- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
Cnsl1 wrote:
This has been an interesting topic.
I found a flaw in one of Silent’s arguments (though no flaw in his character, heh). He mentioned (I’m summarizing and apologize if I didn’t get it quite right but I’m often lazy and don’t like to fish for quotations) that it would not be fair or just for reason and logic to be the primary mechanisms to discover truth because some people just don’t have as much in the brains department, and that God wouldn’t do that to dummies because he loves all of us, everyone…. But wait, a person can increase their spiritual awareness through prayer, fasting, exercising faith, etc. Yet, a person can also increase their logic, reasoning, and understanding through education, reading, and study. Would God give us only ONE mechanism? By the mouths of two or three witnesses shall truth be established. Maybe the witnesses are spiritual, intellectual, and … intuition? Experience?
IF there is truth to be uncovered, I believe that God requires and expects us to obtain it or understand it by as many modalities as we can. To me, that only makes sense.
It’s the “truth” part that seems slippery to me.
I think the idea that two or three witnesses may refer to spirituality, intellectualism, and perhaps even experience. I’ve never thought of it that way before.
Cadence wrote:Never thought of myself as a secularist. To much liberal thought goes along with the term for me personally.
Well then, I’ll take it back.
Cadence wrote:I just believe you go with the evidence and observation, you follow the path that has proven results regardless of ideology. So I guess I do lean to the scientific.
If the evidence is subjective and not objective, what do you do? Do you accept it as ‘real’, regardless? Science cannot. Is there a relationship in your mind between “ideology” and “belief”, as you use the terms? Or “faith”? If so, it seems to me that in your world, faith cannot produce meaningful evidence. Is that your view?
Cadence wrote:No such thing as flat out truth. I was just trying to point out if there is one truth and God speaks only the truth then it seems logical that he would speak exactly the same to everyone and everyone would get the same answer. So are there varying degrees of truth which accounts for all the varying theology’s or is God not speaking and we make it all up. Very black and white approach I know.
But what if the ‘truth’ is only meaningful in a subjective way? Then you will legitimately get millions/billions of different answers. I recall a professor of Religion at Arizona State University that stated at the beginning of class: “In this course, our definition of truth is: whatever two or more people agree upon”. You know why? Because it was not then subjective. What fun. It could still be defined then in terms of millions or billions of legitimate views of ‘truth’.
Cadence wrote:Again my very black and white approach. I am not very good at nuance.
Religion and the individual is all about nuance. Like mythology.HiJolly
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.