The author makes a case that it is impossible for man to escape faith-based reasoning. What are your thoughts on this?

[Melisa Jane]

BOOK WEBSITE: https://ygodallowsevil.com


In the Chapter “God is All-Just” the author makes a case that it is impossible for man to escape faith-based reasoning (summary available here: https://ygodallowsevil.com/faith-2). What are your thoughts on this argument?

[Stephanie Runyon]

I would agree with the author because everyone believes in something. Even atheists. Some believe that God does not exist. Therefore, that is what they believe in.

[Sushan Ekanayake]

I believe that everyone relies on a few unjustifiable assumptions on some level. For example, even the most logical individuals assume that logic is a reliable instrument and that our senses provide us with an accurate picture of reality. These are things we accept without being able to "prove" them in any absolute sense.

But I think some non-believers might argue that there’s a difference between this kind of basic trust in cognitive functions (which is a practical necessity) and the kind of faith that religion requires. The former is more of an unavoidable starting point to engage with the world, while religious faith often asks for belief in things that transcend direct experience or evidence. In that sense, non-theists might feel that their "faith" in reason is less of a leap than faith in the supernatural.

If we view our cognition as something that evolved purely for survival and not necessarily for truth, can we fully trust it to give us an accurate understanding of reality?

[Ajay Pratap Singh Tomar]

Sushan Ekanayake argues that everyone, even the most logical individuals, relies on assumptions that cannot be fully proven, such as trusting logic or sensory perception. However, non-believers might distinguish this practical trust from religious faith, which often requires belief beyond evidence, raising questions about whether cognition reveals true reality.

[Inga_s Book Corner]

I hadn’t thought about it before, but I tend to agree with the author. To reason logically, certain assumptions are necessary. But where do these assumptions come from? It seems they stem from faith in something. Even if a person considers two opposing assumptions and evaluates them, this evaluation is likely influenced by their belief in something. Can truth really be discovered through logic? What is the criterion that determines the truth or correctness of an assumption? It seems to be the person’s faith in something. It feels like reasoning limits us in some way. And it seems that faith is connected to the infinite, timeless existence described in the book, where truth resides. If a person is created for love, and if God is love, then perhaps we need to feel more than to think.

[Sarah Zain]

I don't believe that faith has anything to do with logic. It has more to do with spirituality and your feelings about everything around you. Then If we try to apply logic or reasons after contemplating what is around us, we will reach a stage of comfort. Not every opponent of an idea or faith has a specific belief. On the contrary, few have valid arguments for their ideas or beliefs. The vast majority only apply what makes them reach the idea they want, even if that contradicts all correct principles.Therefore, you find that the principle of attack and imposing opinion by force is easier for them than discussion.

[Jennifer Bells]

Faith is an a static element in all human being, You cannot do anything without the concept of faith.

[Joule Mwendwa]

I agree with the author. An example is when I start a conversation about God's existence, one will agree, another person won't agree, and someone else will chose to be neutral. All of these people will have reasons to back their stands which is influenced by what they believe (their faith).

[Joule Mwendwa]

Faith is an a static element in all human being, You cannot do anything without the concept of faith.

True. From obedience, ignorance, good, bad and all decisions are influenced by a belief.

[Owuamanam Eberechukwu]

In the Chapter “God is All-Just” the author makes a case that it is impossible for man to escape faith-based reasoning (summary available here: https://ygodallowsevil.com/faith-2). What are your thoughts on this argument?

I agree with the author that it would be difficult. Our faith is interwoven with even the laws of the society. The bedrock of the society is faith based beliefs and it makes it tricky

[Owuamanam Eberechukwu]

I would agree with the author because everyone believes in something. Even atheists. Some believe that God does not exist. Therefore, that is what they believe in.

I absolutely agree and there belief itself is an expression of faith

[Owuamanam Eberechukwu]

I believe that everyone relies on a few unjustifiable assumptions on some level. For example, even the most logical individuals assume that logic is a reliable instrument and that our senses provide us with an accurate picture of reality. These are things we accept without being able to "prove" them in any absolute sense.

But I think some non-believers might argue that there’s a difference between this kind of basic trust in cognitive functions (which is a practical necessity) and the kind of faith that religion requires. The former is more of an unavoidable starting point to engage with the world, while religious faith often asks for belief in things that transcend direct experience or evidence. In that sense, non-theists might feel that their "faith" in reason is less of a leap than faith in the supernatural.

If we view our cognition as something that evolved purely for survival and not necessarily for truth, can we fully trust it to give us an accurate understanding of reality?

Beautiful Idea, thus, absence of faith also connotes a disillusioned reality

[Owuamanam Eberechukwu]

Sushan Ekanayake argues that everyone, even the most logical individuals, relies on assumptions that cannot be fully proven, such as trusting logic or sensory perception. However, non-believers might distinguish this practical trust from religious faith, which often requires belief beyond evidence, raising questions about whether cognition reveals true reality.

Faith begins from the basics to the apex. High expression of faiths does not discredit the little pratical expression of faith. Faith in little means faith in great is possible

[Risper Ouma Anyango]

Without faith and hope, man has no reason to live so yes, I do believe that man can't escape this

[Chinemezu Okafor]

It depends on what is essentially perceived as faith-based reasoning, as the author put it. We met ourselves on this world and have to bring up certain theories on how we got here in the first place and why. Although certain people may claim the opposite, I quite agree with the author when we look at the argument in general.