Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

My Religion

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by Guyver View Post
    Things which exist, like a dog, cat or stone are true by nature simply because they exist.
    I don't know what (if anything) you mean by "true by nature", but such things as dogs, cats, stones, trees, and automobiles are not true (and they are also not false). Yeah, they exist; no, they are not true.

    If you consider a dog, a cat, a stone, a toothbrush, and a can of beans to be things that are true, try believing those things; after all, isn't it wise to believe whatever is true? Try believing a cat. Try believing a can of beans.

    Perhaps you'd like to say that a Ritz cracker is true? Take one and break it in two. I suppose you'd like to call each of those pieces a "half-truth"?

    To be true is not the same as to exist. To exist is not the same as to be true.
    What evidence do you have to support your claim that what you call "evidence" is evidence?

    Comment


    • Originally posted by 7djengo7 View Post
      I don't know what (if anything) you mean by "true by nature", but such things as dogs, cats, stones, trees, and automobiles are not true (and they are also not false). Yeah, they exist; no, they are not true.

      If you consider a dog, a cat, a stone, a toothbrush, and a can of beans to be things that are true, try believing those things; after all, isn't it wise to believe whatever is true? Try believing a cat. Try believing a can of beans.

      Perhaps you'd like to say that a Ritz cracker is true? Take one and break it in two. I suppose you'd like to call each of those pieces a "half-truth"?

      To be true is not the same as to exist. To exist is not the same as to be true.
      We obviously don’t speakka the same lingadee.

      How do you define truth?

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Guyver View Post
        We obviously don’t speakka the same lingadee.

        How do you define truth?
        Truth is a statement of reality.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by JudgeRightly View Post
          Truth is a statement of reality.
          Good. Yes it is. Django doesn’t seem to agree with that.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by JudgeRightly View Post
            Truth is a statement of reality.
            What can be realized, is merely a witness of Truth.

            But which is absolute? Which is total and inexhaustible?

            Mortal conception of reality is only partial and subjective.

            Truth is immortal and objectively Divine . .
            "The immutable God never learned anything and never changed his mind. He knew everything from eternity."

            " The difference between faith and saving faith are the propositions believed."
            Gordon H. Clark

            "If a man be lost, God must not have the blame for it; but if a man be saved, God must have the glory of it."
            Charles Spurgeon

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Guyver View Post
              “When I do good I feel good, and when I do bad, I feel bad. And that is my religion.” Abraham Lincoln, 16th President of the United States of America 1809-1865. Known as the president who freed the slaves, Abraham Lincoln is known as one of our greatest leaders ever. But this thread is not about Abraham Lincoln, this thread is about my religion.

              I am pleased to have the opportunity to discuss it, because it was the chief goal of my intellectual and spiritual efforts for so many years...that is the practice of “right religion.”

              Yet, earlier on this forum I claimed that I have no religion. I should clarify that. To be more precise, I reject all of the worlds religions of which I am aware.

              Like Abraham Lincoln, a take a more simple and straightforward approach to religion. In my practice, I seek and venerate truth. I hope to be able to discuss this, and offer my views of God and my religion in this thread.
              So then by what method have you falsified all of the worlds religions of which you are aware?

              I'm not asking for a separate answer for each religion, I want to know generally what sort of method you used to declare all of the worlds religions false. Did you just arbitrarily toss them all collectively into the trash bin or did you actually have some systematic method of determining they're veracity (or lack thereof)?

              So, the first principle of my religion is that truth supersedes belief.
              This happens to be a substantial step down the road toward Christianity but let's not get ahead of ourselves...


              How do you know that truth supersedes belief?

              That's a real question, by the way. I'm not trying to be clever.

              Clete

              P.S. I've not read through the thread yet. If this post is too much of a reset then just say so. If there is a particular section of the discussion I should read before jumping in, just point it out. In the mean time, I'll try to read through and get more of the gist of the existing discussion.

              P.S.S. Just noticing the last few posts...

              The word "True" means "Consistent". Consistent with what depends on the context in which the word is being used. If you lay floor tiles for a living then "true" means that your flooring is laid consistent with some standard like an adjacent wall or a chalk line as well as with the other flooring including all of the tiles you've just laid. If it is all consistently flat and level and even, etc it is said to be laid "true".

              In the context of philosophy, the word "True" or "Truth" simply means that an idea or concept is consistent both with itself and with reality. Pursuant to this idea of truth, there are three axioms upon which all knowledge and discourse is necessarily based...

              1. What is is. A is A.
              This is known as the law of identity. It is the most fundamental statement of truth that can be made. It has the following corollary...

              2. Any truth claim is either true or it is false.
              This is known as the law of excluded middle. A truth claim cannot be both true (i.e. consistent with reality) and false in a specific context. And, as before, it has a corollary...

