No one is my friend

As a wise man once said: your closest friend might also be your worst enemy 

It is possible in the sense they could be dragging you down big time and you arm your enemy with info as your bond and trust them.

Fishchaser became my closest friend here and abused me the moment I chose to cut ties, he did this at least 3 times now but 2 times when he definitely was my closest friend.

It is sad.

Smart, friends will often fuck you up. Friends will convince you to try drugs, to do harmful things, to smoke. Friends are just enemies who also convince you otherwise.

Well, break ups do hurt.

I would not recommend you getting close to him. He will treat you like dirt after a few days faking liking you.

I dont care much what people say to me. People have already told me worst things possible before. I doubt he can come up with something worse.

The quote I cited was clearly a joke. As is the idea that "hell" actually exists. It is just another story to scare children with that no one above the age of 5 should take seriously.

I see hell as a store with goodies we desire in the store-front window, but there is no door.

No fire, no brimstone, just unfulfilled desires. That is punishment enough, but such a condition exists now, always has, and always will.

When we were told to not hit each other, but to share with one another, that was the childhood version of love toward our neighbors, and love of God. They were bilateral commandments of the same sentiment we learned as chidden, and is still ultimately enforced, without force. It is our free will to choose to love, or be selfish. The sealed window is our reward of selfishness; we are denied, ultimately as compensation for denying others. My mother used to tell a story, simplified for children, that heaven was a neighborhood for people who kept the faith and endure to the end. She told of a group of people recently dead, and they were taken on a tour of the neighborhood by Peter. and the tour group marveled at the beauty and efficiency of the neighborhood. One man, who was a faithful, religious man, stopped all when he retired, thinking he had done enough. He died 30 years later. He asked Peter about his residence in the neighborhood. Peter pointed to an unfinished mansion across the street, abandoned. "But, it's not finished," the man complained. "Yes," Peter said, sadly, "we stopped when you did."

That's fair, isn't it?

The problem I see with this story is that it rewards faith, yet faith is essentially stubbornness in defiance of reality. You have faith in something when you put the idea or the goal above logic and reason and set off on a crusade ignoring any signals from the real world.

I do not need to have faith to complete pretty cool projects: what I need to have is passion and persistence. Me not having faith in some bright future after death does not make me think that "I have done enough": I want to squeeze all juice from life, and I will only have done enough the moment my body is done being eaten by earthworms. Reality is too cool to put it behind in favor of old folklore tales.

Faith can make one persevere in pursuing both good and bad goals. Soviet communists had a very strong faith in their theoretical utopia, and that made them blind to the obvious signals by reality that they are on the wrong path. What are 5 million starving Ukrainians if we are changing humanity itself?

The old man from the story had a problem: he did not have much passion for life, never found anything that would keep the fire in his heart burning. "I have done enough" is one of the saddest thoughts one can possibly have - and I wonder if such thoughts often arise precisely because the man had served "god" his whole life and never stopped to think what it is he wanted to do.

You have never read my commentary of the definition of faith, because most people approach faith as if it is the duplicate of brief. I do not believe that for a second. Faith drives action; belief does not. That is just one primary difference. Paul [Hebrew's 11] defined faith as "the substance of things hopped for, the evidence of things not seen." Substance and evidence do not sound like 

to me. you can believe anything and assume it is anything from fantasy to reality. One can believe the moon is cheese, and that person will not be convinced otherwise. One can believe the earth is flat with the same consequence. But neither condition for either belief is akin to substance and evidence. That tells me that faith is something different entirely than belief. I think faith is a sixth sense as dependable as our five typical senses of sight, hearing, smell, taste and touch, the senses we use to prove theory as fact. Faith is a sixth sense, just as I think it is possible [and scientific theory is beginning to see potential proof that it is so] that humans can learn other senses such as echo location and sense of magnetic north, or of Earth's magnetic field. So, why not faith being just another of these senses that point to lnown facts derived from those other senses? Kind of takes it out of the exclusivity of religious discussion, doesn't it? So, if a belief, thought to be faith, turns out to be not true, it was not faith in the first place. That is another distinction of faith v. belief; faith only directs to truth. Belied=f does not direct to anything.

