On another blog, a fellow JoeUser asked the following questions and made the following comments:
I am irritated with the closed-mindedness of organizations with causes. If there is only one way (YOUR way) to reach God … why are there so many divergent paths and religions making the same claim? What makes you think it is even conceivable that a paper trail in excess of 2000 years could contain much resemblance to the original fictions?
I am sure you have heard of the test that goes like this: Get a group of 10 people in a circle and whisper a statement to one person. Then they whisper it to the next and so on. There has never been a valid documented case where the original statement bore much resemblance to the 10th person’s statement. This is simply explained with the fact that people are different and they think ‘differently’. Organizations do not like this concept which they classify as ‘self-serving individualism’.
I must be a fool (as you are want to tell me) because I do not believe that the concepts of lying, deceit and conspiracy, power struggles, suppressing the masses, limiting real knowledge, murder, deception and intrigue are new to this century or any other for that matter. But of course, religious theology was not susceptible to human contamination … of course. I believe these concepts were in existence long before recorded time. Why would this befouling of the truth affecting all of human history, exclude ONLY Christian Doctrine? Only mind dead robots could believe this absurdity.
Myfist0 #76
You bring up Truth. I've been told "Your truth is not my truth".
And my response was truth is neither yours nor mine. It is independent of either of us. We hold things becasue they are true. They aren't true becasue we happen to believe them. Truth is consistent. If you have the truth on a given subject and my ideas conflict with yours, then I do not possess the truth. If I am right, you haven't got the truth.
One priest writing about the needs of the human community and the Church put it this way.
"Without Truth, freedom yields to totalitarianism, justice gives way to exploitation, charity recedes into ruthlessness, peace dissolves into rivalry and hostility. Without the judgment of the enduring values of the Gospel of Jesus Christ: freedom, justice, peace, charity, compassion, and reconciliation won't stand. The human community needs Truth which proclaims without compromise the dignity and worth of every person, lest he be swallowed up in whatever tickles society's ears."
It would be impossible to survey all there is to say about truth in any coherent way. Instead, this essay will concentrate on the main themes in the study of truth in the contemporary philosophical literature. It will attempt to survey the key problems and theories of current interest, and show how they relate to one-another. A number of other entries investigate many of these topics in greater depth. Generally, discussion of the principal arguments is left to them. The goal of this essay is only to provide an overview of the current theories.
The problem of truth is in a way easy to state: what truths are, and what (if anything) makes them true. But this simple statement masks a great deal of controversy. Whether there is a metaphysical problem of truth at all, and if there is, what kind of theory might address it, are all standing issues in the theory of truth. We will see a number of distinct ways of answering these questions.
But I guess the bible believes the truth is flat as well. Your giving me a truth ache.
What is truth?
What is truth? Truth is in possession.
If by my "circle of knowledge" you mean Catholic theology then I take it that "The Truth" you're describing here is supernatural (Divine) Truth or Absolute Truth which is God.
There is only one truth, however there are distinctions to be made. We start with the most foundational meaning of truth---actual existence. Ontological truth is the truth of the actual existence of things. To be ontologically true means to be an indisputable matter of fact.
But something can be ontologically true without anyone being the least bit aware of its existence. Thus another distinction...logical truth. When a human mind becomes aware of the existence of something (X), and when it knows X as it really is as opposed to having a distorted idea of the reality of X, then it can be said that the mind is in possession of the truth with regard to X.
Logical truth corresponds between ideas in the mind and things in the world. The truth which is in the mind is made public through language either written or oral..it's also called a proposition. True propositions correspond with facts and faithfully reflect what is actually the case in the world. It's false if it fails in that respect.
Ontological truth is related to logical truth is related to moral truth.
Yes ma'am and that's what I was getting at when I first responded to Myfist) saying I've been told, "Your truth is not my truth".
Relativism.
Yes and yes. The truth is under seige and the dictatorship of relativism proclaims that there are many as truths as there are individuals who want to invent it. This is becasue people aren't concerned with what is true but rather with what will work for them..you think?
Truth for the relativist loses its critical objective status and becomes entirely subjective. I think it true that abortion is wrong, but the person next to me thinks it true that abortion is right.
Pluralism.
In a pluralistic society, everyone can be right and nobody has to be wrong for it is up to each individual to decide for himself his own truth and his own false...his own right and his own wrong..his own good and his own evil. We are living under the dictatorship of relativism and in a pluralistic society. And I've got to ask...how's that working out for us?
I'd say, disaster?
