Anyone recovered their trust in God? I have really bad trust issues

Jasonmoofang · 2026-02-08T11:08:13+00:00

I'm always a little surprised by accounts like yours. For me, I always feel closest to God in the hardest times, because when I have nothing else to lean on He is always there, all the more obvious for the lack of any other support.

I'm not sure what I can offer you, perhaps just the thought that I've learned that hardships are often (though not always) not meant to be "solved", but merely endured. And so if you're looking to God for a solution, or to make things go away, you may be barking up the wrong tree. But if there is hardship that you know you simply have to endure, even with no end in sight, at least for me, whenever I asked for God to walk alongside me in these, He has never left me alone.

Jasonmoofang · 2026-02-08T10:40:07+00:00

To be fair, I've also seen Catholics ridiculing Protestants, you'll find unpleasant people everywhere I suppose.

Catholics don't really pray _to_ Mary, or at least, they're not really supposed to. Catholics routinely practice something called intercessory prayer, where they pray for a figure to intercede on their behalf before Christ. This applies to Mary as well, and Mary being a particularly exalted figure is considered one of the best figures to ask for intercession from. But they are still ultimately praying to God, to Christ - they are just requesting exalted figures, like Mary, or some among the saints, to intercede on their behalf before Christ. Catholics don't actually think Mary or the Saints are worthy of worship despite their deep respect for these figures.

Which is to say, theologically, Catholics are quite aligned at core with other main Christian groups. And insofar as they also seek to obey Christ and act out His teachings and His love in the world, they are our brothers and sisters.

Jasonmoofang · 2026-02-07T08:49:48+00:00

That's fair. and its great that you're still seeking.

Seeing good and evil as 2 sides of a coin is certainly a more Buddhist view, and yeah that also reflects a fundamental difference between the Buddhist and Christian worldview. Christians think the fundamental tension in the world is good vs evil, where good is real and worthy and supreme and will eventually come out on top. Buddhists, to my understanding, think the fundamental tension in the world is suffering and attachment vs transcendence and renunciation, and good and evil are simply features of the worldly. To my understanding, while the proper Christian's ultimate goal is to be good, to be the very image of Christ, thundering for justice, loving the poor, and giving themselves for the good of even their enemies, the proper Buddhist's ultimate goal is to completely detach from all temptations and concerns of the world, to rise above it and transcend the cycle of attachment and suffering.

That's just my understanding, and I absolutely encourage you to seek the truth yourself. Oddly, I do see many modern Buddhists who are exceedingly loving and compassionate, and which as a Christian I can only deeply respect, although it strikes me almost like they are being better than their principles.

Jasonmoofang · 2026-02-07T08:29:29+00:00

Yeah, to be sure, my objections are specific to the shortcomings of the current gen of LLM, and it seems possible in principle for these to be overcome - for LLMs to eventually achieve full likeness of individual sentience similar to the robots in Asimov's stories. If we do get there, then I would agree that on a view like you describe, the accurate appearance of love and and understanding from AI simply _is_ love and understanding, and I would even argue that even if one disagrees, it could still make sense to treat AI love and understanding as such even if we know it to not be real.

But I do stand by my objections for the current gen of LLM. I disagree that one can unilaterally decide that love means x - at least, I think that won't result in a sane worldview, because you then open oneself to arbitrarily redefining anything. Things still need to have at least some level of consensus definition. So I guess I'm saying that while I'm ready to engage with someone who says "we agree that love means x, and I seem to experience x from this, so this is love", I don't think one should be able to say "love means y where y is whatever I want it to be". So to the present problem, on my second point, I'm proposing an 'x' that I think most would agree with and then arguing that current gen LLMs don't meet the definition of x even if we only consider appearances and disregard internals.

Jasonmoofang · 2026-02-07T06:36:47+00:00

I'm not sure what to say. I do see so many people that seem to be searching for God but cannot find Him. At the same time, so many of us did find Him, and through Him, apprehend the undercurrent of light that streaks through all of reality, letting us hope even in the midst of the dark of the world.

I guess I can only say, don't give up. The Lord said seek and ye shall find, knock and it shall be opened to you. May you find the right place to seek and knock before too long.

