All truths are gods truth.

[Amorphos]

All truths are gods truth.

I am using the notion of 'god' here so as to put everything in to one place – so to say. If god is truth then surely all truths belong to him, this isn't just christian truth or any other given set of truths, it is all truths. This must include any given truth spoken by anyone and it doesn't matter if it is spoken by god or man! So when we find a scientific or philosophical truth then these too all go into the same pot, i mean if god were creator then he would have to create a universe of logic and law or else it would be a nonsense. It would be like having all cheats to a game, if it doesn't go how you want it then you just change everything so that it does, and nothing would be achieved. In this universe there are always 'new truths' occurring, so not even god can know all truths and there is never a time when all-truth is a whole entity unless there is an absolute end to things, yet then there would be simply nothing including truth.

gods truth or the truth is the same no matter where it comes from, if jesus says a truth it is the same as if einstien or some crazy hermit says a given truth. a truth is a truth!

Ok i wont babble on for this one, i'll leave the notion open for debate.


To find truth and god is to find yourself, or to prove god exists is the same as to prove you exist.

[Garbarsardar]

But we have to kill some of the lesser gods, right?

[Amorphos]

not neccesarily – the lesser gods could be seen as aspects of the truth as like in Hinduism.

[Tom Paine]

You seem to define truth oddly; a truth is that which, according to the most common definitions, is something accepted by the majority; that has a corresponding fact in the universe; or that is pragmaticly true. Which definition of truth are you using here, or a different one altogether?

[Amorphos]

I am thinking of truth as any given truth, be it universal, subjective or particular. [etcetera].

[Tom Paine]

So conflicting truths still are God's truths? They are the same thing, effectively? A conflicting subjective truth (it is wrong to kill) is the same as the opposing truth (it is right to kill)?

[Ummon]

Certainly, all truths are God's truth, as clearly stated even in the Bible. The problem is finding truths.

So conflicting truths still are God's truths? They are the same thing, effectively? A conflicting subjective truth (it is wrong to kill) is the same as the opposing truth (it is right to kill)?

Conflicting truths are not truths. They are merely not-yet-refuted lies.

[Amorphos]

TGS, i wouldn't agree with your opposite there as being a truth! [right to kill] Perhaps you have a better example to a good point made!

Ummon,

Certainly, all truths are God's truth, as clearly stated even in the Bible. The problem is finding truths.

Eh! did you actually read the post? It stated and means that all-truths are gods truth weather or not they are scientific or of any given religion. Remember the crazy hermit part? And that 'any truth' by any person be it god, einstien or you, remains a truth. It can come from any religion even paganism – i have a lot of respect for pythagoras and the ancient greek pagan philosophers generally – would you really say that nothing they said was true? Or that science has no truths!

[Ummon]

TGS, i wouldn't agree with your opposite there as being a truth! [right to kill] Perhaps you have a better example to a good point made!

Ummon,

Eh! did you actually read the post? It stated and means that all-truths are gods truth weather or not they are scientific or of any given religion. Remember the crazy hermit part? And that 'any truth' by any person be it god, einstien or you, remains a truth. It can come from any religion even paganism – i have a lot of respect for pythagoras and the ancient greek pagan philosophers generally – would you really say that nothing they said was true? Or that science has no truths!

The problem is that I am not referring to science. Nor to religion. Truth is beyond human opinion, and saying that any opinion is truth is therefore wrong, although of course, in a small way, all opinions are true since truth is unattainable. But essentially, no.

[Tom Paine]

The problem is that I am not referring to science. Nor to religion. Truth is beyond human opinion, and saying that any opinion is truth is therefore wrong, although of course, in a small way, all opinions are true since truth is unattainable. But essentially, no.

Truth is not beyond human opinion. Subjective truths exist because we are human; dependant on our definition of truth, anyway. But there is no corresponding fact to give us "It is wrong to kill"; that is not objective but subjective truth and a matter of opinion.

All right, another example; taking subjective truths, still. How about that Newtonian physics are accurate? They are still used in many areas, yet are superseded at the extremes by Einsteinian physics. So which is true, given that they are contradictory?

[Amorphos]

Zenith,

yes the heresies abound. I don't see how i was saying that a truthful deed is the same as a truth in words, i was only saying about truth generally of which may be expressed linguistically or in form and in deeds. The truth in my opinion is that god is not mono or poly nor even universal as these are measures of given things, yet 'god' is not definable in any of these terms any more than the truth of who we are may be defined so. Equally we may use terms like quantum or infinity to describe natures of reality that 'fit' the meanings yet reality itself is not set to those terms.

