my point is comfort, even a spiritual comfort, can come with two ways: a payoff of hard good work; or just an indulgence.
The over-emphasize of belief (or even worse, some kind of religion, -ism, cult, based on dogmas) is an indulgence for a person. It's not a spiritual liberation, it's an enslavation. We all have the tendency to sit back and enjoy what we have (or, in mind, to selectively accept what we want to believe). So when we explain the benefit of belief, like the comfort it brings, we should not forget to remind ourselves they are just like the sweetness of icecream and softness of a bed: some amount of them definitely is refreshing and beneficial, but an overdose will bring us obesity and, more harmfully, a lazy mind.
BTW, philosophy is one kind of science. So being indisputable is not its target. We should better say, its goal is using the simplest expression to reach the maximum accordance among the current known facts (about this you can look into the Kolmogorov complexity concept in information theory).
And about "哲学界的很多大师最终都走入了所谓虚无" is in my mind too obsessive with "their" theories of the world. They fall again into the trap of "easy way out", or indulgence of simplicity and beauty of "their" theories. Russell is a great philosopher that I respect, who can really accept the complexity of real world, like Socrates, and respect our own limitations.