Truth is Relative ?

[Mike 1967]

But, if i try to explain this to anyone, then it is me forming my perception of that truth based on my experiences and limited understanding.

What you are describing has nothing to do with the Truth. It has to do with your ability to perceive and communicate it.

If I am reading you correctly, it appears that you have your cart before the horse.

Any Truth that exists, exists regardless of your perception or understanding. If you have an incorrect or incomplete knowledge of a given Truth...then that Truth is not impacted..... What is impacted is your understanding of that Truth and your ability to communicate that Truth.

But that Truth is not contingent upon your understanding or ability to communicate.

If Truth was contingent upon your understaning...then you would be all powerful God. But even that would not logically follow, because an all powerful God, by definition, is omnicient. And if you are omnicient...then there is no perception...there is only complete knowledge.

 

[Mike 1967]

There is no "truth" .. there is only the perception of truth. What we claim as "fact" is simply our beliefs backed by some form of evidence. However, you can find evidence to prove or disprove just about anything if you dedicate enough time.

By the way.

You just contradicted yourself.

You said..that there is no truth. But to say that there is no truth is to make an absolute statement.

 

[Hoov]

What you are describing has nothing to do with the Truth. It has to do with your ability to perceive and communicate it.

If I am reading you correctly, it appears that you have your cart before the horse.

Any Truth that exists, exists regardless of your perception or understanding. If you have an incorrect or incomplete knowledge of a given Truth...then that Truth is not impacted..... What is impacted is your understanding of that Truth and your ability to communicate that Truth.

But that Truth is not contingent upon your understanding or ability to communicate.

If Truth was contingent upon your understaning...then you would be all powerful God. But even that would not logically follow, because an all powerful God, by definition, is omnicient. And if you are omnicient...then there is no perception...there is only complete knowledge.

yes that is what i was saying. something that is truth will exist and be what it is regardless of whether anyone perceives it correctly. It still is what it is. My point is that much of what people claim to be truth is always going to be colored by their own individuality, even if a perfect revelations is put forth to an individual, as soon as it enters the mind, the mind immedialtely compares this new knowledge to the current database of stored memories, and at that instant the revelation becomes tainted, colored if you will by that persons mind.
So, when you talked about God being all knowing, you are right in saying there would be no perception only knowledge. That is why the energy of God at the purest level is just energy, there is no thinking, no perception, it just is, just pure energy. Then as it filters down there is an understanding of itself, and awareness that it exists, then you have motive, direction and action fueled by a desire that being has to know and understand more about itself. And it continues to filter down to lower levels still and it empties itself or divides itself so that it can interract with itself, so that the one multiplies so that it can have various experiences of itself.

And so forth, so then you see that that is what living beings are. we are collectively the only God that there could ever be. Since in the beginning there was just one and nothing else, it follows that everything else must be a manifestation of that one. If there was just one (God) and everything is/was created by that God, the what did God use to create the universe, what material did God use to create creation, God must have created everything out of its own being, its own essence.

 

[Mike 1967]

So, when you talked about God being all knowing, you are right in saying there would be no perception only knowledge. That is why the energy of God at the purest level is just energy, there is no thinking, no perception, it just is, just pure energy. Then as it filters down there is an understanding of itself, and awareness that it exists, then you have motive, direction and action fueled by a desire that being has to know and understand more about itself. And it continues to filter down to lower levels still and it empties itself or divides itself so that it can interract with itself, so that the one multiplies so that it can have various experiences of itself.

And so forth, so then you see that that is what living beings are. we are collectively the only God that there could ever be. Since in the beginning there was just one and nothing else, it follows that everything else must be a manifestation of that one. If there was just one (God) and everything is/was created by that God, the what did God use to create the universe, what material did God use to create creation, God must have created everything out of its own being, its own essence.

Exactly how did you come to this conclusion ?

On the one hand you tell me that much of what people perceive to be true is colored by thier own perception and experience.....then in the same breath you are attempting to tell me something that God would only know.

As far as the concept of a creating God. You appear to be limiting God in your discourse.

To say that God must intrinsically create something from Himself is to say that God cannot simply create something from nothing.

What if I were to say that God could intrinsically create matter out of nothing. And what if I were to say that God could create life out of nothing ?

 

[WV Cowboy]

As far as the concept of a creating God. You appear to be limiting God in your discourse.

To say that God must intrinsically create something from Himself is to say that God cannot simply create something from nothing.

What if I were to say that God could intrinsically create matter out of nothing. And what if I were to say that God could create life out of nothing ?

Not only did he create it, but uniquely, awesomely, he spoke the universe into existence.

And God said, "Let there be light," and there was light.

And God said, "Let there be an expanse between the waters to separate water from water."

And God said, "Let the water under the sky be gathered to one place, and let dry ground appear."

Then God said, "Let the land produce vegetation: seed-bearing plants and trees on the land that bear fruit with seed in it, according to their various kinds."

And God said, "Let there be lights in the expanse of the sky to separate the day from the night, and let them serve as signs to mark seasons and days and years, 15 and let them be lights in the expanse of the sky to give light on the earth."

And God said, "Let the water teem with living creatures, and let birds fly above the earth across the expanse of the sky."

And God said, "Let the land produce living creatures according to their kinds: livestock, creatures that move along the ground, and wild animals, each according to its kind."

Then God said, "Let us make man in our image, in our likeness, and let them rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air, over the livestock, over all the earth, and over all the creatures that move along the ground."

