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.
Read the Bible.
Of course, this is to assume that you are a Christian. If you are not, then you can not enjoy any absolute truth, because it does not exist to you.
Well, I used to be a christian, but when an investigation led me to believe the bible was not reliable, it helped to stimulate me to leave christianity.
Nope, I never believed in creation or any flood, even when I was a christian.
If so, what was it that drove you away?
You opened the door of facts and atheists. Do Christians ever lie?Both of your replies to me are out of the topic.
Part of it was a thorough review of the NT from a scholarly and historical standpoint, you know, reading the works of many different NT scholars and historians.
Lastly, taking this new knowledge and overlaying the basic christian theology, with the realities of the world, just didn't add up any more.
You opened the door of facts and atheists. Do Christians ever lie?
The bible contradicts itself all the time.
OK. Not to argue with you, I just show my way of looking at your concerns.
I don't care who said what on the history of the NT (and the OT). No body can be sure on anything with these two thousand years old documents. I simply consider the content of the NT/OT. My concern is on the content, not on the origin of these documents.
What the Bible says DO NOT fit the realities of today's world. If it fits, I won't want it.
OK; this leads to some interesting philosophical considerations, quite apart from the problem of establishing precisely what God does or doesn't say.In this case, it is the simplest question to answer: Whatever God says IS the truth.
This is where we differ.
Man can write anything in stories and the content existing doesn't make them legit. The historicity of the NT, is what matters, if one is concerned about it's reliability that is.
Au contraire, it is my point exactly. We assemble facts to arrive at truth. That is why both terms are used. The "whole" truth means not only certain facts, but all relative facts. Mitigating circumstances are an example of facts the clarify other facts and contribute to the "conclusion of the matter", the truth.
My whole point is that the terms "fact" and "truth", while synonyms, often have different meanings.
OK; this leads to some interesting philosophical considerations, quite apart from the problem of establishing precisely what God does or doesn't say.
It tells us that truth is arbitrarily dependent on God's word, and so bears no necessary relation to our human experience and perception of reality, nor to logic or maths. Truth is simply the word of God. If God says it is right for Abraham to kill his son, then that is true. If He changes His mind, it is no longer true. You may say that God wouldn't contradict the analytic truths of logic and maths, and that might be the case (maybe you can know the mind of God to this extent, I don't know what the theologians say about this), but the synthetic truths of everyday life, and the broad moral and ethical compasses of culture, society, and individuals, are all susceptible to contradiction by this arbitrary truth-by-fiat.
But the tricky problem is in establishing the word of God, because this too is culturally dependent, and can lead to a confusing contradiction of God-given truths. Even among Christians, there are many different versions of the the word of God, so differing versions of the truth, producing schisms that have develop into different sects.
As I understand it, in principle, the word of God to Christians is a truth of tolerance and compassion (not that you'd always notice in practice, but that's what the monks of St. Benedict taught me). For certain other cultures, the word of God is a very different truth - that of intolerance and lack of compassion for those that don't have their specific beliefs. These we might call fundamentalist groups or cults.
Ask the believers of each of these religions, sects, groups, schools, & cults, "What do you believe?" and they may say, "We believe the truth". Ask them, "What is the truth?" and they'll probably say, "It's the word of God". Ask them what the word of God is, and they'll say, "It is the truth, it is what we believe". Outside this circularity, ask them where they find the word of God, and they'll point to some human artefact, or a human, or their own selves. Often the artefactual sources are the same, or very similar, but the word of God is read differently in them by each group, to a greater or lesser extent.
That's the way it looks from here - so who can explain which word of God really is the truth, without the circular argument that it's what they believe?
Neither are synonyms for "my opinion", though, which is the meaning you've been using.
As I see it, the problem here is a semantic one - 'Truth' (the word of God) and 'truth' (correspondence with reality or the facts) are homonyms, spelt the same but with radically different (potentially contradictory) meanings. Using them interchangeably is nonsensical.For one who has faith to God, what you said is exactly what it should be. God tells Abraham to kill his only son. Yes, it has truth in it. God than tells Abraham to save his son, Yes, it also has truth in it. God tells Israeli people to terminate a tribe. Yes, it has truth in it. That is the only way any TRUTH could work. We can reason it, but we can not question it.
As I see it, the problem here is a semantic one - 'Truth' (the word of God) and 'truth' (correspondence with reality or the facts) are homonyms, spelt the same but with radically different (potentially contradictory) meanings. Using them interchangeably is nonsensical.
I take it you don't agree with my examples;
Fact: Illegals come here for a better life (generally speaking).
Truth (sometimes called the greater truth as it relates to the above fact): They should solve the problems in their own country instead of bringing those problems here.
Put another way, while it is a fact that they bring those problems with them the truth is that they should go back to their own country and solve their own problems. See the moral imperative there?
All I see is someone trying to turn their opinion into something more by slapping the label "truth" on it.
This now has the wonderful description of, "being economical with the truth".Another way to put is that one can be a factual person while being untruthful (I have never heard the term 'unfactual') at the same time, by simply omitting certain facts, or, aka 'lying by omission'.
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?