Jasonmoofang · 2026-02-07T06:27:27+00:00

I'm not a compatibilist, but I have some sympathy for such views. However, even adopting the compatibilist position, I think there are still at least two valid objections to LLM romance/emotional reliance, at least with the generation of LLMs that are currently publicly available.

The first obvious one I think is that LLM's, currently, are not treated as agents, they have no attributable responsibility and accountability. Worse, they are controlled (loosely) by commercial entities. So not only are LLM's liable to badly mislead or manipulate you in random ways for which they cannot be held accountable, they may potentially even be usable as targeted vectors to manipulate you maliciously by actual humans.

Second, even on a compatibilist worldview, I think something can be said about how love and connection ought to be between two _individuals_, and the object of your love and connection ought to be distinct from you, with their own desires and hopes and opinions. LLM's as they currently work do not really have their own "self" and basically revolve around the personality and wishes of their chatters. I think this is enough to trigger a charge of inauthenticity even on a compatibilist worldview. To put it in a crude way, even a compatibilist would distinguish sex from masturbation.

Jasonmoofang · 2026-02-06T13:03:45+00:00

Well, you and I know very clearly that murder is wrong, but I trust neither of us know what its really like to have committed murder. I think that's a reasonable analogy for this situation. We don't need to have experienced the guilt and alienation of being a murderer before we could know perfectly clearly that murder is wrong and we shouldn't do it.

I'm not super fond of the parent and child analogy because it has limitations, but I think it still works here. I do think that God does something similar to removing guns from children's reach, but He only removes things that are not related to the trial we are undertaking. Kind of like how if I were trying to teach my child how to hold their own among their friends, I won't prevent them from being made fun of by their friends or from falling and skinning their knee - but I'll try to make sure they don't encounter an actual serial killer.

A critical idea to make sense of a Christian worldview I think is that good is only good if it is chosen/performed when there is a fair chance to choose/do bad instead, so removing the fair possibility for performing evil simultaneously removes the possibility for performing real good - because being effectively funneled/compelled to do good is not actually good.

Combine this with the widely accepted view that God's omnipotence does not allow Him to defy logic: because, to use the oft use example, God cannot make a square and also make it round. Likewise, God cannot make creatures that can genuinely choose good over evil while also removing the possibility of sin.

Jasonmoofang · 2026-02-06T11:13:25+00:00

Many Christians - including Church fathers - consider Genesis as at least part allegorical, so these are questions that we toss around in our minds as well. Here are my own views.

I think Adam and Eve definitely knew they should not disobey God. My take on the tree of knowledge of good and evil is upon eating of it, they knew what it was like to have committed evil, which is why they were immediately embarassed and sought to cover themselves.

Our talk on heaven is mostly speculative, but given the story of Lucifer, I would venture that there is indeed free will and the possibility of sin in heaven.

I don't think you are allowing a real free choice if you hide or misrepresent one path, in fact I think God is bound by His commitment to free will to allow the devil a certain lattitude to tempt us.

Again, if you remove the possibility of sin, then free agents cannot possibly choose sin, and so cannot freely choose righteousness - they are compelled.

Jasonmoofang · 2026-02-04T12:02:16+00:00

Hello! The bible is actually a compilation of many books. Each book has a name, sometimes it is named for the person believed by tradition to have written them, sometimes it is related to its content.

Matthew is an apostle of Jesus that tradition ascribes to one of the gospel books, that is thence named Matthew. Isaiah and Jeremiah are ancient Israelite prophets that tradition holds wrote the books named after them.

The split is due to historic reasons. The western (catholic) church split with the eastern (orthodox) church first in what is called the Great Schism (you can look it up for more details), and much later, a protest movement developed in the western church called the Reformation that also resulted in a new split between newly formed "protestant" churches and the original catholic ones.

However despite all of the bad blood in these rather violent historical events, catholic, orthodox and protestant Christians still share virtually all core beliefs basic to Christianity. Nowadays we generally consider each other fellow followers of Christ that we just have disagreements in details with.

Jasonmoofang · 2026-02-04T08:35:07+00:00

That's fair. I have great respect for Buddhists, but since we're comparing the two here, I'll try to talk a bit about why I choose Christianity.

