I have a question, if the Fall of Adam and Eve brought death to the world why do we have evidence of animals dying in brutal ways before man was created? This is shaking my faith and I don't know what to make of it

There was death, decay and disease before the Fall but why?

>>17824357 (OP)
Genesis is metaphorical and Christ is mystical

>>17824357 (OP)
>if the Fall of Adam and Eve brought death to the world
This comes from Romans 5:12 and two verses later it also states
>"Nevertheless, death reigned from the time of Adam to the time of Moses,"
We know that death reign a lot longer after Moses, why couldn't death reign before Adam as well?
Why would Adam and Eve need to eat from the Tree of Life and be granted immortality if death didn't already exist? We know Evil already existed, We know the fall of the angels already happened. Satan was in the Garden with them.

>Another perspective
Adam and Eve were only one day old while in the Garden of Eden. But they didn't act or look like newborn babies. God has always had the ability to give the appearance of age to something, including the Earth.

Here's another good perspective to the question from Zoomer -
>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R4o0ey1ddJs&t=328s

>>17824357 (OP)
American protestants are the greatest tragedy to Christianity. They have successfully ruined the reputation of Christians with nonsense like biblical literalism and moral panics.

The idea of treating the bible as literal history has never occurred in history, until Protestants
Hence why there was never any expeditions to find Eden or Tower of Babel.
Everything was understood as a metaphor, but, at the same time, it isn't seen as fiction

It is generally well-understood that Adam was the first priest and the Fall of Man was interpreted as the first time that God's message was corrupted for selfish reasons

>>17824445
>Everything was understood as a metaphor
ironically the only thing protestants don't take literally is the eucharist.

>>17824357 (OP)
>There was death, decay and disease before the Fall but why?
How do you know?
>>17824387
Retard
>>17824445
Well poisoning kike

>>17824458
Genesis is not literally true.

>>17824458
>How do you know?
The copious amounts of dead things in old rocks

>>17824445
>The idea of treating the bible as literal history has never occurred in history, until Protestants
TIL: Renowned scholar, theologian and archbishop Isidore of Seville was actually a time-traveling Protestant

>>17824513
>Thus is summarized the whole period, from the beginning of the world up to the present tenth year of the most glorious prince Recesvintus, which is the year 696 of our era, the year 5857

Unironically what did he mean by this

>Otto of Freising (Latin: Otto Frisingensis; c.1111 – 22 September 1158) was a German churchman of the Cistercian order and chronicled at least two texts which carry valuable information on the political history of his own time. He was the bishop of Freising from 1138
Who knew the Germans were already Protestant before the Reformation?

>>17824520
>>17824513
>>17824527
First off, Isodore is well-regarded as amongst the greatest scholars of ancient knowledge. He published books not just about theology but also ancient history, philosophy, and education

He is not some redneck who believes in talking snakes. He is literal historian in every bit of the word. The fact that he wrote a book mapping the Creation in an orderly sequence doesn't mean that he believes that it literally happened.

Secondly, there are always going to be outliners but they are in the great minority. There were expeditions to find the tomb of Jesus and Peter. Even the house that Mary lived and died in were located and found. But no one ever searched for Noah's arc

>>17824543
he still belive in bible literally.

>>17824543
>uhh uhh yeah they clearly believed in biblical literalism, BUT-
Stop being a coping faggot because you're embarrassed by association with christians that still believe in biblical literalism.

>Secondly, there are always going to be outliners but they are in the great minority
I posted two ecclesiastically-educated bishops lol, not some crank with a printing press in 16th century Uberwaldersheim

>>17824543
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Searches_for_Noah%27s_Ark
stfu mexico.

>>17824551
Actually I don't. I just come across brown retards like that anon and presumably you that seem to struggle with the concept of pre-Reformation Christians might not be as skeptical towards the events of the Old Testament as your typical Westerner that has enjoyed the fruits of subsequent scientific and archaeological discoveries (and is embarrassed by association with the Christians that still believe in Biblical literalism)

>>17824357 (OP)
Because cultural marxism brainwashed you with evolutionary pseudoscience religion causing you to drink the "muh billions of years" koolaid.

"Lies in the Textbooks": https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zvxr8DstD8o

"Dinosaurs in the Bible": https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H6f_U_9xwBk

>>17824357 (OP)
Anon, don't worry about it. Just live your life, go to church, be a good person, and everything will be fine. I mean that unironically.

