Wow... I've just joined this discussion forum, there are some wonderfully thought provoking posts! It's taken me a while to get here but I think it was worth it.
Firstly I can't resist but enquire Shining One, how you can be so resolute in your last post?
God exists outside of this timeline since time itself is a part of creation. God resides in eternity and He sees all, past, present and future (to us). At death the soul goes to the realm of that existence, therefore (from a eternal perspective) all souls return and reside in eternity.
It seems others in their posts have taken great care, choosing their words carefully, backing up their ideas with sound well rounded reasoning. Can I ask, is this, your quote (which is written as a statement of fact) a conclusion you've drawn yourself? Is it something you've read somewhere? I can't understand how you can be so unequivocal?
But getting back to it, I know it's a long way down the line, but I do have a small (some may say pedantic) problem with the original premise of the thread. I would like to "agree a different definition of fact". The definition given in jgnat's original post (one of the most interesting posts I've read in ages BTW) was
To me, a fact1 is something that at least two people can independently verify by observation.
...surely this definition is... how to 'prove' a fact as truth, as of course it's perfectly possible to have mistaken facts once believed to be true. I hate to muddy the waters, but IMHO most belief, scientific or religious, must be a matter of faith.
To pick a silly example... FACT: The earth orbits the sun - well at least I believe or have faith in that fact - I've never flown into space to verify it, and I certainly don't understand the maths proving it as such. You might say well it's been independently verified by observation - hmm, well what does that mean exactly? Well from my point of view, it means... some people I've not met, experienced something in "their reality" verifying the said fact. I would also say that it can be even more subjective that this!
I think it was the Inca's that believed a sacrifice was required to ensure the sun would come up in the morning, fact. Why is that a fact? Well it's been independently verified by observation. I expect hundreds of Inca priests observed and thought. 'Yep... Killed another kid last night and sure enough the sun did come up, must remember to wash down the altar for tonight'.
So getting to the point, the original post asked 'trust in Faith or trust in Fact'... I suppose what I personally asked myself was 'Can I believe in something that can not be proven or disproven as truth?' As a snap judgement I said "No", but as you can see from my reasoning, I personally can't prove or disprove most of what I've put my faith in anyway!
What's interesting to me is, the fact I think that God doesn't exists, kind of make me a hypocrite