Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
An anonymous rock through the front window would be typical.What did you mean by imposing then?
1. That's a terrible argument. This is a Christian discussion forum....not an Antifa message board
2. Would you like some examples?
3. Again, what do you mean by imposing?
It depends on the issue in question. For some issues there may be one truth, but for others it can be different for different people. The problem is when you have someone claiming a truth that cannot be verified or proven to be true; like we’re just supposed to take their word for it.Not really. Jesus claimed He was the "Truth" above all other claimed truths. Today's idea of truth in a postmodern society in a subjective/relative one. In other words they claim there is no truth and that many truths apply. So making a claim that there is only one "truth" is different.
Really? So because someone says you shouldn’t lie, you shouldn’t lie, you assume that person will tell the truth 100% of the time? C’mon you know better than that!Its either true or its a lie. Seeming this claim comes from the same faith that states "thou shall not lie" its a pretty significant claim compared to all other faiths..
100% of the people breaching the law of gravity by jumping off a building will suffer the consequences, most who have breached the law of murder suffer no consequences at all; as a matter of fact, in the criminal world; many who commit murder are rewarded for their acts.One can breach the law of gravity by jumping off a building and will suffer the consequence. Just like one can breach the law of murder and suffer the consequence. Its just another kind of fact or law that is part of reality.
Are you sure about that? In the real world, how often do we disagree on the difference between right vs wrong?I don't get what you mean. We know the difference between right and wrong, we have a conscience and free will. That's the difference between us and animals and robots.
100% of the people breaching the law of gravity by jumping off a building will suffer the consequences, most who have breached the law of murder suffer no consequences at all; as a matter of fact, in the criminal world; many who commit murder are rewarded for their acts.
Are you sure about that? In the real world, how often do we disagree on the difference between right vs wrong?
You've made 2 points that align with everything I've said; so why the apology?Sorry Ken. To quote Mr. Scott: "You canna break the laws of physics."
On the other hand... you can *attempt* to break the laws of physics and the consequences can be quite severe.
or there maybe be different truths in different domains of life such as scientific truths, abstract truths, experiential truths or logical truths.It depends on the issue in question. For some issues there may be one truth, but for others it can be different for different people.
Not really though when it comes to belief this is not without support. Also abstract truths. We can support their truth such as in math and ethics. Just not in the same way science verifies things. But nevertheless its still a truth that can be supported in other ways. Then there's experiential truth. We experience colors or love and we believe that our partner is faithful. But try proving those things scientifically.The problem is when you have someone claiming a truth that cannot be verified or proven to be true; like we’re just supposed to take their word for it.
When it comes to Christ yes, He is without sin. So Christ is either lying or He is making a truth claim. But if there is no sin in Him then he cannot make a false claim. Yes it comes down to faith in accepting or rejecting that claim but that is the same for most claims.Really? So because someone says you shouldn’t lie, you shouldn’t lie, you assume that person will tell the truth 100% of the time? C’mon you know better than that!
Actually people who murder do suffer consequences even if they get away with it or think its rewarding. It takes a certain mind to murder, one that is not conducive with a integrated and well balanced person. If they don't suffer the consequences of the law they will through a guilty conscience and this will come out in one way or another. If they don't then there was something wrong with them to begin with.100% of the people breaching the law of gravity by jumping off a building will suffer the consequences, most who have breached the law of murder suffer no consequences at all; as a matter of fact, in the criminal world; many who commit murder are rewarded for their acts.
Do we really disagree though. If we take the core moral truths like murder, rape, stealing, lying etc and compare those with being kind, honest and loving I think we can safely tell the difference and realize one set of behavior is better than the other. You don't need a test tube to realize that. That's why we make them law including Human Rights laws and apply them to everyone regardless of personal views.Are you sure about that? In the real world, how often do we disagree on the difference between right vs wrong?
I don't think that matters. On the core beliefs all Christian denominations share the same beliefs. The disputes are often about the details. Like whether God created the world in 7 days or over a long time. But they all believe God is the creator which is the important factors of that belief.How any different Protestant denominations are there?
