Theists and the Truth

[TagliatelliMonster]

It does matter.
I think certain élites in Brussels pass their time to defraud and deceive the European peoples.

I don't care what you think, especially when it concerns your paranoid political delusional conspiracy ideas.

It doesn't matter to the point at hand.
You conveniently ignored the main point of the post again: you seriously confuse "truth" with mere opinion / beliefs.

Truth is demonstrable. Regardless of what people say / claim / believe.

 

[Estro Felino]

I don't care what you think, especially when it concerns your paranoid political delusional conspiracy ideas.

It doesn't matter to the point at hand.
You conveniently ignored the main point of the post again: you seriously confuse "truth" with mere opinion / beliefs.

Truth is demonstrable. Regardless of what people say / claim / believe.

And that's the difference between a theist and an atheist.
A theist believes in an hereafter where Gold will tell her/him if certain élites defrauded the people.

An atheist believes he/she will die with the doubt

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

And that's the difference between a theist and an atheist.

An atheist doesn't confuse mere beliefs / opinion / claims with truth?
I'll agree to that insofar as the subject matter is religious claims / beliefs.

A theist believes in an hereafter where Gold will tell her/him if certain élites defrauded the people.
An atheist believes he/she will die with the doubt

Or like I said it, which you felt the need to argue about for some reason: for an atheist, truth is discovered and not handed to you on a platter.
So to find out truth, research and evidence gathering has to happen. One has to actually roll up ones sleeves and get to work.

There are no shortcuts in life. If you wish to accomplish something (like finding out truth), you need to actually put in the work.

 

[Estro Felino]

Or like I said it, which you felt the need to argue about for some reason: for an atheist, truth is discovered and not handed to you on a platter.
So to find out truth, research and evidence gathering has to happen. One has to actually roll up ones sleeves and get to work.

I won't discover a truth. I want the Truth. Capitalized.
You can say that living in Belgium, you somehow discovered that the EU élites are all saints. All immaculate, sinless, holy angels.
But that's your personal truth.

There are no shortcuts in life. If you wish to accomplish something (like finding out truth), you need to actually put in the work.

I already do. Certain truths are very, very, very hard to find.

 

[Polymath257]

In the OP I asked a question: are atheists interested in the Truth?
You did not answer this question, but other atheists have.

I am interested in the truth, whether capitalized for drama or not.

But, the only way to get to know the truth is by investigation, forming hypotheses, and testing those hypotheses against more observation. It is crucial to look for alternative explanations for any case.

I don't expect the truth will be handed to me. Instead, I (or someone) has to do the grunt work of investigation and testing.

Are there things we may never know? Yes. Evidence gets destroyed and, sometimes, we simply don't have enough left to make a conclusion. That can be frustrating or depressing, but it is another fact of life.

It does matter.
I think certain élites in Brussels pass their time to defraud and deceive the European peoples.

OK, based on what evidence? What testing have you done on that hypothesis? What alternative explanations have you considered? How have you tried to show your hypothesis to be false?

And, as a theist, if you die and God tells you that no such organized fraud and deception were there, would you give up your belief? If God verified that JFK was billed by Oswald acting alone, what would you say?

 

[Estro Felino]

I am interested in the truth, whether capitalized for drama or not.
But, the only way to get to know the truth is by investigation, forming hypotheses, and testing those hypotheses against more observation. It is crucial to look for alternative explanations for any case.

I totally agree.

I don't expect the truth will be handed to me. Instead, I (or someone) has to do the grunt work of investigation and testing.

Neither do I. I don't expect any human being to hand it to me. But God is not a human being.

Are there things we may never know? Yes. Evidence gets destroyed and, sometimes, we simply don't have enough left to make a conclusion. That can be frustrating or depressing, but it is another fact of life.

Of course. But this means that injustice reigns in this world. Justice is a meaningless concept, then.

OK, based on what evidence? What testing have you done on that hypothesis? What alternative explanations have you considered? How have you tried to show your hypothesis to be false?

I said: "I think, I guess", which means "I suspect".
Which means I don't know whether I am right. That's why I need to die to figure it out.

And, as a theist, if you die and God tells you that no such organized fraud and deception were there, would you give up your belief? If God verified that JFK was billed by Oswald acting alone, what would you say?