              3. Any two truth claims that contradict each other cannot both be true at the same time in and the same way.
              This is known as the law of contradiction. It is similar to the previous law but applies when truth claims are in conflict with each other and not reality itself.

              There is no truth that can violate any of these three laws of reason. No argument can be made without making use of these laws. Thus any attempt to counter these laws is self-defeating! They are therefore true because of the rational impossibility of the contrary. That's why they are called "axioms". (There are others.)

              Clete
              Last edited by Clete; August 17th, 2019, 06:00 AM.
              sigpic
              "The [open view] is an attempt to provide a more Biblically faithful, rationally coherent, and practically satisfying account of God and the divine-human relationship..." - Dr. John Sanders

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Clete View Post
                How do you know that truth supersedes belief?
                To that I would add "what exactly do you ( [MENTION=8654]Guyver[/MENTION]) mean by "truth supersedes belief"?

                For example - it is a truth that, as I am typing this, my clock displays 9:22

                I believe that [MENTION=8654]Guyver[/MENTION] will read this, sometime in the next day or so

                Does that truth "supersede" that belief?

                Comment


                • Originally posted by ok doser View Post
                  To that I would add "what exactly do you ( [MENTION=8654]Guyver[/MENTION]) mean by "truth supersedes belief"?

                  For example - it is a truth that, as I am typing this, my clock displays 9:22

                  I believe that [MENTION=8654]Guyver[/MENTION] will read this, sometime in the next day or so

                  Does that truth "supersede" that belief?
                  Well, hopefully, what he means is that he would allow the truth to change his belief and that the truth is true whether one believes it or not.
                  sigpic
                  "The [open view] is an attempt to provide a more Biblically faithful, rationally coherent, and practically satisfying account of God and the divine-human relationship..." - Dr. John Sanders

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by ok doser View Post
                    To that I would add "what exactly do you ( [MENTION=8654]Guyver[/MENTION]) mean by "truth supersedes belief"?

                    For example - it is a truth that, as I am typing this, my clock displays 9:22

                    I believe that [MENTION=8654]Guyver[/MENTION] will read this, sometime in the next day or so

                    Does that truth "supersede" that belief?
                    In this case, the truth and your belief were the same. So that’s a good thing. But that is not always the case.

                    Clete, I know that truth supersedes belief because truth is always true, but beliefs may be true or false. Beliefs are true in the mind of the person who believes, but even that can change over time.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Clete View Post
                      Well, hopefully, what he means is that he would allow the truth to change his belief and that the truth is true whether one believes it or not.
                      Yes. That is well said.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Clete View Post
                        So then by what method have you falsified all of the worlds religions of which you are aware?

                        Clete
                        Rational thought process. I think I did say that I do believe in the twelve step recovery program of AA. That I believe is a true religion.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Guyver View Post
                          I don’t believe in “dark or evil” forces except for the evil actions that people choose to do.
                          Note that dark or evil forces do exist which are not flesh and blood like humans are (Ephesians 6:12).

                          --

                          Originally posted by Guyver View Post
                          It seems to me that Ecclesiastes should be the simplest of all books to give an answer, but you don’t have it; neither does anyone else.
                          Ecclesiastes 12:1 simply means that old people can have a hard time because of physical frailties.

                          --

                          Originally posted by Guyver View Post
                          I was a found lost soul who realized the truth.
                          John 14:6 Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.

                          --

                          Originally posted by Guyver View Post
                          I was just thinking about dying and I was going to say that I’m ok with dying as a result of my religion. But then, I checked myself and realized I’m not ok with dying because dying is brutal. I should say I’m ok with death, but that’s not true either. I’m not ok with death, I’m ok with being dead.
                          Note that dead people can be sent to hell (Luke 12:5).

                          Originally posted by Guyver View Post
                          ...the problem I have with death is that it exists in the first place. It’s the whole idea of why would God make a world of death?
                          Because of sin (Romans 6:23).

                          Originally posted by Guyver View Post
                          It is possible that we are being punished for crimes in a previous existence.
                          No, for there is no reincarnation (Hebrews 9:27).

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Guyver View Post
                            Rational thought process. I think I did say that I do believe in the twelve step recovery program of AA. That I believe is a true religion.
                            That's it?

                            Of all the things I said in my post, you come back with "I do believe in the twelve step recovery program of AA."?

                            Are you trying to waste everyone's time here or what?
                            sigpic
                            "The [open view] is an attempt to provide a more Biblically faithful, rationally coherent, and practically satisfying account of God and the divine-human relationship..." - Dr. John Sanders

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Guyver View Post
                              Now death. Well, being dead is fine...the problem I have with death is that it exists in the first place. It’s the whole idea of why would God make a world of death?
                              Why do you think God made a world of death?

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Guyver View Post
                                ... why would God make a world of death?

                                He didn't

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X