I never suggested truth needs to be proven scientifically. But there are those who make empty claims and expect you to take their word for it.Not really though when it comes to belief this is not without support. Also abstract truths. We can support their truth such as in math and ethics. Just not in the same way science verifies things. But nevertheless its still a truth that can be supported in other ways. Then there's experiential truth. We experience colors or love and we believe that our partner is faithful. But try proving those things scientifically.
How do you know Christ is without sin? Because some guys wrote books claiming he was without sin? How do you know those guys were being truthful?When it comes to Christ yes, He is without sin. So Christ is either lying or He is making a truth claim.
Ahh so it’s all about faith huh? My problem with faith is that there is no means of establishing the truth.But if there is no sin in Him then he cannot make a false claim. Yes it comes down to faith in accepting or rejecting that claim but that is the same for most claims.
Do you know the biggest difference between the truth and a lie? From my experience, the truth never asks to be believed; that’s what lies do. The truth asks to be tested. The truth wants to be picked apart, studied, analyzed, the truth wants to be verified! Because once you’ve done all of that; belief comes natural.You can get only so much evidence and some things we cannot get any evidence that will satisfy someone 100%. So there is a degree of faith involved. But we live this way with many aspects of life. You have to take someones word sometimes.
Is this an empty claim? Or do you have some empirical evidence showing 100% of the people who commit what YOU call murder are mentally deranged? If you have evidence, please present it.Actually people who murder do suffer consequences even if they get away with it or think its rewarding. It takes a certain mind to murder, one that is not conducive with a integrated and well balanced person. If they don't suffer the consequences of the law they will through a guilty conscience and this will come out in one way or another. If they don't then there was something wrong with them to begin with.
What one person may call murder, rape or stealing; another person will call it justified killing, making love, or taking what is rightfully theirs. What one person calls honest, or loving, another person might call insulting and mean. In the real world, we often disagree on right vs wrong.Do we really disagree though. If we take the core moral truths like murder, rape, stealing, lying etc and compare those with being kind, honest and loving I think we can safely tell the difference and realize one set of behavior is better than the other. You don't need a test tube to realize that. That's why we make them law including Human Rights laws and apply them to everyone regardless of personal views.
Of course and we should not blindly believe any truth. but what I think a lot of people do is find it hard to be open to other ways of knowing how reality works. they find it hard to imagine truth beyond empiricism and materialism. I guess dominant western culture is heavily based on a scientific material view of reality. Science and tech have been very successful and in some ways people believe in the ability of science to account for everything similar to how people believe in gods.I never suggested truth needs to be proven scientifically. But there are those who make empty claims and expect you to take their word for it.
We have ample evidence of Christs claims. One was Christ claimed he was the Son of the old testament God, the Messiah. So there is general consensus that Christ made this claim as being the Messiah and then crucified by Pontius Pilate for this claim from biblical and none biblical sources.How do you know Christ is without sin? Because some guys wrote books claiming he was without sin? How do you know those guys were being truthful?
There is no means for establishing many things we regard as truth and yet we regard them as truth. For example we believe there is a color red but there is no way to test that. Are we to say because we have to believe there is a color red that there is no such color.Ahh so it’s all about faith huh? My problem with faith is that there is no means of establishing the truth.
That doesn't seem to follow. The biggest protestors of injustice are those who have been unjustly accused. Sometimes their fight goes on for years. Its those who fight for their rights who are standing on the truth because liars are not worthy and they know it in the end.Do you know the biggest difference between the truth and a lie? From my experience, the truth never asks to be believed; that’s what lies do. The truth asks to be tested. The truth wants to be picked apart, studied, analyzed, the truth wants to be verified! Because once you’ve done all of that; belief comes natural.
I never said that all murderers are mentally deranged. I said those who murder will be psychologically affected in some way. We are talking about the unjustified killing of another which is a significant event.Is this an empty claim? Or do you have some empirical evidence showing 100% of the people who commit what YOU call murder are mentally deranged? If you have evidence, please present it.