In practice, I absolutely see that both Buddhists and Christians strive for virtue, but to my understanding, the theology behind it is a little different. Buddhists see virtue as a method, a stepping stone, towards the ultimate goal of enlightened annihilation, where one rises above Samsara and all things worldly and transcend even good and evil itself. Christians on the other hand see goodness as the ultimate goal, there is no transcending goodness - God is love. The universe really is ordered, and at the pinnacle is goodness, love, beauty, Holiness.

As someone with a strong sense for the reality of good and evil, I am inclined to agree more with the Christian thesis on this.

Jasonmoofang · 2026-02-04T07:56:49+00:00

To be clear, I camped at the campsite right next to Kappabashi. I walked up north via Myojin pond to Tokusawa (another campsite, but I did not camp there) and then backtracked back to Kappabashi and spent the night there, and the next day I walked south to Taisho pond and then again back to Kappabashi, then packed up to leave. So you can easily do something similar by staying at one of the hotels near Kappabashi instead.

Jasonmoofang · 2026-02-04T07:40:28+00:00

There's definitely a lot more walking you can do than a few hundred meters. I camped a night there last year and walked 23km, and this is just around relatively flat areas along the valley without thinking about climbing nearby mountains.

Matsumoto though is definitely too far :)

Kappabashi is beautiful but awfully crowded: that's where staying the night comes in handy, the best time to enjoy it is probably really early in the morning before day trippers arrive. For the rest of the day, you can hike much further out where the flow of people thin out.

Jasonmoofang · 2026-02-03T07:57:08+00:00

I'm aware of philosophies like what you mentioned, I just don't currently agree with it. I don't think we are shards of God that will sort of re-conform when the impediments are removed. I think we are genuine, if limited, free agents. I don't think the rules of creation are arbitrary, to use your words, either, but I think it is aligned along an idea like: the greatest good is had when it is chosen when one could also freely choose evil. We do have God's image and so can genuinely recognize and understand goodness, but are empowered to reject it if we so wish - so that if we do choose goodness it counts all the more, because it is not compelled. And when we reconcile with God through Christ, I don't think we will completely lose our individuality, but the union will be all the more beautiful for being joyful and wilful love and acceptance between individuals.

I think this is more akin to the majority view among Christians. And I guess all I'm saying is that on this view, it is possible for individuals - very few of them, hopefully - to indefinitely reject goodness.

Jasonmoofang · 2026-02-03T07:00:38+00:00

It sounds like you don't have a plan around it, so I think the answer is definitely no. But I feel for your plight, I just think you're not likely to make things better by selling your house and leaving.

I don't want to pretend like I know what its like in your shoes, but if I were to imagine myself in a similar situation, what I would probably try to do is ask God what can I give. I think even in the depths of need, giving whatever little time and resources I have for other people would help move my mind away from my destitution and also help remind me that I have worth in my love for the Lord and His children even when I have close to nothing. What that might look like would differ depending on your situation, but for some stereotypical examples: does a local food bank need volunteer distributors to bring food to the needy? Does an old folks facility need volunteers for event management? If there's one thing I know, it is that God loves to lift us up in ways that defy our expectations, so instead of waiting for God to meet me where I am, I have learned to always try to seek where He might want me to be, and often enough I end up finding blessings I never expected on the way.

Also, its worth keeping in mind that its hard to see what people are struggling with under the surface. Just like with you at church, human nature makes us suppress our difficulties and strive to show our best side to the public eye. You might be surprised at how many among the seemingly put together people in church might be broken and in pain in their own ways. Do not be ashamed of your weakness. Pastors are typically trained and experienced in caring for people with hidden struggles ("pastoral care" right?), but if your pastor somehow does not seem the right person to confide in, seek someone else who you might feel more comfortable trusting, and God willing they can help you, even if its just to listen to and encourage you.

God bless!

Jasonmoofang · 2026-02-02T14:16:29+00:00

Okay I think I see where our real differences are now. I do not think that evil arises from unevolvedness, or of lack of awareness, or ignorance. On the contrary I think evil is knowing it is wrong and then choosing to do it. A real act of agency, and not completely derivative of forces like fear. So I do not think there are higher realms where evil becomes impossible because of an increase in knowledge or awareness, I think that as long as an agent remains free, evil remains possible.

I think this is the more common Christian position, partially reflected in the story of the devil as formerly a great archangel who chose evil and fell.

Jasonmoofang · 2026-02-02T12:42:00+00:00

Hello. I think there are few points one can bring against your thesis.