>>17824357 (OP)
A better question to ask is why are animals perfectly designed to predate, rape, and maim each other if human freewill caused all suffering. It's one of many lies the Bible tells us. Keep going down the rabbit hole and read every chapter of the old testament and you'll see what a wicked degenerate collection of books it is. "God" orders and signs of on genocide, rape, slavery, mutilation and even kills his loyal followers like they're worth nothing.
The truth is that the world we are in is a prison that was rigorously designed to make everything within in it suffer. Abrahamism is a cult to its creator, Saturn, who is either our teacher or warden depending on how you look at it, but the idea that he is the most high and that we are somehow responsible for this mess is insane gaslighting. This world is a puzzle and the solution is to get out.
Don't trust abrahamics, they are swindlers who benefit from your obedience. Start reading. Buddhism, Hermeticism, Gnosticism, Platonism, the Gita, and Daoism are a good place to start. If you feel someone is lying to you trust your instincts.

>>17824564
You're not funny

>>17824564
Jesus died and was thrown in a mass grave, he's never coming back

>>17824555
>>17824552
You posted 2 bishops out of hundred, if not thousands throughout history

I repeat:
Biblical literalism was NEVER part of the Christian dogma
In fact, it was not even part of the pre-Jesus Judaism

You may qoute few rabbis and bishops. But not magisterium who never saw it as such

Atheist concern trolling, sage and hide

>>17824572
What about Jesus? Many Buddhist agree with the teachings of Christ

>>17824614
yeah it is. Accept that mexico.

>>17824765
JESUS is god you dumb nigga.

>>17824614
Anon, please be honest, not even you think that Isidore of Seville was just some fringe nutjob that was resentfully tolerated by the ecclesiastical hierarchy of the Iberian peninsula.

Is it really that hard to believe that at some point devout Christians took the events of the Old Testament as more or less factual?

>>17824357 (OP)
Simple:
Deny yourself, said Jobbes, and this means doing what you don't want, stay with me for a second: would this not confuse your soul?

>>17824772
Oh, I see, you are a retard. You mentioned gnosticism without knowing they think God in the Old Testament is a different one from the New Testament according to them

it's a jewish supermacist fairytale bud

just throw it in the trash. your divine book written by god is full of errors and contradictions

>>17824357 (OP)
For the same reason Gen1 and Gen2 don't list the same order of events. Because the scripture is not focused on describing material reality. It's describing a spiritual reality first and foremost. There is nothing wrong in reading it literally the first time around or the first 100 times and for some they manage to read it that way their whole life and good for them. But when a conflict arises between a materialistic description (such as in contemporary science) and a scriptural description, you have to know which is which.

This is not to reduce the Bible to a mere set of metaphores or anything of the sort. I would actually say that the material descriptions are the metaphoric ones because matter is the most volatile element of reality... but be that as it may, to insist on literalism where it doesn't even internally work is going to lead you to many conflicts.

>>17824850
fuck off mexico. I say god father and god son is one. And he did some shit in old testament. So jesus did it too.

>>17824445
>The idea of treating the bible as literal history has never occurred in history, until Protestants
sounds extremely cope-ish. people who did not know any better, who did not have the scientific knowledge that make the tall tales embarrassing, people who thought they received gawd's own word in the bible did not believe it was literal? people did not think noah's flood happened? that men have one less rib because of the manufacturing of eve?

>>17824614
lies.
there's no point of having a bible if it is not literal.
>magisterium
it does not matter. ordinary christians were 100% literalists up until the industrial revolution. the intelligentsia is an inconsequential fringe. we had and have to deal with the mindless warsheep, not with ivory tower types who would be chased out of town if they ever told the flock what they actually think christian beliefs are or should be.

>>17825517
>>17825508
The belief that old people are fools is just arrogance. Everyone knows how to ask questions, and everyone understands that, during their time, there is no such thing as fiction or non-fiction.

Instead, every tale is a semi-fictional account of a real event that was turned into a play because only through this can the story be preserved. No one was ever a literalist. In fact, the idea of expecting history to be accurate, reliable, and not turned into propaganda never happened until the 1800's
Everyone had a blatant agenda to promote (even to this day)

>>17825508
PS
It was not Adam's rib but Adam's"lateral half". Literally half of him was turned into Eve, thereby implying that marriage is divinely ordained

>>17824357 (OP) Adam and Eve are all about humans.