I doubt that rape equates to making love as rape in against a persons consent and with force. That's not love. If someone takes back what was rightfully theirs then I don't think we can call this stealing. The differences in taking another life are clear and set out by the law. Murder is different to manslaughter and negligent homicide is different again. There are clear guidelines to differentiate.What one person may call murder, rape or stealing; another person will call it justified killing, making love, or taking what is rightfully theirs.
No on these core morals there are clear differences and these are set out in the law and by social and moral norms .What one person calls honest, or loving, another person might call insulting and mean. In the real world, we often disagree on right vs wrong.
Of course and we should not blindly believe any truth. but what I think a lot of people do is find it hard to be open to other ways of knowing how reality works. they find it hard to imagine truth beyond empiricism and materialism. I guess dominant western culture is heavily based on a scientific material view of reality. Science and tech have been very successful and in some ways people believe in the ability of science to account for everything similar to how people believe in gods.
We have ample evidence of Christs claims. One was Christ claimed he was the Son of the old testament God, the Messiah. So there is general consensus that Christ made this claim as being the Messiah and then crucified by Pontius Pilate for this claim from biblical and none biblical sources.
Even the Jews who were a hostile witness to Jesus and the Muslims acknowledge Jesus and that he was crucified. The Jews say Jesus was not the Messiah as claimed. So in refuting Jesus as Messiah they were acknowledging that Jesus was regarded as the Messiah at the time.
So basically Christ was crucified an innocent man for the claim of being the Son of God and this is why he wore the crown of thorns as the Messiah King of the Jews. That's unless your a conspiracy alarmist and want to claim that Jesus wasn't innocent and there was some heinous crime he did that was worthy of crucifixion.
There is no means for establishing many things we regard as truth and yet we regard them as truth. For example we believe there is a color red but there is no way to test that. Are we to say because we have to believe there is a color red that there is no such color.
The same for many experiences we have. The same for 'love'. How do you prove there is such a thing as love or pain. There is no chemical or electrical signal. Yet its as real as the chair your sitting on when writing this post.
Even science takes belief because we can never step outside our reality to see is science is the real measure of reality. Reality maybe be a complex mixture of experiences, senses and psychology and there may be forces beyond sciences ability to measure like consciousness that influence the way we see things at the subconscious.
That doesn't seem to follow. The biggest protestors of injustice are those who have been unjustly accused. Sometimes their fight goes on for years. Its those who fight for their rights who are standing on the truth because liars are not worthy and they know it in the end.
I think we've been down this road before and it goes nowhere. But I will say that there are impossible to verify ideas in science and yet we don't abandon these ideas. We live by many impossible to verify truths which affect our lives and make a difference to reality.Yet such a truth is impossible to verify.
Yet there is real world evidence of Jesus which most scholars agree with. Even hostile witnesses attest to this. The Jews for example were irate at the claim that Jesus was the Messiah and this is found in their own text. They say he was a sorcerer and a trouble maker and acknowledge he was crucified. But most important they say He was not the Messiah they were waiting for. Why would they refute the claim if it wasn't made.There is very little evidence from the real world to support the claims about Jesus put forward in the Bible. But that discussion would be taking this thread off topic.
But all that does is describe red technically. But it doesn't actually explain the color red itself as we experience it. For example you can be color blind and know all the facts about color but never know what red is.We can measure the wavelength of light and assign a particular value to "red".
That's not the point. The point is that we can experience colors in the first place as a real phenomena when there is no scientific explanation for how that happens. Yet its a fact that we experience the color red. You can know all there is to know about the mechanical functioning of colors experiencing colorOf course, what one person calls red, someone else might call magenta. Where do you draw the line?
All those explanations are mechanical and don't explain the experience of love which is a different thing to brain chemistry and signals.
Why what is reality. I don't think we can even know what reality is let alone have enough evidence to prove to us that it exists in a specific way such as only being material reality. We can never step outside our own reality to confirm it is as we perceive it. So therefore we do have a degree of faith because we can never completely confirm reality.You don't really expect people to accept that "reality exists" is a claim made with just as much faith as "God exists," do you?