Which takes me back to what the priest said:
Lula, the truth is very relative to people, you must know that. You believe that suicide is a mortal sin and ensures one hell bound (I think?). And yet within the Age of Christendom (and well before), there are those peoples who believe that suicide is the only way to atone for ‘whatever’ to ensure a path to the afterlife. Both of these cannot be true, but what do you think each side will argue with besides ‘their own truth’ of course? And religions are just like governments, they do not take kindly to the word NO, either; they only preach justice and humanitarianism before they send out the swordsmen to decide “The Truth”. Sort of like in Iraq … and Jerusalem to name a couple places where the “TRUTH” was under contention in the real world … where we live and play… Somewhere (???) in JU, I made a comment that went something like this. The movie was “Blood Diamond” I think??? It was bloody and cruel to say the least. There was this black man, of peasant descent, one of the real people who are honest because they do not understand why someone would need to tell a lie. Honesty, without theology to explain it all to him, go figure. A photographer or reporter pairs up with this gentleman (and I mean that in the truest sense) and through necessity they must gain access further into the war zone (not an option). So the white guy hands the black man his camera and tells him that he is his “new” camera man, hum… The ignorant aborigine stops the white man and says he cannot tell them he is a camera man … because he is not one??? The white guy educated in the ‘real’ ways of the world explained, you have to lie to those guards or they will not let either of us get bye. They resume approaching the bus… They stop again and he said that it was not right to lie and he couldn’t do it. Perplexed, the white man basically and stringently told him to man up and on they went. This was a life and death situation, they had to get by. So they got to the bus, the white guy showed his credentials and when asked, the black man held up the camera and said “I am camera man” and they walked on bye. Lie, or no lie, or it doesn’t mean anything under the right conditions … in the real world of course … where I reside … here on earth, is all.
Why you want to pretend everyone is attacking your church on every front is beyond me. In your minds (somehow?), you have convinced yourselves that every word spoken or even any thought others may have contrary to your church or any of its dictates (theology, bible)… are ALL enemies of the church. And when the enemy lists are drawn up … you go reforming and recruiting and you do this by going on the attack. Do not ask to be my PR manager, geeze.
Lula posts:
If we go back in this discussion, we'll find we were discussing history and the Bible. If we look at the Bible as a collection of Books about religious history, we find in existence today the Dead Sea Scrolls, thousands of manuscripts, going back 2,000 plus years. A comparison of those manuscripts with the writings of Roman and Jewish historians, and with archeological findings in the Middle east, shows that they give an accurate account of many persons. places and things in the Bible.
I tend to agree. The same is true of science text books. There should be no lies or bias in educational textbooks.
That's what I meant when I wrote:
Yes to both questions.
This of course goes back to the discussion about truth. Teaching with history and science books that are as Myfist0 says, " full of outright lies", or bias, results in distorted and inadequate presentations of history and science when it should the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth and that both in the presentation of the facts and in the interpretation of those facts.
I am not at all familiar with American Education but I was raised in a Catholic school where I was taught both sides. The Adam and Eve and, to quote my teacher, "The theory of evolution". I also had a great high school history teacher that showed the inconsistencies of what we were previously taught for which he came under some fire from the school board and actually made local news.
"Schools need to be a place of learning and not be centers of indoctrination". Quoting my history teacher.
Ah good, back to the original question.
Because my answer to the question is back on page 1, I'll restate it here.
I'll start by defining what I mean by RELIGION. Theologically, philosophically, or metaphysically speaking, what I mean by religion is an act of homage by which we render to God both privately as individuals and publicly as social beings, the honor, gratitude, worship and obedience due Him and in the way prescribed by Him.
Religion may be natural or supernatural.
Religion, in the way prescribed by God, indicates revealed religion by God Himself and since there is but One God there can only be one true religion in any given period of time.
Are we on the same page as far as the definition of religion?
I agree that man is fallible. Based on that I would say that there are so many different paths and religions due either to the ignorance or perversity of people.
For sure, people invented religions for themselves— religions which differ even as the outlook differs of those who originated them.
For now I'll speak of the 3 man-made religions.
Modern Judaism was developed by Rabbis after 70AD, Mohammedanism (Islam) was developed in 650, the thousands of various sects that developed within Protestantism began in 1517. They all believe in God yet they are distinct religions with different doctrines and different belief systems. Reason tells us that since there is but One God, it is impossible to believe that God, Supreme Truth Himself, revealed such contrary doctrines, teachings and worship.
