth their purpose.

Science once named Satanism.

When you lie are you lying when you said para at my side I conjured was normal?

Yes said mother you surely did.

Spiritual story natural human. Nasty evil lying story man's science thesis.

So if you still preach science along with being a natural human basically you're false preaching.

Human faith see the truth before your lies destroy life.

 

[rational experiences]

Read a book be a teacher not a preacher is another example.

Words are stated to make you personally think and give correct just your self answer.

New. One man gave his updated we attacked life by science temple again.

Wasn't first time and wasn't the last science attack as just behaviour of man. Behaviour choice predicted human about men ..
they're doing it again.

Behaviour have to be a living human to see or discuss behaviour.

 

[Augustus]

My experience is different.
Although I have previously held your view. Now I don't.

You believe you view the world as it is free from cognitive, perceptual, cultural, ideological and experiential biases?

That your view of reality is not significantly distorted by the limitations of human cognition and our reliance on narrative to ascribe meaning to things?

 

[HaEmeth]

There will be, indeed, a "restoration of all things of which God spoke through the mouth of his holy prophets of old time" (Acts 3:21), including elimination of sickness and pain, even death (Revelation 21:4) - all things suffering humans yearn for. To some people it's fulfillment may seem delayed but that's because they expect the fulfillment to occur in their lifetime. But, really, has God revealed his timetable to anyone?

It is for our own benefit that God has not, lest we be accused of serving God only up to a certain point, in which case it will not be true faith. No, God has not revealed that date, not to anyone -

Not even to a "very desirable man" like Daniel (Daniel 10:19). He would not have the satisfaction of fully understanding and seeing the fulfillment of the many prophecies - including the Seventy Weeks of Years prophecy for the appearance of the Messiah - which God has prophesied through him: “And as for you, O Daniel, make secret the words and seal up the book, until the time of [the] end." (Daniel 12:4)

Rather he would have to wait and sleep in death and wake up at the end of the days and be resurrected to get that satisfaction. At that time everything would have been accomplished.

Daniel 12:13 “And as for you yourself, go toward the end; and you will rest, but you will stand up for your lot at the end of the days.”

Not even to that Abraham - that outstanding man of faith - and to other men and women of like faith.

"In faith all these died, although they did not get the [fulfillment of the] promises, but they saw them afar off and welcomed them and publicly declared that they were strangers and temporary residents in the land." - Hebrew 11:13

They waited for "the city (God's Kingdom) having real foundations, the builder and maker of which [city] is God" (Hebrew 11:10) not wavering in their faith.

Their faith was not dangerous. Rather, it was an inspiration and salvation for us.