Yes. Research within some branches of natural sciences is trusted less than research within some other branches but such philosophy as metaphysics is trusted even less.
The mistrust may correlate with how touchable or visible the matters are in everyday life. Natural sciences mostly deal with the material world and the everyday life may provide some sense that these can be real and important matters, even when the interpretations about the observations differ. The ‘mental masturbation’ (as you called it) does not have this advantage.
One element in gaining trust is an ability to make predictions that can be shown to be true. If philosophical thinking cannot reach that level, it has a disadvantage.
I would say no. One ‘feature’ of Christian faith is the relationship with God that is real and may act in our life. Spectacular acts of God that might be called ‘miracles’ may not be common but no matter if it happens through the so called ‘miracles’ or through more ordinary happenings and ‘coincidences’, somehow the promises of God can be experienced to be true.
If the teaching or the beliefs are just ‘dead’ thoughts in real life, there is a reason to consider if something is wrong. I do not claim that something needs to be wrong but it might be beneficial to ask why God does not seem to be present in my life?
There are periods in the life of a Christian when God seems to be quiet or far away but there should also be periods when it is possible to experience that the promises of God are true.
Christianity is by definition faith. The predictions are mostly in the afterlife. Hell, we can’t even demonstrate that the afterlife is true let alone any predictions made about it.
Personal certainty is one thing. Demonstrable truth is something else.
Christians gain trust by demonstrating the effect the faith has on our lives, That is the only demonstrable truth we can show.
Correct, for many forms. There is no real way to test and make predictions that we could collect evidence for that would allow us to parse between “the apostles mistakenly thought Jesus rose from the dead” vs “Jesus rose from the dead.” In dismissing philosophy, mainly because it’s not science, which I disagree with, the apologetical baby has been thrown out with the bath water.
We think it’s real and it feels real. But making predictions that can be shown to be true to others is another matter. This just seems like private evidence. Muslims and 50 other religious faiths all feel strongly about their religious beliefs as well. I know a couple that just got divorced because the wife joined an extreme, new age, feminist cult. They have kids. I’m sure she feels certain of her beliefs to do something so drastic. So we certainly have to factor that in. I’m a big proponent of personal experience but I’m not going to be dismissive of any field of study just because it’s not science and can’t make testable predictions by collecting data. That is essentially the philosophical position known as scientism if we carry it through. Metaphysical arguments establishing the God of classical theism which happens to have the same attributes of the Christian God (and Jewish and Muslim faiths) is a big help in narrowing possibilities.
How does one show ordinary event miracles are acts of God unless one already knows God exists and did them? How do we show this to be true with predictions that we can collect data for and test? How do we even show nature defying miracles have occurred to others? We could be mistaken or lying. How could we make predictions that we could show to be true that we are not mistaken or lying?
When we over-press the scientific method and make it the only means of truth or apply it to other areas of life, I consider that worshipping at the altar of science. I don’t feel you are being consistent in applying to your own religious beliefs to the same standard you wanted to apply to metaphysics (an ability to make predictions that can be shown to be true). Maybe you don’t need to but I think Richard’s objection is significant.
I do believe our experience with God is the most convincing. Everything else, in comparison, to steal a line from Lewis, “are just words, words to be led out into battle against other words.”
As a Christian I am also simply okay with Jesus in John 10:27: “My sheep listen to my voice; I know them, and they follow me.” Good enough for me.
I skimmed the comments. I can’t tell if the OP is a troll or not. The argument is very weak though. I can pray to any god or even create a new god to pray too. I can pray to characters in a book. None of that makes what I’m praying to true.
It’s the ability not who you are praying to. Why do I or You have this ability? Baseball players can hit a 100mph ball, I never could, but I do see some do a Prayer at the Plate.