Exactly. Why would a guilty person say 'look at the evidence' when they know it won't look good for him.And when was the last time you saw a guilty person saying, "Look at the evidence"?
That’s because materialism and empiricism is the only way things can be confirmed as true. Everything else requires faith, assumption, or imagination; terrible ways of establishing the truth.Of course and we should not blindly believe any truth. but what I think a lot of people do is find it hard to be open to other ways of knowing how reality works. they find it hard to imagine truth beyond empiricism and materialism.
No, belief in God claims require faith, belief in Science claims do not.I guess dominant western culture is heavily based on a scientific material view of reality. Science and tech have been very successful and in some ways people believe in the ability of science to account for everything similar to how people believe in gods.
The problem with Jesus is that he never wrote anything down. The only thing we know about him is what other people said about him. A lot of people said lots of stuff about him, and these claims do not align. So I disagree, we don't know what Jesus actually said.We have ample evidence of Christs claims.
That is according to the men who wrote the books that eventually became the bible. What about those men who wrote the books that eventually became the Gnostic gospels, or the Holy Quran? According to those men, Jesus never even made those claims. How come don't you accept their claims on faith?One was Christ claimed he was the Son of the old testament God, the Messiah. So there is general consensus that Christ made this claim as being the Messiah and then crucified by Pontius Pilate for this claim from biblical and none biblical sources.
No. According to the Muslims, the Jews were conspiring to crucify him, but Allah took him directly to Heaven before they could do it (sorta how Christians believe Elijah was taken directly to heaven)Even the Jews who were a hostile witness to Jesus and the Muslims acknowledge Jesus and that he was crucified.
To his followers maybe, but going by that logic, Jim Jones (Jonestown of the 1970’s) said he was the Messiah, many Christian leaders said he was not, but by refusing him as Messiah, they were acknowledging Jim Jones was regarded as the Messiah at that timeThe Jews say Jesus was not the Messiah as claimed. So in refuting Jesus as Messiah they were acknowledging that Jesus was regarded as the Messiah at the time.
Or… that the men who made those claims were not telling the truth.So basically Christ was crucified an innocent man for the claim of being the Son of God and this is why he wore the crown of thorns as the Messiah King of the Jews. That's unless your a conspiracy alarmist and want to claim that Jesus wasn't innocent and there was some heinous crime he did that was worthy of crucifixion.
You test the color red by looking at itThere is no means for establishing many things we regard as truth and yet we regard them as truth. For example we believe there is a color red but there is no way to test that. Are we to say because we have to believe there is a color red that there is no such color.
Love and pain are personal feelings. You may not be able to prove it to others, but you can prove it to yourselfThe same for many experiences we have. The same for 'love'. How do you prove there is such a thing as love or pain. There is no chemical or electrical signal. Yet its as real as the chair your sitting on when writing this post.
That has nothing to do with what I said.That doesn't seem to follow. The biggest protestors of injustice are those who have been unjustly accused. Sometimes their fight goes on for years. Its those who fight for their rights who are standing on the truth because liars are not worthy and they know it in the end.
And what constitutes an unjust killing? Is a soldier killing during war unjust? How about a cop trying to stop a crime? How about if someone breaks into your house attempting to do you harm, and you accidentally kill him in the process? How about if he isn’t in your house but is on your property threatening to harm you? Are you sure you want to claim everybody who commits what is considered murder will be psychologically affected?I never said that all murderers are mentally deranged. I said those who murder will be psychologically affected in some way. We are talking about the unjustified killing of another which is a significant event.
Are you sure? If a 19 year old guy has consensual sex with his 17 year old girl friend in the State of California, that is rape. Move next door to the State of Nevada, and it’s called making love.I doubt that rape equates to making love as rape in against a persons consent and with force. That's not love.
Many people have had their property legally taken from them and given to another due to unjust judgments. For that person to take that property back is called stealing.If someone takes back what was rightfully theirs then I don't think we can call this stealing.