Under the above circumstances, when cool projects come to a standstill because you cannot get over or around some obstacle; what then? Do you give up, or do you ask someone whom you trust knows the answer. Better yet to come up with solutions of your own, and then ask that expert what they think about your solutions, knowing the expert will guide you. That way, doing your own investigation, first, you're performing the research yourself and looking for expert confirmation. Much mot likely your expert will advise than ignore. You're shown not just passion and persistence, but confidence. So, what if that "expert" is God? What changes? Not a bloody thing.

It works, my friend, but your preparation must be evident. Your passion and persistence , and faith in a response must be evident. That's how faith works, my friend.

So, no, that is what belief does, but not faith. Faith must lead to truth, or it is not faith that has been applied.

First, this is very vague: from your description, it is still not clear to me what exactly your definition of "faith" is - aside from seeing that it is different from what people conventionally mean by it, and I do not see much point in playing the redefinition game. If faith is some kind of a "sixth sense" that has never been found in anyone's research, then it is exactly what I said it is: unjustified stubbornness, clinging to something ethereal.

Faith is best exemplified by Job's behavior in the Book of Job. God decides to inflict unimaginable suffering on him, yet he keeps having faith that god loves him - that is foolishness. The kind of foolishness that has people stay in bad marriages because they believe that "fate" brought them together, keep doubling down on terrible investments or disfunctional business models, building totalitarian utopias because they see the light at the end of the tunnel despite all evidence of it being an illusion. A functional adult should not be operating on faith under any circumstances.

What if I cannot go around an obstacle, you say? If I cannot, then I will not - neither will anyone else, no matter how much "faith" they have, by definition of the word "cannot". There cannot be solution to an obstacle that cannot be bypassed.

But what if an obstacle is just very difficult to go around? Do you think that only people with "faith" will persist in overcoming it? What, do you think everyone else is a frail weak-minded coward? People of faith tend to think of those without one as some kind of simplistic hedonists who do not have any high principles and will give up as soon as things get a little unpleasant - which to me is just a projection of their own weakness, of the fact that they never found themselves in this life, hence do not have anything that drives them to keep going, other than "faith". They have not found a rational reason to keep going, so they have to go by an irrational one - with all the downsides of such, such as ending up in bad marriages and trying to make it work for decades with no success.

I run ultramarathons, friend. I intentionally seek discomfort. Where is the place for "faith" here? There is none. I love challenging myself, and I know that I have put in enough effort into training and racing, so I can finish my next race and not fall apart. There is no reward at the end of the race other than the satisfaction from completing it, and there is no guarantee that I will complete it. I am not there for the destination - I am there for the journey. And obstacles are an essential part of the journey. I do not need any motivation other than knowing that what I do accords with my values and passions.

But "faith" gets you to double down on stupid things. In ultramarathons, I have to be strong, but smart: if 20 miles into the race I get a nasty injury, I will seriously consider quitting - not because I am weak, but because I do not want it to be my last race. But a person with "faith" will keep going, wake up in a hospital next day, undertake a leg surgery and be out of the sport for the rest of their life. "God will watch over my leg" - surprise, buddy, biology happens to be more real than old folklore stories.

None so blind as those who will note see. You cannot? Yoda told Luke Skywalker, who said, "I can't," "That is why you fail," Yoda told him.
 

You think Job is the best example of faith?  Have you read the volume, word-for-word, cover-to-cover? I have my friend, in four languages. Job is not the best example of faith by any means. First of all, it is not known whether Job was a real person, or if the story is entirely allegorical. But God did not initiate the suffering of Job. Job may have thought that, and he does tell us the Lord gives and takes away, as if Satan has naught to do with us. The Lord allows sorrow and discomfort, but offered a path to avoid its effects if only we will do as he says and not think we can think of a better way through life. Try again. I already gave you one clue: Hebrews. Read the whole bloody  eptisle, my friend. One verse doesn't cut it, and I told you that, too. This takes effort, my friend, by all of us together

So you run marathons. Good for you, but you're learning the wrong lesson if you have an injury and think that applied personal faith will heal all the time.

