Religious Philosophy – “The Difference Between a Belief and a Fact” – 7/31/2020

“Since when has the belief become a fact? Since when did we need scientific proof for something as a belief? Since when did this occur, when even love itself needs no science for its existence, when it cannot remain around without faith or trust?”

– Modern Romanticism

A fact requires evidence. A belief, however, does not.

There are far too many Christians, Atheists, and people on the verge of losing their “faith” to become Atheists, who look at figurative writings, to be literally viewed. For all things literal must mean that they have science to them, in their proof.

Though, that cannot be the case, when a belief has nothing for its proof. To look upon any religious tale, to say that it had literally occurred, goes against what a religion is, being a belief. If any subject matter to a religion is taken in a literal fashion, then it becomes not a belief, though something made to be proven as a fact.

If a Christian states that God is real, then he or she believes in that. If the Atheist questions this, and wants physical evidence on the realness of God, then that Atheist has forgotten that religion is centered around faith. One cannot, to a religion, any of them, ask for physical evidence, for a metaphysical notion of something believed in. It simply erases the idea that religion is centered around belief, around trust, and around faith.

For the Christian will believe in what the Atheist does not have faith in, and nothing more. If the Christian God is said to be of love, then no other religion can claim love to be its representation. For if there were two deities to be of love, then that would make all Christians reject the 1st Commandment, making the Christian God to be physical. Again, that is to reject the notion of Christianity being a belief, not of anything physical, turning it into something fought to be proven.

If any Christian, or any religious person, states their deity to be a real, physical being who “exists”, then they’ve rejected the idea that a religion is about faith.

For no “faith” could be proven with physical evidence, without such faith turning into a place where humans wish to be God. In the rejection of the 1st Commandment, a Christian has believed that a human could be God, out of arrogance, because of their fight to prove God of His physical realness. The Christian becomes the average fool, when he or she believes God to be as real as any other human, when the 1st Commandment speaks otherwise.

10 thoughts on “Religious Philosophy – “The Difference Between a Belief and a Fact” – 7/31/2020

  1. I believe I wrote a day ago that the reason we have the Coronavirus, is because of a lacking faith or trust. Physical objects are too close to us for trust to be necessary. We are crowded in an overpopulated world, as both overpopulation and lacking trust are the two primary factors for COVID19.

    The “existence of God” is therefore the “non-existence” of God, when trust become not necessary in a world where the physical becomes far too close. Love buries numbers, and then brings about the oneness when trust becomes, again, necessary.

  2. Well said! A belief is not a scientific knowledge. We only believe in what we don’t know rationally or scientifically. People can’t understand that or don’t want to.

    1. Though, what fascinates me the most is that the 1st Commandment to the 10 in Christianity was almost deliberately placed at the top of that list to tell humans that God cannot he proven of a physical existence, seen with the naked eye. For it God could be proven of His “existence”, there’d be no need to ever admire or respect another human.

      The 1st Commandment states, “Thou shalt have no other gods before me.” Meaning… no other person or object, which could be proven of its physical realness, is at all like something that was never a physical realness.

      1. True. But people consider their beliefs as the ultimate truth. That’s one of the major problems of the world.

      2. It’s like how a Liberal thinks that being one makes you affiliated into politics. Though, being a Liberal only makes you a decent human being who wants to contribute to helping out another person in their miseries. However, when you place politics on something innately good, it becomes the opposite. Such as with “political correctness” or “social justice”, which are two terms that mean the opposite, because of the first word before the second word.

        Anything political about correctness, or anything social about justice, becomes incorrectness and injustice.

        Therefore, it might be the same with religion, turning understandable emotions, like love, into deception, when it becomes about rulership or dominance. That, I believe, is a human craving.

      3. At the end of the day, they are all different labels for one underlying truth: power. But too much suffering in the world. Call me stupid, I hate violence and injustice, misery and suffering. I have always stood with the weak. True leadership and true power is when a leader brings out the best in people. Violence today is a replica of all bad ugly dominance we have had.

      4. Any person who states that they do like violence and injustice, misery and suffering is a simple psychopath, and nothing more. Yet, such innately terrible things shouldn’t be made political.

        Why do you think this COVID19 virus is showing up in political magazines and newspapers, and not strictly in medical news outlets? This is a medical problem, not a job for politicians. Or… about that Judge Kavanaugh case, with the dumb MeToo movement, as he was accused of “sexual assault”? Why did the woman doing the accusation go to political figures, and not the police?

        If things like injustice or violence, or sexual assault upon women, become politicized or involved in the dirtiness of politics, then all the goodness of intention is wiped out of the equation.

      5. Have you seen the police George Floyd body-cam footage?

        These BLM shits are termites. Just designed to eat away at the structure of a nation. Pathetic and small.

Leave a Reply