Actually depending on the circumstances, it isn’t always clear.The differences in taking another life are clear and set out by the law. Murder is different to manslaughter and negligent homicide is different again. There are clear guidelines to differentiate.
Not all moral issues are core moral issues.No on these core morals there are clear differences and these are set out in the law and by social and moral norms .
I think we've been down this road before and it goes nowhere. But I will say that there are impossible to verify ideas in science and yet we don't abandon these ideas. We live by many impossible to verify truths which affect our lives and make a difference to reality.
Yet there is real world evidence of Jesus which most scholars agree with. Even hostile witnesses attest to this. The Jews for example were irate at the claim that Jesus was the Messiah and this is found in their own text. They say he was a sorcerer and a trouble maker and acknowledge he was crucified. But most important they say He was not the Messiah they were waiting for. Why would they refute the claim if it wasn't made.
It is relevant because its an example of a truth that cannot be completely tested to a scientific satisfaction. Yet lived experience shows it was a real claim and one that demands attention considering it is coming from one of the worlds most famous person in history who stood on the platform that lying was a sin.
But all that does is describe red technically. But it doesn't actually explain the color red itself as we experience it. For example you can be color blind and know all the facts about color but never know what red is.
The color red cannot be reduced to its physical components because its experienced and experience doesn't have physical components. Yet the color red is a real phenomena.
That's not the point. The point is that we can experience colors in the first place as a real phenomena when there is no scientific explanation for how that happens. Yet its a fact that we experience the color red. You can know all there is to know about the mechanical functioning of colors experiencing color
All those explanations are mechanical and don't explain the experience of love which is a different thing to brain chemistry and signals.
Otherwise if it was just about mechanical processes like a robot we should then be able to build a robot that can love or experience red and music and have a conscious experience of itself. This would be impossible through robotics because conscious experience is more than the sum of mechanical processes.
Why what is reality. I don't think we can even know what reality is let alone have enough evidence to prove to us that it exists in a specific way such as only being material reality. We can never step outside our own reality to confirm it is as we perceive it. So therefore we do have a degree of faith because we can never completely confirm reality.
Exactly. Why would a guilty person say 'look at the evidence' when they know it won't look good for him.
Yes, core beliefs like those being asserted in this country, like that Jesus hates gun control, thinks global warming is a hoax and that Christian charity need not be extended to LGBTs or immigrants.I don't think that matters. On the core beliefs all Christian denominations share the same beliefs. The disputes are often about the details. Like whether God created the world in 7 days or over a long time. But they all believe God is the creator which is the important factors of that belief.
Yes that is one of the fallout of modern society who don't put value in a persons word or being honest anymore. A lot of people get caught out. But that doesn't mean that people don't tell the truth and we can trust them. The thing is those who are not truthful usually don't get away with it and are found out. But the truth will stand in the end and we can learn lessons and be confident about that truth.I never suggested truth needs to be proven scientifically. But there are those who make empty claims and expect you to take their word for it.
Then we would have to say that everyone from Jesus to the witnesses, and disciples to all the non-biblical people and events all being lies. That means Jesus or whoever lied has fooled the world. They are all deluded or liars. Now I know that people can be deluded and lie about all sorts of things usually for self gain. But what benefit would there be for this hoax.How do you know Christ is without sin? Because some guys wrote books claiming he was without sin? How do you know those guys were being truthful?
That's because you are narrowing what truth is down to empirical measures. As you have acknowledge there are truths that cannot be tested by the science method. We use faith with just about everything in some ways even when it comes to science.Ahh so it’s all about faith huh? My problem with faith is that there is no means of establishing the truth.
All the methods you mention to measure the truth can be described as science measures. But as you have acknowledge there are different ways of finding a truth. Like we couldn't test, analyze, pull apart love.Do you know the biggest difference between the truth and a lie? From my experience, the truth never asks to be believed; that’s what lies do. The truth asks to be tested. The truth wants to be picked apart, studied, analyzed, the truth wants to be verified! Because once you’ve done all of that; belief comes natural.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?