That's not how faith is supposed to be applied. You may read and interpret in Matthew that faith can move mountains. It says that very thing, does;t it? No, it doesn't. It says with a mustered-seed size of faith, a mountain is removed to another place.  In that instance, faith is a tool a person uses to move the mountain. They move it, not faith. Faith [aka  "the Force"] would be the tool Luke would use for him to move his x-wing out of the Dagoba bog should he decide he can rather than can't. But, faith is not a tool best used to satisfy one's own need, but to aid others. It is for others to apply faith to heal our wounds in "battle," such as a marathon. Service to others is the best vehicle for the use of faith, and our faith in that may actually trickle down to mend ourselves, as well. So, although I believe we can use faith to improve our own lot in life, it's best use is for others, and have faith that others will be of service to us. Jesus taught that in his experience early on with Satan in the wilderness, when Satan tempted him. With the temptation to make bread from a stone, Satan also challenged Jesus with who he was. "IF thou be the Son of God, command this stone..." Jesus recognized the challenge, that his power was to be used for others, not for himself.  If others see we have a personal obstacle to overcome, if we are a society of faithful people, dependent on one another in times of need, the proper society will render aid to us. That is the best use of faith, and may find applying it as such will heal ourselves. We're in this together, and it is the proper system designed by God for our best benefit. You may think that God makes everything happen. Nope, the fact is, he allows us to make our own path with suggestion how best to make it. We can agree with him and live with service to others in our minds as the best path, or not, but the fact is, we make most things happen to ourselves, and God allows that agency to us to do as we will with consequences already advised if we are careful to listen to him. He's been through this, himself, in a distant past. God was not always God, but an ordinary man, and we are challenged to achieve like he did, and become like him one day in a distant future.  You think that happens with doubt guiding us? Nope.

Your choice. But I feel like that approach is probably what's causing your social Machiavellianism.

I watch videos which educate me on how to mock all other people. Machiavellianism is one part of my education.

Job was definitely a real person. The story has to be literal otherwise it is a hoax to say Satan did that and rooted against Job as God enabled the test.

Job refuses to curse or deny God despite his agonies, but I would argue his faith in God -- his belief in a just, good, and wise deity -- shatters completely. He calls God a tyrant, a bully, an abuser, a malevolent spectator who mocks the pain of the innocent, and the enemy of hope. 

Job is my favorite book of the Bible. It's so raw and honest.

Idk. Play fake games, win fake prizes.

Prizes dont matter.

After all this, I still do not understand what it is you mean by "faith". It seems like a placeholder for something that you cannot quite articulate. A good concept can be explained concisely; if I have to do hours of reading just to understand what it means, then either this is a bad concept, or a good concept specific to a very-very narrow field (such as some obscure branch of algebraic topology).

Here is how I think about it. When choosing what action to take, one can rely either on something they know, or on something they do not know. When I run an ultramarathon and start feeling a horrible pain in my right knee, I do not know for sure what is happening - but I do know that in most cases it indicates a serious injury, so I better take this seriously, and not brush it away as just my knee getting occasional cramps, which is normal.

I could instead assume that something bigger is watching over me and will not let me get seriously injured - and keep pushing. Many people ended up in hospitals this way. In some cases it did lead to a good race result without a serious injury, but as a consistent approach to such situations it is foolish.

I prefer to never operate on things I do not know. Everything I do is based on my knowledge about the world, my knowledge of my abilities, of my preferences and values, and my ability to forecast consequences of my actions. I absolutely will not put a lot of effort into something that I believe has a low chance of succeeding and that does not offer any rewards along the way. I will not bet all my money on a lottery which I have a 0.00001% of winning - but if I had faith in the forces of cosmos being on my side, then, perhaps, I would want to do so?

For a literate person, it is not so hard to understand the meaning of these words: "...faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen." Substance and evidence area the very principles used in the empiric method. Without obtaining either of these, the scientific method fails, doesn't it? So the question becomes how to obtain the substance of hope, and how to obtain the evidence of the unseen [or unheard, not smelled, tasted, or touched]? First, by expecting that other senses are available. I've told you that some other senses  are being learned, by the scientific method. What is so hard about thinking that faith is one of these other senses we are enabled to learn, and by it, learn things we currently do not knows: your stated obstacle. Faith requires our outreach and not just personal investigation. That former is essential.

1 We must show the initiative to try to discover the knowledge we seek on our own: personal investment in a desire to know, thinking that, ultimately, all knowledge is eventually ours for the effort of discovery.