Faith is a state of desperation, coherence with rationale is lost and the reverberation is faith, to put the weight of truth into something beyond your grasp and leave it there. Doubt grew into faith. You know that whatever comes next is either nothing or everything, and yet one always acts as if life matters at all, relative to what comes next it certainly would not. We have doubts about what is rationally obvious, and this becomes faith. Faith is a divergence from rationale, a pain, a cry. If doubt grows strong enough, one has no choice but to place meaning into something unknown and intangible. Faith. I will say it again, doubt begets faith. Doubt is a precursor to faith. That is to say that faith is not an initial or base state, instead it is progressive. Wherever rationale does not work, one will place faith. There is the progression of faith to the extent that faith-bearers will refer to it as knowing, and they will report experiences of miracles and divinity. This is just a broader reflection of the underlying pattern at hand. When feedback becomes incoherent, doubt occurs, and from this --faith, and by virtue of this motive-force, sometimes feedback is achieved via this irrational process.

>>17825658
Faith means trust
I have faith in my friends because I do know the TRUTH that they love me and will never betray me
Same goes to God, he already came in the flesh and showed the truth that he loves us all and we just need to have faith in his plans

>>17825597
it was rib, and it's the pc version of the folk tale about 'why humans haven't got a baculum?'.

>>17824564
>cultural marxism
Buzzword for pussies who don't have the balls to say the word nigger or tranny.

>>17824543
>Writing events in a history book doesn't mean you believe those events happened
What?

>>17824850
That anon isn't me. Jesus is a wise teacher who in my opinion tapped into something very important but interpret his words in your own way not the way that the abrahamics do. Hell for an example, is a metaphor. "You shall know them by their fruits" is key.

>>17824357 (OP)
>why do we have evidence of animals dying in brutal ways before man was created?
Evidence from outside of biblical canon is the devil's evidence.

>>17824445
>Hence why there was never any expeditions to find Eden or Tower of Babel.
Were their ever expedition to uncover historical sites, did archaeology even exist before the 18th century or were they more concerned with building the future than excavating the past and got all their information about the past from surviving artifacts instead of going to some foreign land and digging around?

>>17824493
Do you also know for a fact that heaven is definitely in the sky because of all the people and animals moving about in the stars and clouds?

>>17826726
There are museums in Ancient Egypt, about Ancient Egypt
And yes, even Greeks are obsessed with relics

>>17826757
Yes, relics bought from aristocrats who have some epic story attached, but not necessarily relics unearthed from excavation expeditions.

>>17826766
They had literal wars over the bones of Alexander.

>>17826768
Ok and did they go on an expedition in those ancient times to uncover the lost city where he was thought to have died and found the bones after years of excavation or did they someone just claim to keep them when he died and they were passed around between aristocrats, forgeries were made until there were supposedly several places where his bones are housed until the 19th century when a bunch of expeditions were sponsored to find the real tomb which has not yet conclusively succeeded?

>>17826778
His corpse was fought over and turned into a major tourist attraction that even Ceasar visited.

Christians were recorded by Tacitus (120 AD) as being the weirdest bunch as they readily paid huge sums of money just to acquire bones of their humiliated saints who were burned in the Coliseum. He found it absurd that these people would consider that a dead man is more valuable than a living one

Yes, Christians were obsessed with bones and historical objects since the beginning.
And by beginning, I mean that the Temple of Jerusalem is believed to have been where Abraham tried to sacrifice Isaac

>>17826785
So you can't read well but you finally agree that excavation expeditions of historical sites weren't really a thing until after the 18th century, before that they just passed around forged relics to worship.

>Yes, Christians were obsessed with bones and historical objects since the beginning.
Thanks for conceding that they were only interested in historical objects and had no interest in finding historical sites from the bible to excavate.

>>17826797
The Ark of the Covenant had historical relics, namely the 2 tablets, a golden Jar of manna, and Aaron's staff

>>17826820
Yes that were supposedly passed from family to priest to merchant to aristocrat to king and so on, not excavated from some site that someone figured out was the place that the actual events int he bible took place.

>>17826829
No, when the Ark was being constructed, they personally went up the mountain to collect the fragments of the 10 commandments that Moses broke after witnessing the betrayal of the Israelites

>>17824357 (OP)
God created Adam old, he did not create him young. When Adam was created, he was not one day old. Apply the same concept to the Earth.