And it was so.

To believe anything less than that is discrediting the All-mighty, Creator God of the Universe.

 

[Hoov]

Not only did he create it, but uniquely, awesomely, he spoke the universe into existence.

And God said, "Let there be light," and there was light.

And God said, "Let there be an expanse between the waters to separate water from water."

And God said, "Let the water under the sky be gathered to one place, and let dry ground appear."

Then God said, "Let the land produce vegetation: seed-bearing plants and trees on the land that bear fruit with seed in it, according to their various kinds."

And God said, "Let there be lights in the expanse of the sky to separate the day from the night, and let them serve as signs to mark seasons and days and years, 15 and let them be lights in the expanse of the sky to give light on the earth."

And God said, "Let the water teem with living creatures, and let birds fly above the earth across the expanse of the sky."

And God said, "Let the land produce living creatures according to their kinds: livestock, creatures that move along the ground, and wild animals, each according to its kind."

Then God said, "Let us make man in our image, in our likeness, and let them rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air, over the livestock, over all the earth, and over all the creatures that move along the ground."

And it was so.

To believe anything less than that is discrediting the All-mighty, Creator God of the Universe.

yo guys, i think this thread is gonna get closed. if we kept it philosphoical that would be ok, but we cant interject our own religion.

 

[Mike 1967]

Is the thread on Is Truth Relative considered to be Religious ?

 

[Mike 1967]

yo guys, i think this thread is gonna get closed. if we kept it philosphoical that would be ok, but we cant interject our own religion.

But...you are the first one that interjected his religion.

But since your "Religion" is more eastern mysticism than Judo-Christian in nature....it is ok.

It is very obvious to anyone that cares to look that this is not an issue about "Religion".... this is specifically an issue about "Christ".

 

[WoodysGirl]

Is the thread on Is Truth Relative considered to be Religious ?

It wasn't until someone injected God into it. If it goes back to the original philosophical form, without the religious perspective on it, it should be fine. If not, well...

 

[Mike 1967]

It wasn't until someone injected God into it. If it goes back to the original philosophical form, without the religious perspective on it, it should be fine. If not, well...

Cool

 

[Mike 1967]

yo guys, i think this thread is gonna get closed. if we kept it philosphoical that would be ok, but we cant interject our own religion.

Hoov

I am bowing out of the discussion.

Any good philisophical discussion is ultimately going to lead to a discussion of a higher power. And that discussion is against the law.

This is a Cowboys Forum after all :

 

[Hoov]

Exactly how did you come to this conclusion ?

On the one hand you tell me that much of what people perceive to be true is colored by thier own perception and experience.....then in the same breath you are attempting to tell me something that God would only know.

As far as the concept of a creating God. You appear to be limiting God in your discourse.

To say that God must intrinsically create something from Himself is to say that God cannot simply create something from nothing.

What if I were to say that God could intrinsically create matter out of nothing. And what if I were to say that God could create life out of nothing ?

Well, that would be the fundamental point that would determine if your scenario is more likely than mine, its just i beleive it is more likely the way i said. But your right, as i said it is my opinion colored by my own thinking and experiences.

But what about your statement that God or the creator, if being all knowing, would only know and not perceive. did you mean he would know and so his knowledge would be classified as true and not a perception, or did you mean as i thought, that that being would have some knowledge and would not think or perceive or judge about anything, it would just be a pure awareness, not a thinking and judging being.

 

[Mike 1967]

But what about your statement that God or the creator, if being all knowing, would only know and not perceive. did you mean he would know and so his knowledge would be classified as true and not a perception, or did you mean as i thought, that that being would have some knowledge and would not think or perceive or judge about anything, it would just be a pure awareness, not a thinking and judging being.

That is an excellent question....

But unfortunately it is not allowed

 

[BrAinPaiNt]

That is an excellent question....

But unfortunately it is not allowed

Sure it is allowed...via PMs or on the other site mentioned numerous times.

If you do not wish to persue the other avenues in order to talk of the topic you wish to discuss...then no need to make light of the decision to not talk about it on this forum.

In other words all you have to do is to go to the other board or do so via PMs...but seeminly find it easier to keep questioning the decision on this board.

Not really sure why it is so hard to go to the other site, in order to discuss what you seem to want to discuss.

 

[royhitshard]

huh??????

 

[Concord]

Not only did he create it, but uniquely, awesomely, he spoke the universe into existence.

QUOTE]

And ConcordCowboy Spoke and said BS and it WAS!

 

[Hoov]

Not only did he create it, but uniquely, awesomely, he spoke the universe into existence.

QUOTE]

And ConcordCowboy Spoke and said BS and it WAS!

You instigator............. that was funny though

 

[Concord]

You instigator............. that was funny though

Thank You...For taking it for what it was...to be funny!

People need to relax sometimes, especially when it comes to religion.

Not everyone is going to see it your way and that doesn't mean they're wrong....Because in the end no one can prove anything it's all based on Faith.

I personally like mine...Faith Hill!

 

[TruBlueCowboy]

Thank You...For taking it for what it was...to be funny!

People need to relax sometimes, especially when it comes to religion.

Not everyone is going to see it your way and that doesn't mean they're wrong....Because in the end no one can prove anything it's all based on Faith.

I personally like mine...Faith Hill!

I'd definitely start going to church more often if she was my preacher!