So long as man arranges for himself what he will believe making a great act of faith in his own powers of discernment , there will inevitably be different churches, different paths, and thus different religion
As to the one religion of God, we begin with the revealed holy religion of the Old Testament, namely Hebraic Judaism which was based on the Old Covenant (Mosaic) Law, its Aaronic priesthood and worhsip of God by offering sacrifices in the Temple. That ended when Christ died and the Temple veil was rent in two from top to bottom. Christ said He came to fulfill the Old Covenant Law and the Prophets and He did.
Catholic Christianity is Hebraic Judaism fulfilled. The Jewish religion of the Old Testament was essentially a prepatory religion meant by its very nature to merge into its perfect fulfillment when Christ came. He gave us Christianity which Hebraic Judaism foreshadowed. In the New Testament, and in historical reality, Christ founded a Church and said the gates of Hell would not prevail against it and that He would be with it all the days until the end of the world. His Church and His religion therefore, must be still here and it must have been here all days since His time. That rules out all of the other religions named above. Only Catholic Christianity and the Church has existed and lasted in perpetuity since Christ in 33AD.
I understand. I remember reading somewhere you are Canadian living near the border. My parents were born in Canada and emigrated to the states in the late 1920s. I have lots of wonderful Canadian relatives.
My father was Catholic and my mother converted from the Episcopal religion. I'm the 9th of 10 children, some of us were educated in the Catholic school, but I was not. During the 50s, I attended public schools and received a first rate education...graduated in 1966. Back then the science books represented Stellar and Darwinian Evolution strictly as theory. At the same time, I received catechesis from the nuns in full habit where I was taught the Faith, including Adam and Eve, their Fall into Original Sin, etc.
During the late 80s, my children went to Catholic school and their science textbooks had Evolution as fact. I was at war with those teachers who refused to teach both sides of the Origin debate. I've written about my experience in some of the JU blogs about evolution.
I have not been keeping up with the science journals for a few years and have not heard or read when evolution became fact from theory. I agree it should be taught as theory. To many times I have seen top scientist put there work as fact just because nobody can prove them wrong. Then a couple years down the road that fact was proven wrong. Look at some old issues of scientific american and you will see what I mean. What is scientific truth one day is BS the next which is why I like the word theory.
I was into math which most people think deals in absolutes where a lot is theory.
On the other hand I believe in the separation of church and state. A person should not have to enter a court house in a multi-cultural society to be greeted with religious icons. Religious prosecution is what lead to many people fleeing there countries and can be very intimidating when dealing with government issues. Canadians having a state run Catholic School board also known as "Separate Schools" shows how powerful the lobby was and still is here. Does this mean when immigration and free voting allows a curtain other religious people to be predominant in our parliament that there religion will be pushed onto our children in school? Or the state paying for every religions separate school? I hope not. School should be for educating the sciences and parents and church for the rest.
Yes we both believe in nature and its wonders.
Yes, I believe Genesis that teaches Creator God spoke and the things of nature were created. Nature is not the originator of anything. All that is manifested through nature exists within it by the will of the Maker of nature, God. Nature doesn't design nature any more than an apple seed designs the apple. Nature is a process of unfolding the design implanted in substances, forces and in man.
And you believe nature is nothing more than the natural progression of matter as it endlessly adapts in the constant struggle to survive. OK. But that does not explain or answer my question ... how did nature come to be on earth? And what is your body of empirical scientific that supports your answer?
Of my belief that God created nature, you tell me:
Nature is not self-existent. It had a beginning, God is its first Cause. The marvelous order seen in nature that we both acknowledge would be an impossibility without a Designer of the plan, a Maker of nature and the laws of nature. Astronomers, physicists, chemists, and other scientists will tell us the laws of nature are so exact that calculations can be made in advance with mathematical exactness.
The laws of nature posit the existence of a Law-Maker whom we call God. You must accept this or assume that the laws of nature originated my mere chance in a self-existent universe that came from nothing ... something absolutely impossible and something that has virtually no body of empirical scientific evidence to prove it.
Well my first response is that theology is the highest of sciences! But that aside, I agree schools are supposed to educate in the sciences, however, the dilemna is that their textbooks are biased, politically correct, and full of lies. That said, I'm for homeschooling.
All you have to do to comprehend is to step down off your cloud of perfection and understand we are not theology students in search of things we cannot comprehend … that would be you guys. If you really look back you would see that we (I) claimed the bible as a not an historical document … you were the only supporter. As I said it is convenient to reference old stuff, and I will admit this is not something I follow … but if there were any such proof, I think I would have heard if for no other reason you would be heralding it from your cloud … and you are not, just implications.
Now that I am thinking about it, I do not see why there could not be actual for real people mentioned in the bible. Most fables, parables, customs and legends are linked to actual people or events … so what? And you still cannot prove it.
