If it goes beyond understanding that means you don't understand it.
Let me clarify. We both agree there are things we don't understand and accept the possibility that there are things we cannot possibly understand.
The difference between us is that you, faithholders and believers, insist that you know anyway.
Any decision past understanding that has no connection to reality, is irrational by definition.
The truth value of something you don't understand cannot be known by you.
Perhaps this will help you understand.
I cannot disprove there is God and God's truth, so let's stipulate it exists. This still doesn't help you because you have no evidenciary or logical way to know what it is.
You can pray for understanding, but ultimately you have to just make an assumption. What we certainly know from history is that when theists make these assumptions are often self serving and murderous. But it's worse than that, since we cannot know what the divine truth is, it may be the case that the justifications for barbarity are the divine unknowable truth.
Or they may not be, but we don't know. We have to have faith one way or another. In fact if faith is to have any value it must be adhered to over evidence. Otherwise why have faith? You don't need faith if you only act from logic and evidence. The whole point of faith is for you to be able to act contrary to what you see.
All that said, I don't insist you be rational. But the irrationality of theists (especially statists) is always a potential threat. Ultimately I can never know if a faithholder will act on evidence or faith, and if on faith, if that action will be moral or immoral.
Since you don't know, you will pray for guidance and hope you received it and understood it, I certainly can't know.
Religionists are always thus a potential threat to their brothers.
Want DP delivered to your inbox daily? Subscribe here:
Content of posts and comments on the Daily Paul represent the opinions of the original posters, and are