>>17826870
So how does that prove that anyone ever tried to excavate biblical sites before the 19th century rather than they just trade in forged relics that reinforced their favorite mythologies just like pagans and hindus?

>>17826883
Point, is everyone was obsessed with historical items.
Forged or not, everyone did their best to honor their ancestors. The point here, is that they didn't bother with relics that are obviously just metaphors than actual history

>>17826885
>Point, is everyone was obsessed with historical items.
No that is what some barely literate retard is trying to change the conversation to, it wasn't the original point of the discussion
>>17824445
>Hence why there was never any expeditions to find Eden or Tower of Babel.
They didn't do actual physical expeditions because they were fine with using likely forgeries that reinforced the metaphorical point of the story to increase the perceived value of the items.

>>17826896
There are no scams here as the relics aren't being sold.
They obtained it for free and were never given.

Whether they were scammed is unknown but they did their best with the best instruments they had. And they never paid a cent

>>17826898
>There are no scams here as the relics aren't being sold.
They were displayed to draw in crowds to financially exploit.

>And they never paid a cent
Sure and nobody ever charged anyone else for splinters from jesus's actual cross either, it was all in good faith with no exchange involved whatsoever.

>>17826907
The Ark was not available for view
It is sealed within the Holiest of Holies which is opened only twice a year

>>17826910
So that place doesn't accept any kind of donations or tithing or public money or vatican donations from people who have donated and tithed, the people who own the building just pay to store it out of the goodness of their heart and their good luck in the market?

>>17826923
The Ark is not a business

>>17826933
Sure, the hosts just advertise its existence and draw crowds and financially profit off of it by pure coincidence.

>>17826934
It was not open for view
In fact, no one is allowed to enter past the sacrificial grounds

>>17826937
How does that prevent them from receiving massive amounts of donations on the basis they are safekeeping holy idols?
Random people generally aren't allowed to enter movie sets either, that doesn't mean movie making isn't big business.

>>17826942
That's on them. No matter how much they pay, the Ark is not available for view

>>17826945
So? Something doesn't have to be available to view by the public to be part of a business scheme, tons of other art and art forgeries aren't publicly available and they make for some of the biggest money laundering schemes on earth.

>>17826945
>That's on them
Yes profiting off of artifacts is on them, that is exactly why they are operating as a business.

>>17824614
You are a proven liar. Tick tock.

>>17824614
You are a proven expert. Ping pong.

>>17826948
>>17826949
sigh
It isn't a business if it relies on donations

This is a very important thing to note between for-profit and non-profit organizations

The fact that an organization possesses an item of interest for its supporters doesn't make it a business. Orphanages own orphans, but that doesn't mean that they offer goods and services to donors
Donations are offered by the person's own goodwill. They receive nothing in return, and therefore it isn't a business

>>17827055
Non-profits corporations are registered businesses with a relationship to the IRS by definition and there are whole directories about non profits on the better business bureau website because they are run like business, the fact that they are called corporations should have tipped you off.

>>17827065
NTA but as per his example, you would say someone is in "orphan business"....?

>>17827076
I would say they are part of the childcare and healthcare business.

>>17827076
>>17827083
And the people who are specifically paid to find parents for the children are in the fostercare and/or adoption business.

>>17827083
Right. You wouldn't say "orphan business". Because that strongly implies them selling orphans for profit.

>>17824357 (OP)
>why do we have evidence of animals dying in brutal ways before man was created?
What evidence?

>>17827089
Because they aren't in the business of selling kids for profit, they are in the business of providing healthcare and childcare to the children in their care, the ones who match kids with parents are in the foster and/or adoption business.

>>17827093
I feel like we're talking past each other, because you have exactly re-iterated my point back to me and you still seem to disagree.

1) Your stance is that non-profits are businesses fair and square.
1 implies: 2) A person working in a non-profit orphanage would then be in the orphan business.
But we both feel that (2) is not correct, we would never call it orphan business. So (1) must be wrong or misleading.

>>17827098
Its still a business, just not selling orphans just like a church is a business, but its not selling churches, its selling ideals and access to esoteric knowledge and artifacts.

>>17827105
Then call it orphan business. I'm only asking for consistency.

>>17827117
Consistent with what?
You can't own people, you can't sell people, you can't own or sell orphans, you can only sell childcare and adoption services in relation to orphans.