2 We must demonstrate a sincere effort to know, and not just casual, wishful thinking.

3 We must read sources, or speak to someone we think already knows the thing we desire to know and find all we can find on the subject to enlighten us.

4 We must formulate a presentable conclusion of the previous three steps such that it can be clearly articulated. You're quantifying a theory, and it should be organized.

These four objectives must first be met before anything else can be accomplished in faith. Now for either the easy, or hard part, depending on your attitude on the existence of God and Jesus Christ, and the Holy Spirit as divine beings dedicated to our development and understanding of greater knowledge than we have today.

4 Ask God, the Eternal Father [our father of our spirits] in prayer, better vocalized so our thoughts do not wander,  in the name of Christ [our Father's literal son in the flesh] when what you have investigated on your own is true. We are addressing real personages who hear and understand and desire to bless with knowledge the sincere seeker after it, if it is prudent to know at this time. 

This is not as far-fetched as you may think if you are not already a believer. I'll just mention that if you are skeptical about the existence of God, that may simply be the knowledge you seek. Doubt cannot be a factor. One must leave doubt behind and consider they can receive an answer, just as the inquirer after scientific knowledge considers the empiric method will give them an answer. Doubt deceives science, too. On the other hand, if we seek proof of a desired knowledge by a personal visitation, we have exceeded our right to knowledge of the thing we desire to know. The proof is by the influence of the Holy Spirit, as described below.

5 When steps 1 - 4 have been successfully, desirably met, the Holy Spirit will reveal the truth of your inquiry. Thus, all three members of the Godhead, plus yourself, are involved in the pursuit of truth, and the Holy Spirit will imbue you, when your pursued point of knowledge is, in fact, true,  and is rightful to know, with a feeling that floods your entire body. It is not possible to ignore it, and endures for may seconds, leaving a feeling of pure joy and enlightenment. That is the desired response of substance and evidence of which Paul speaks that a thing desired to know is true, or a course of action from among choices is the proper choice. This is whys I say that true faith, when applied, can lead only to truth, for when the thing you desire to know is not true, you will feel nothing. 

The result of faith, and why I think it is a sixth sense, is because when the thing you desire to know is true, you are internally touched by the Holy Spirit. When it is not true, you are not. 

I must be illiterate then, for to me the two sentences you used to define "faith" contradict each other. "Substance of things hoped for" and "evidence of things not seen" are completely different entities, and I am not sure I understand what either one means. What substance are we talking about? If I am hoping for no rain tomorrow, what is the substance of it not raining tomorrow that constitutes my "faith"?

You mentioned "other senses", but never specified what those senses are. It all is extremely fuzzy: "There is something we do not know about and we cannot articulate, but it is there" - is the kind of language I hear a lot in discussions like this, and it never amounts to anything. I need something concrete, and I am not getting it.

You mentioned something interesting: "leaving doubt behind". That is every scoundrel's dream, to encounter something who leave doubt behind and tries his hardest to believe in the scoundrel's claims. There would be a lot of very wealthy Nigerian princes on this planet if people left doubt behind more often when it came to tangible things - such as their wallet - than ancient fantasies. To me, it does not really matter if the Nigerian prince is Christian or not.

What I think more likely is happening is that this "sixth sense" is a product of self-deception. One can hypnotize themselves into believing anything, and that is a sure path to madness. I use the reality around me as reality check (pun intended): I know that a hot stove will burn away any fantasies I may have about its temperature. If there is no hot stove to tell me that I am wrong when I am, then it is just a waste of my time. "Supernatural hot stoves" belong on pages of fantasy books, not in one's personal search for happiness.

I refuse to deny Father's true nature unlike many modern Christians (yes, including Catholics).

He is my Lord. I am his servant.

It is as simple as that. Christ is the King person we envision, to have the loving relationship with Father and Holy Spirit is the one that helps us feel both.

I fear God. I love God. I am his whimpering servant if he wishes me to be but he so far loves me enough to have mercy.

Have you read Hebrews, yet? Do not play act your ignorance of this while avoiding doing the necessary reading I suggest. I am not your paid tutor, through I will be, if hired. $200/hour is my going rate for serous academia. [Harvard gets billions, so I'm a bargain. For what I've already imparted, I'm owed about 3 hours' worth; not that I reality expect a dime..

Apparently not, because you just did, boyo.