Origins TheologyForum for the discussion of Creation Science (Young/Old) vs Theistic Evolution. Discussion of Atheistic Evolution should be taken to the Discussion and Debate forums.
Therein lies the boundaries of the little box that was built around Christianity. What if there orthodox doctrine was in fact incorrect? (I mean like all doctrine it was established by man which makes errors) If you ever limit yourself to a little box you will never know if the truth actually lies outside of that little box.
Truth exists. By definition it is exclusive. So once found there is no need to continue searching. The only issue is whether it is found or not. I don't question the doctrine of salvation through Christ because I'm convinced it is true.
Truth exists. By definition it is exclusive. So once found there is no need to continue searching. The only issue is whether it is found or not. I don't question the doctrine of salvation through Christ because I'm convinced it is true.
See, that's the thing, it isn't exclusive. Multiple things can and in fact are true. For example, we disagree on this, that's obviously true. Though I bet there are things we do in fact agree on... so both of these statements in certain contexts are true:
We disagree
We agree
hence Truth is far from exclusive in most cases. There is no way you or I can confirm and/or be positive a supernatural truth is exclusive to others. In fact the best we can do is a horrible guess in the scope of things. So to claim that you know the "exclusive truth" is very arrogant.
See, that's the thing, it isn't exclusive. Multiple things can and in fact are true. For example, we disagree on this, that's obviously true. Though I bet there are things we do in fact agree on... so both of these statements in certain contexts are true:
We disagree
We agree
hence Truth is far from exclusive in most cases. There is no way you or I can confirm and/or be positive a supernatural truth is exclusive to others. In fact the best we can do is a horrible guess in the scope of things. So to claim that you know the "exclusive truth" is very arrogant.
Pointing out that we can agree on one thing and disagree on another does not demonstrate that truth is not exclusive. If a claim is true it can not also be false. If you claim that we agree on somethings and disagree on others this is either true or it is false.
There is nothing arrogant about understanding truth. Arrogance is the result of what one does and how one acts. It has nothing to do with whether you are right or wrong per se. A person can be wrong and arrogant or they can be correct and arrogant. Jesus was not arrogant when He claimed to preach the Truth. He was not arrogant when He said that no one would come to the Father except through Him.
No I'd say the issue is really understanding that doctrine is not the same as Truth. The rest of what you said was kind of weird.
We said the same thing about the doctrine. I do not use the word "truth" because it implies an "absolute truth". This does nor exist yet here on Earth.
"weird" Just ask me. I'll explain anything you do not understand.
Pointing out that we can agree on one thing and disagree on another does not demonstrate that truth is not exclusive. If a claim is true it can not also be false. If you claim that we agree on somethings and disagree on others this is either true or it is false.
There is nothing arrogant about understanding truth. Arrogance is the result of what one does and how one acts. It has nothing to do with whether you are right or wrong per se. A person can be wrong and arrogant or they can be correct and arrogant. Jesus was not arrogant when He claimed to preach the Truth. He was not arrogant when He said that no one would come to the Father except through Him.
There is no absolute truth.
Only human truth can exist. Truth is limited by our perceptions and there will always be more than one perspective. There are no “absolute” truths, i.e. those that operate above the natural laws. Maybe when we evolve into something “else”, maybe human but different, you will be right.
Can you give an example of an absolute truth?
BTY ... he did not mean "him" he meant "his way of living"
Only human truth can exist. Truth is limited by our perceptions and there will always be more than one perspective. There are no “absolute” truths, i.e. those that operate above the natural laws. Maybe when we evolve into something “else”, maybe human but different, you will be right.
Can you give an example of an absolute truth?
It is important not to conflate perception with reality. Reality exists whether we perceive it or not.
Absolute truth exists in the natural world. Judging from your response you seem to agree with that. You'd agree that since the world around us exists this constitutes absolute truth. Correct? You are also implying a non-empirical form of absolute truth when you claim no absolute truth exists. I mean, if you claim there is no absolute truth then you are either wrong, in which case there is absolute truth, or you have made a non-sensical statement by disclaiming absolute truth absolutely.
In the case of the supernatural world, either, 1) there is no supernatural reality, or 2) there is a supernatural reality. It is an absolute truth that one or the other is true. If you believe there is a supernatural reality, like I do, then there is some set of absolute truth in the supernatural realm as well.
I don't understand what you mean by evolving into something? What?
BTY ... he did not mean "him" he meant "his way of living"
This could not be the case else we would work our way to salvation, which the NT is pretty clear is not the plan.
We said the same thing about the doctrine. I do not use the word "truth" because it implies an "absolute truth".
As explained by others, 'truth' absolute or otherwise does not depend on perception.
This does nor exist yet here on Earth.
Sounds suspiciously like an absolute to me!
__________________
Give me Scotland or I die - John Knox
A mathematician confided
That a Möbius band is one-sided,
And you'll get quite a laugh,
If you cut one in half,
For it stays in one piece when divided!
Pointing out that we can agree on one thing and disagree on another does not demonstrate that truth is not exclusive. If a claim is true it can not also be false. If you claim that we agree on somethings and disagree on others this is either true or it is false.
There is nothing arrogant about understanding truth. Arrogance is the result of what one does and how one acts. It has nothing to do with whether you are right or wrong per se. A person can be wrong and arrogant or they can be correct and arrogant. Jesus was not arrogant when He claimed to preach the Truth. He was not arrogant when He said that no one would come to the Father except through Him.
Arrogance is to believe that we as flawed humans could ever definitely proclaim an absolute truth. Sure they are out there, but they are beyond our ability to confirm or deny.
Arrogance is to believe that we as flawed humans could ever definitely proclaim an absolute truth. Sure they are out there, but they are beyond our ability to confirm or deny.
It is easy to determine the error of your reasoning. Your error takes two forms.
First, there are by definition many, many more ways to be wrong about something then correct. If absolute truth is obtained by random guessing, as your position forces us to assume, then your claim that we can not know truth has a high probability of being wrong. It is empty and self refuting.
Second, your declaration of unobtainable truth is again an absolute statement about being unable to obtain absolute truth.
Absolute truth exists and we're able to reach it. We reach truth through guided means. In the natural world we reach truth through the scientific method. In the supernatural world we reach truth through reasoning and faith in the Holy Spirit. It is not arrogant to think you can obtain truth. No more then thinking you can climb a mountain is arrogant. Arrogance is manifested independent of whether one achieves something or not. Impotent fools can be arrogant.
Linear Mode
