Hi again BC! - do you think there's a difference between faith-based beliefs and beliefs based on particular religious views? What if a person isn't connected to any religion and so doesn't base their faith in God on religious doctrines or interpretations?
It seems like most accusations of this sort are against religion, doctrines/interpretations... with which I totally agree. There's some weirder stuff than jws out there, and ALL of 'em claim to be the ONLY truth. And yet, they've all been proven false about something or other.
I think faith is experience-based, or should be. It's not something you 'learn' by listening to others prattle on or by reading this book or that. No one's opinion, however briliantly it's expressed, trumps what someone else has experienced. I mean, you might throw out the accusation that a person's experience is due to whatever - a head injury, mental disease, stupidity - but to prove that belief in God(apart from whatever religion claims to 'know' about God) is false(falsifiable) would be difficult, wouldn't it? Especially if there is no head injury, mental disease or stupidity?
Sure, A whole-helluva-LOT of things that religion teaches - like the Bible is the first and last word on every modern-day topic - can be proven false. So 'faith' in those things can not be justified - rationalised by those who believe them, but not justified by a truthful standard. But faith that's beyond the precepts of religion, faith that's based on experience and not mere 'head knowledge' - how can it be "falsifiable"?
Watkins