>>17827119
Consistent with you idea that non-profits are businesses fair and square. A non-profit orphanage would by direct implication be an orphan business. But you actually know that 'business' implies a completely different mode of operations and you even admit them here:
>you can't sell people
>you can't own or sell orphans

Can you sell dogma? Can you own it? It seems that you tried to stretch a word out of rhetorical convenience and now it backfired and you're having to back out. What if the orphanage just hosts the orphans and has external agencies taking care of adoption, healthcare etc? You will have to keep finding new directions to backpedal because ultimately your only two choices will be
a) orphanages would be orphan businesses
b) non-profits aren't businesses

>>17827127
>A non-profit orphanage would by direct implication be an orphan business.
No it would be a business, but not necessarily an orphan business, I already told you what type of business they are.

>Can you sell dogma? Can you own it?
Yes, you can copyright combinations of words and phrases, print them in books, and sell them like churches often do to make money, you can also provide a subscription service where some expert in the book explains it to you personally each week.

> It seems that you tried to stretch a word out of rhetorical convenience and now it backfired
No, they are still a business, that never backfired, they just don't sell orphans, they sell childcare and navigating the adoption paperwork process, so they aren't an orphan business, they are a childcare and adoption business.

> What if the orphanage just hosts the orphans and has external agencies taking care of adoption, healthcare etc?
Then they are a subcontracting business in the adoption and healthcare industries.

>new directions to backpedal because ultimately your only two choices will be
a) orphanages would be orphan businesses
b) non-profits aren't businesses
No, I can easily say that orphanages are childcare and adoption business and non-profits operate like business and are tracked by the government as businesses because that is how it works.

>>17827134
>>Can you sell dogma? Can you own it?
>Yes, you can copyright combinations of words and phrases
Then I suppose our disagreement was much simpler than I had thought. No, you cannot own dogma. "Christ is both God and man" doesn't belong and cannot legally belong to any particular organization.
>Then they are a subcontracting business in the adoption and healthcare industries.
Meaning that I am also a subcontracting business in the adoption and healthcare industries if I pay an elderly home meal from my company's budget. Again, stretched out and backfired. You're using terms in ways that nobody else does.

>>17827141
*orphanage meal
I don't know why I remembered elderly homes haha

>>17827141
>Christ is both God and man" doesn't belong and cannot legally belong to any particular organization.
That phrase it too old and widespread to be copyrighted and owned at this point, you can't own anything ancient in the public domain, only novel dogma.

>Meaning that I am also a subcontracting business in the adoption and healthcare industries if I pay an elderly home meal from my company's budget
No, it means you are supporting them if you don't get any government subsidies to keep the building running as a supporting business.

>You're using terms in ways that nobody else does.
No I have never backed away from calling it a business, you just want to call it a different type of business than it is because you want to insert derogatory outdated verbiage known to offend people since you have no real point and are just trying to cause emotional instability on the level of whatever motivates you to pretend to be this retarded.

>>17827148
>it means you are supporting them if you don't get any government subsidies
I might, you don't know about my business.
>No I have never backed away from calling it a business
I know. You're just using these terms in ways that nobody else does.
>you want to insert derogatory outdated verbiage
I don't think I've said or aimed to say anything derogatory, I'm sorry if I come across as condescending. I do think it is a very misleading move to not differentiate between businesses and non-profits. And I think you recognize this too, because you're having to jump through hoops to avoid certain implications.

>>17824357 (OP)
Just stop believing in stupid shit like talking snakes and flying jews. How hard is that?

>>17827155
>I don't think I've said or aimed to say anything derogatory,
Obviously a bad faith arguer, you know orphan is out of favor, its the only reason you want them to be that type of business.

Nonprofits are still corporations which are businesses, they are listed on the better business bureau and treated like a business by the IRS and other governmental organizations, but you know all this, you are just trying to use bad faith to make it seem like people who disagree are orphan peddlers in the business of human slavery.

>>17827170
Pointing out a terrible implication isn't bad faith. Most people differentiate between businesses and non-profits and if you want to conflate the two categories based on the semantics of "corporations", you will naturally be faced with inconveniences like "orphan business".

People who disagree aren't orphan peddlers, they are simply confused about how certain distinctions work in language.

>>17825699
Wrong

>>17827065
This is not a corporation
It's just a group of people with shared faiths

>>17827083
Childcare and healthcare provide goods and services to people da fuck you on?
Orphanages don't give anything to donors

>>17824357 (OP)
Divinity is atemporal and we have no idea how long Adam and Eve were alive.