Lula, if you are looking for some theological arguments from me, don’t, maybe myfist0 will??? But there was one quote of yours that did catch my eye...
Well, call me a blasphemer if you like but why can we not have both.
God created the mathematical equation we know as the universe. The earth formed over millions of years using gravity to draw mass together. The earth cooled and when the time was right God reached down and gave life to the primordial goo that evolved into all life on earth.
Lets see what happens when man mucks with evolution
--->
Lula, you want the answers to all of life’s mysteries and don't we all. The truth is that we just do not have the ability right now and can only work with what we have. We are learning more and more and we will get better still. But it all takes time. I tried to walk you through the historical evolution of the earth (in the eyes of man) and you defended it as if it were another attack on your religion. It was intended to demonstrate that science has a way of catching up with its own anomalies. You missed the whole point. There is nothing built into your theology to check yourselves. There is nothing built in to allow for time and custom or any other kind of adjustment … you are locked in a self-justifying, self-administered and self-supporting circle that views any disagreement no matter how slight a blasphemous thing and some kind of attack.
It is my contention that the church made a bad decision way back then. When they compiled their book of books, they had two choices. 1. Claim this book as actual historical fact and dominate the foreseeable future or 2. To represent it as the wisdom of God which could have been molded through time to incorporate societal changes … but this would lessen their immediate control. I expect that they just assumed that this god would do just as well as all the others. But the math and sciences changed the evolutionary irrationality that is religion. I am beginning to think that your real old predecessors sealed your fate with their pursuit of the sciences through the years. It took 2,000 years to gain the technology and make it available worldwide for the information age of today to exist. Now all we have to do is convince those less inclined to work, to push a few buttons, whew… and look for themselves. Same thing applies to Iraq or Afghanistan … a few clicks away … and most seem to find this arduous task beneath them … push, whew, push … no this is just too much to expect from me, the hell with the truth … full speed ahead. This irrational belief in the church or the USG as entities of good intent is well preposterous if history is to be our guide.
Sorry about that. I should have been more clear. As far as time relative implications, yes, God gave His true religion to mankind gradually, (over two periods of time) so that men could be prepared by more simple doctrines for still more noble truths.
I attempted to explain that there can be but One God, so therefore there can be only one religion of God's making in any given period of time when I wrote:
In a nutshell, that one supernatural religion was ancient Hebraic Judaism (the only God revealed religion in the period of time before Christ ) become Catholic Christianity (the period of time during and after Christ that according to Christ will last until the end of the world). Christianity is the perfect development of the Hebraic Jewish religion, just as the perfect tree is the perfect development of the seed from which it grew. Catholics hold their religion, Catholicism or Catholic Christianity with its Christ instituted priesthood and sacrifice to be Hebraic Judaism full blossomed.
This goes to what Myfist0 said,
I agree. All those man-made religions, no matter how lofty their doctrines or ideals, contain truth mixed with error and therefore are flawed.
The very existence of those man-made religions, are, inferentially, a denial of the One-ness of God. God is Absolute, Eternal Truth does not contradict Himself, as do the varying religions.
BT posts 114
We were discussing lies in the textbooks.
What I said is true. Science is supposed to be the search for truth. If you look at any government school science textbook, particularly in the part that describes Evolution, you'll find plenty of lies, exaggerated claims and deceptions galore. The section that describes how we went supposedly "evolved" from ape to human are the ones that really get my dander up.
Believers love math and love science...they also love God Who comes first more but so what? We must priortize in life.
There you go again with "Irrational belief". I'll have more to say about this later.
#114
If I remember correctly, I said the Bible contains actual history and that's true. We can certainly look at the Bible as a collection of books about religious history.
Google historical books in the Bible and you'll come up with quite a lengthy list.
Here's one to prove my point....
Read more: http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_are_the_historical_books_of_the_Bible#ixzz1NQnwPGtJ
Quoting lulapilgrim, reply 1Religion, in the way prescribed by HIm, indicates revealed religion by God Himself.Catholic Christianity came into existence in 33AD when Christ founded a Church upon Simon renamed Peter, her first Pope and established Christianity.
Quoting lulapilgrim, reply 2We begin with the revealed holy religion of the Old Testament, namely Hebraic Judaism. Catholic Christianity is Hebraic Judaism fulfilled.
Quoting BoobzTwo, reply 3I am not going to try and walk around your self-contained circle of knowledge. It is self-justifying, self-defining and self-tolerant. There is nothing fair about it, nothing democratic about it and nothing free about it. These are all no-no’s in my secular world. Just not my cup of tea I guess.