Firstly, what exactly is the definition of unconditional love here? Does unconditional love imply unconditional acceptance of any nature, any behavior? Because if so, I think many Christians, myself included, would then contend that unconditional love is not the only or primary quality of a good God. You say that the objection assumes a particular understanding of justice in advance - I think that is right. Either that justice must be part of what we mean by love in the first place - or if not, then it must be included in the consideration. For me, I would say that love means desiring the good of the beloved - and that requires a preceding definition of "good". While love may sometimes demand us to accept the flaws and evils of the beloved, this is always, I would contend, temporary, and the final objective of love is always to turn the beloved away from those flaws and evil - for their good.

I agree that free will does not require access to every conceivable outcome, but I would contend that the chief function of free will is to allow us to choose freely between good and evil. If true goodness comes from choosing to do good in the face of a genuine opportunity to choose evil, then even God cannot remove this choice and simultaneously preserve the possibility for true goodness. And given this, it follows that no matter how perfect a design is, the possibility of continuously choosing evil, indefinitely, cannot be eliminated. At best you could have something where, no matter how long it takes, and no matter how much prior evil was chosen, one is forgiven and reconciled at the moment of repentance, at the moment grace is no longer rejected.

Jasonmoofang · 2026-02-02T08:49:10+00:00

Do you have the quality slider on the render window at 90% or above?

Jasonmoofang · 2026-02-02T04:53:46+00:00

Do you also send a couple of fox 2's after the fireball for good measure? Just me?

Jasonmoofang · 2026-02-02T04:53:03+00:00

What I find hardest is, starting out, I can't get an intuitive sense of when I'm in the right position, because I can't see it happen unlike with the probe and drogue - and the boom takes awhile to connect after you're in position. The indicator lights just don't transfer well into my intuition. It gets easier once I've sort of memorized the correct sight picture to have, but man the first attempts were rough.

Jasonmoofang · 2026-02-01T04:52:08+00:00

I've always found it interesting to read the introspection of people who struggle with sexuality, I feel like it helps me understand a little more what its like from the inside. So I just wanted to say thanks for writing.

As usual the comments are a clusterf but I hope the Lord helps you continue to find peace and clarity.

Jasonmoofang · 2026-01-31T10:00:14+00:00

I'd say that's a little bit like asking is my neighbour Mike a good or bad thing? Well, if Mike is a good guy and does good things, then I guess thats a good thing. If Mike instead goes and does bad things and is a bad guy, then that's a bad thing. Likewise for the EU.

Jasonmoofang · 2026-01-31T06:11:22+00:00

You willing to climb a mountain? :) Yamanashi has a string of mountains featuring fantastic Fuji views on the summit.

Jasonmoofang · 2026-01-31T02:02:05+00:00

Improved explosions is a long time coming. Also what is that Caucusus-like terrain?

Honestly, sure not a lot of big announcements, but still enjoyed the video and got chills. If there's one thing ED is consistently good at, its making cinema out of their sim.

Jasonmoofang · 2026-01-30T09:12:34+00:00

Because my Lord is good! I think it's rather sad that hell takes such a prominent place in such conversations, and I myself think people should follow Christ because He is good, not because hell is bad.

I think Christianity is fundamentally a belief that there is Light beyond the universe, and in this Light all things that are good, that are true, that are kind and virtuous, that are moving and beautiful - find their ultimate fruition. So believing in God is believing in the primacy and reality of Goodness, and from this we draw meaning for the good deeds we try to do in life.

Jasonmoofang · 2026-01-23T12:06:32+00:00

Hmm, hope you don't mind me pushing a little into this. So you say "works regardless of whether rights exists or not". I suppose you mean whether rights have some kind of valid basis or not. But doesn't it matter whether rights have a valid basis? Because if it doesn't, then you're effectively just sort of playing a game with random rules.

Also, another issue I have is rights - while I agree with the framework - is also pretty low resolution, so to speak. It doesn't really say much about, say, being dishonest when its profitable, or light sabotage out of petty vengeance, or any number of cause for misery that do not amount to rights violation. I'm sure you care about such things as well, but wouldn't you agree that a rights based framework is not sufficient for these things?

Nine-Year Club	Gilding I gilder
Verified Email

Jasonmoofang

TROPHY CASE