>>17824445
>The idea of treating the bible as literal history has never occurred in history, until Protestants
Incredibly false, it was the norm for both Christians and Jews until the modern era. Why do you think it's the most conservative Christians and Jews who hold to these literalist Bible readings?

>>17824395
>apples
an apple a day might keep the doctor away but it'll send the dentist instead
>Apple seeds (and the seeds of related plants, such as pears and cherries) contain amygdalin, a cyanogenic glycoside composed of cyanide and sugar.
poison and "sweet poison"? not very nice
>When metabolized in the digestive system, this chemical degrades into highly poisonous hydrogen cyanide (HCN).
>A lethal dose of HCN can kill within minutes.
cyanide, aye? that's why it keeps drs away
>Thankfully, there are several factors that make death-by-apple-seed very unlikely. >First, the amygdalin is accessible only if the seeds have been crushed or chewed; a whole unbroken seed will pass right through.
>Second, the human body can process HCN in small doses, so a couple of chewed seeds are usually completely harmless.
>Finally, the average adult would need to eat anywhere from 150 to several thousand crushed seeds (depending on the apple variety) to be at risk of cyanide poisoning.
>The average apple contains only about five to eight seeds.
>So unless someone is eating their 18th consecutive apple core and has been meticulously chewing all the seeds, they should be fine with their occasional absentminded core chomping.
so it was like that cucumber dude or wot?

>>17827160
start lookin' at it like art
>movies aren't real, are they?

>>17829059
link
https://www.britannica.com/story/can-apple-seeds-kill-you
>encyclopaedia_alexandria.org

>>17829031
You mean Protestants
The magisterium never upheld anything even before Christ

>>17829085
>reminds me of the related royals in WWI

>>17829085
>football!?!?

>>17824454
>I'm drinking human blood and killing people for "heresy", exactly like Jesus Christ told me to!

What the everliving fuck is wrong with Catholics

>>17826871
Last thursdayism is a fallacy and invalid.

>>17827091
Pretending to be stupid is not an argument.

>>17829607
We don't drink human blood. Just Jesus'
Heretics are put into trial and public debates to prove them wrong and let the people know that they are wrong.
Then they are given as much time as possible to stop

The Church abhors killing heretics. But heretics just wouldn't stop trying to poison the well

>>17824357 (OP)
First of all, relax.
You are over-thinking. Over-thinking is going to do nothing but send you into a panic attack.
Look, just because you can't wrap your head around something theological doesn't mean what you believe in isn't true. That's how many people become atheists. They mistake negative feelings about their interperetation of their beliefs, as rational realizations. That's not what those are. You simply need to calm down, breathe. If God is the foundation of all that is good, then there's a philosophical answer waiting for you to navigate towards with your own spine and your own thought process.
Also, stop putting your mind on a pedestal. Just because you haven't come up with a good answer to a tough philosophical question doesn't mean someone else hasn't answered it sufficiently before you.
Agnosticism / Atheism is all about mental narcissism and ego. If you hold your own mind in high esteem, which almost every atheist does, because they can't seem to shut the fuck up ever, you're going to start treading that line between belief and agnosticism.

The bottom line is God is real, God is the only rational explanation for the existence of a finite universe.

Well, imagine if scientifically you could just prove the Bible. There wouldn't be any need for faith in the first place.

>>17831464
Big Bang was made by a priest
Einstein hated it, calling it a creationist propaganda

>>17825699
Stop with the faith means trust meme. The word has multiple meanings.

>>17832773
Many uses. Same meaning
Deep level of trust

>>17833797
You don't know what the words you're using mean

>>17834120
What does having "faith in your wife" mean?

>>17834381
Depends. Could mean that you trust her to be faithful (as in not cheating on you) or it means that you expect her to be able to do something (like winning a contest). Because faith has multiple meanings.

>>17824445
you're an atheist without faith masquerading as a Christian because the aesethetic appealed to you and being a /pol/ nazi was no longer fashionable, you're all the same, and nothing you say will ever hold weight

>>17834446
Otherway around
You are a Christian without God. You live our rules, follow our ideals, but reject our God because you don't want the ramifications of his judgement

>>17831362
>The bottom line is God is real, God is the only rational explanation for the existence of a finite universe
You used your rationality to determine that correct ? Then you seem to hold your own rationale in high esteem.