Here is your lecture on how awfully restrictive and un-free the Church and Catholicism are. I can assure you this notion comes from not having a true idea of the CC or being based upon lack of information or even upon wrong information.
Honestly, I, and all the Catholics I know, can't imagine how we could be freer or less restrictive than we are as Catholics. As Catholic I am bubbling over with happiness knowing that a)--- I'm free from all error by the Christological teachings of the Church and able to be liberated from my sins by her wonderful Sacraments and the other means of God's grace and that --- the Church and the Catholic Faith has the road map to eternal life in Heaven.
The Church's sole purpose is to lead souls to their ultimate Happiness and Good Who is God. I think of the Church as a parent who wants happiness and the good for their child. Much like the Church, they structure rules and guidelines to make this happen.
George Kendall wrote an article about the CC and Freedom in The Wanderer newspaper. I'll use his ideas and logic.
First about being unfree. People consider themselves unfree when subject to circumstances they can't get what they want. So it's really about the good and one's pursuit of the good. Kendall says that a situation that restricts you from pursuing your good seems restrictive and one that does not do this, not so. It's a question of whether our rules, our authorities or whatever we deal with structures things for us in a way that helps us get to our destination or prevents us from doing so. To Catholics, the real freedom in life is in the hope of eternal life with God.
Now about restrictions. And here again, we can relate the Church to parents bringing up children. So, of course there are restrictions because the whole point is to keep us on a certain path and restrict us from going off the path which could lead us away from our destination.
In her effort to keep us on the road to Ultimate Happiness, which is our goal and destination, the Church and Catholicism restricts us from from traveling on other roads which could lead us where we do not want to go, namely Hell.
We start with the fact we live in a natural world. Nature..something we both think is wonderous. St.Paul says what can be known about God is plain because God has shown it to us.(What has He shown to us? His wonderous nature all around us.) Ever since the creation, God's invisible nature, namely His eternal power and deity, has been clearly perceived in the things that have been made.
So here we have it ... that our human reason is capable of attaining a true, albeit an imperfect knowledge of God. So reason comes first. The gift of faith follows which seals the knowledge. Faith teaches things that are so profound that they are above reason.
Belief (Divine Faith) in the One God and His one, holy, catholic and apostolic religion is rational and in no way conflicts with science although that is the propaganda of those who hate the Church. Of Faith and Science, there was a teacher who once said, "Science is knowing how God works in the natural order and Faith is knowing how God works in the supernatural order."
I've already addressed your faith first misconception. As far science, empirical knowledge and theology failing us .... you speak but you don't know what your talking about. If you do, give some concrete examples.
Your misunderstanding is due to failure properly to appreciate what Faith really is and its basic role in the sphere of science as well as true religion. Because we can know by the light of human reason which comes first, Faith isn't emotional blind submission to the unknowable.
Faith is an intellectual assent of the mind to something not seen with the physical eye; the acceptance of a truth upon the authority of someone else. In true religion, it's Divine Authority, taking God at His word.
In science it's dependence upon human authority, that may or may not be right despite its personal integrity.
Q. # 1, No, only God the First Cause can create life, especially human life. God created man and woman so taht they could effectively partner and cooperate with God in the creation of new offspring.
Q #2, I have no idea.
Myfist0 posts #100
Regarding the highlighted...I am one of the those who say this. It seems to me they go hand in hand in that it would be impossible to pursue God and not pursue perfection at the same time.
As to your second statement, yes there is the one, perfect religion and Almighty God Himself gave it to us.
Here's my reasoning. Almighty God in His Mercy and Goodness did not leave us high and dry in these pursuits. For our road map, He gave us His holy (perfect) religion which started out as Hebraic Old Covenant religion fulfilled in Christ's New Covenant Church and religion known as Christianity and by Christianity I mean Catholic Christianity.
Christ gave us a Church and the Church gave us Oral (Sacred Tradition) and Written Revelation, (Sacred Scripture), both of which are God's communication of Himself to mankind. The great teachings and dogmas and definitions proclaimed by the Chruch as contained in Revelation or issuing from it are light- bearing; possessing them we are in the light of God's grace.
In that light, we can grow, in other words, become holy or perfect.
Sorry Lula ... let me see if I can catch up ...
I need a break from the Middle East ...
This is nothing short of strong-arming your way to your perfection ... over the blood of the people ... just as the USG does. Our soldiers are the best in the world and they cannot be directly defeated, but they are just doing their job ... relying on the veracity of the USG. And you are soldiers of the church ... the best in the world and you cannot be directly defeated, but you are just doing your job ... relying on the veracity of the Church. They are both liars …
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:
Sign in or Create Account