Christ was incorrect in his assertion that he was the son of god in a direct context – if that is what he meant. I would say that no one nor any group religion etc, has a monopoly on truth! Hinduism and Christianity, islam etc, may have truths to them yet cannot be the entire truth. The whole and the complete e.g. A given truth or entity, cannot be obtained in absolute terms as obviously there would be nothing else bar that specific absolute [whatever it is]. Also truth is an on going thing thus some truths are as yet unknown perhaps even to god [hence we exist?].

I'll gladly remain a heretic as all others are heretical to me and mine, :tooth:

seriously i don't want to be of any given religion as many of their truths are being or will be superseded. Apart from that I don't need a safety blanket and i view religion generally as infantile and ridiculous. [irrespective of what individual truths they hold].


time for you earthlings to grow up!


ummon, you were refering to religion hence the term bible was used, and you meant it as in 'the bible is the truth' didnt you. intersting point you make now though - i'll think on it.

[Zenith Darksea]

All truths are gods truth.

I am using the notion of 'god' here so as to put everything in to one place – so to say. If god is truth then surely all truths belong to him, this isn't just christian truth or any other given set of truths, it is all truths. This must include any given truth spoken by anyone and it doesn't matter if it is spoken by god or man! So when we find a scientific or philosophical truth then these too all go into the same pot, i mean if god were creator then he would have to create a universe of logic and law or else it would be a nonsense. It would be like having all cheats to a game, if it doesn't go how you want it then you just change everything so that it does, and nothing would be achieved. In this universe there are always 'new truths' occurring, so not even god can know all truths and there is never a time when all-truth is a whole entity unless there is an absolute end to things, yet then there would be simply nothing including truth.

gods truth or the truth is the same no matter where it comes from, if jesus says a truth it is the same as if einstien or some crazy hermit says a given truth. a truth is a truth!

Ok i wont babble on for this one, i'll leave the notion open for debate.

Well, leaving aside the blatant heresies contained this post, I'll show you your problem.

Thucydides would have words to say about this. He always stressed the significance of the difference betweenerga (deeds) and logoi (words). You're making the mistake of believing that if someone says something, then it is a truth in deed as well as in word. But this is completely impossible at any rate.

For example, some people say that there is more than one God, and you say that there is just one. Which of these 'truths' is correct? And if God doesn't even know His truths, how can he be God?

To take the example of Christianity. Christ tells us that He is the only mediator between man and God. You would agree that this is one of God's truths. Yet you'd also (apparently) agree that Hinduism or some other religion is also a way to God. They can't both be true!

If I were you, I'd stay off the radical heresy and stick to one religion, whichever you choose. I'm sure that those statements of yours are heretical in most of the world's major religions.

[Zenith Darksea]

I'm sorry, but I don't see how you can use the word 'truth'. You don't seem to be referring to definitive and absolute truths, merely to opinions.

[Tom Paine]

Isn't that all truth is, commonly and widely accepted opinion, possibly backed up by a corresponding fact in the world?

[Zenith Darksea]

No.

EDIT - Perhaps I should explain further. 'Truth' is a definitive fact - something that cannot be wrong due to its irreversible existence. Now, you are referring of course to perception of truth, but that is a different matter. Again, we see the contrast between logos and ergon.

[Tom Paine]

So you are using the correspondence truth, a truth must have a corresponding fact; but does that not make moral "truths", or religious "truths", not in fact truths?

[Zenith Darksea]

No, I don't think it does. Why would you say that a religious truth cannot have a corresponding fact? Just because it is not a physical fact that a human may necessarily be able to experience does not mean that it cannot be a fact.

[DarkKnight]

No, I don't think it does. Why would you say that a religious truth cannot have a corresponding fact? Just because it is not a physical fact that a human may not necessarily be able to experience does not mean that it cannot be a fact.

Experience leaves the truth up to interpretation of what was percieved.

[Tom Paine]

No, I don't think it does. Why would you say that a religious truth cannot have a corresponding fact? Just because it is not a physical fact that a human may necessarily be able to experience does not mean that it cannot be a fact.

So then you would argue religious truths could have a corresponding fact, fine, let's accept that; but what about a moral "truth"? How can a moral truth even approach a corresponding fact?

[Zenith Darksea]

So then you would argue religious truths could have a corresponding fact, fine, let's accept that; but what about a moral "truth"? How can a moral truth even approach a corresponding fact?

Well morality is indeed an intangible concept. However, religious morality is derived from God - an innate part of the Christian Mysteries (to use the appropriate Orthodox terminology which is sadly not so popular in the West) is the absolute nature of God, He being the Alpha and Omega. Since God has decreed a certain moral code, it must be a fact, intangible, but still a fact.