I will be satisfied with that answer since God is Truth.
That demonstrates that I am a humble person, because I don't claim I possess the Truth.
I claim that only God possesses it.

 

[Polymath257]

I totally agree.

Neither do I. I don't expect any human being to hand it to me. But God is not a human being.

I don't expect *any* entity to just hand me the truth.

Of course. But this means that injustice reigns in this world. Justice is a meaningless concept, then.

I don't think that follows. It is hard to find and to bring about. But that doesn't make it meaningless. In fact, just the opposite.

I said: "I think, I guess", which means "I suspect".
Which means I don't know whether I am right. That's why I need to die to figure it out.

I will be satisfied with that answer since God is Truth.
That demonstrates that I am a humble person, because I don't claim I possess the Truth.
I claim that only God possesses it.

I don't think that any entity has the whole truth.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

I won't discover a truth. I want the Truth. Capitalized.

What's the difference? 6th time I asked. No answers are forthcoming.

You can say that living in Belgium, you somehow discovered that the EU élites are all saints. All immaculate, sinless, holy angels.
But that's your personal truth.

I never made any such claim.

I already do. Certain truths are very, very, very hard to find.

Look harder.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

I am interested in the truth, whether capitalized for drama or not.

Coffee almost came out of my nose from laughing

 

[Estro Felino]

What's the difference? 6th time I asked. No answers are forthcoming.

Did you answer all of my questions?
Quid pro quo. Answer mine and I will answer yours.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Did you answer all of my questions?

Which didn't I answer?

Quid pro quo. Answer mine and I will answer yours.

Myeah, I'm not buying it. Your posting history suggests you'll always find another excuse.

 

[Estro Felino]

Which didn't I answer?

Did OJ Simpson kill Nicole Brown and Ron Goldman, in your opinion?

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Did OJ Simpson kill Nicole Brown and Ron Goldman, in your opinion?

I don't know anything about that, nor does it interest me.

Your turn now.
What is the difference between "truth" and "Truth".

 

[Estro Felino]

I don't know anything about that, nor does it interest me.

Do you think that the CIA didn't kill JFK?

Your turn now.
What is the difference between "truth" and "Truth".

I cannot explain it to you unless you answer my question about JFK first.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Do you think that the CIA didn't kill JFK?

I don't know.
Of all stories I heared, I think the mob hit one is plausible.
But I don't know.

I cannot explain it to you unless you answer my question about JFK first.

What's the difference between "truth" and "Truth"?

(8th time asked, still no answers - will you have yet another excuse?)

 

[Estro Felino]

I don't know.
Of all stories I heard, I think the mob hit one is plausible.
But I don't know.

Thanks. Perfect.
To so many American people, the Truth is that Oswald was the only perpetrator. They are blinded by their own ego, they will deny there were at least two mafia's hitmen on the crime scene.
The US Government's official truth is that Oswald was the only perpetrator.

But that's their truth. The Truth (capitalized) is the historical truth. Who really had JFK killed and why. And whether they used some mafiosi as hitmen, and blamed Oswald.

See? I showed you the difference between truth and Truth.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Thanks. Perfect.
To so many American people, the Truth is that Oswald was the only perpetrator. They are blinded by their own ego, they will deny there were at least two mafia's hitmen on the crime scene.
The US Government's official truth is that Oswald was the only perpetrator.

But that's their truth. The Truth (capitalized) is the historical truth. Who really had JFK killed and why. And whether they used some mafiosi as hitmen, and blamed Oswald.

See? I showed you the difference between truth and Truth.

So just like I figured.....

What you mean by "truth" is mere belief / opinion.
And what you mean by "Truth" is simply demonstrability. Aka "truth".

Just like I said then... you confuse mere beliefs / claims / opinions with "truth".

I suggest you start using words correctly.

 

[Estro Felino]

And what you mean by "Truth" is simply demonstrability. Aka "truth".

No.
Truth capitalized is the historical truth.
Demonstrations can also be falsified.

Example: the fact that you were born in Belgium is the historical truth.

 

[Stevicus]

So maybe the difference is that "truth" (uncapitalized) is what we can handle, whereas we can't handle the "Truth," which might be said to be the ultimate truth.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

No.

Yes.

Example: the fact that you were born in Belgium is the historical truth.

And this can be verified and demonstrated. It's the truth.
If somebody else believes I was born in Albania, because some guy said so... then that is not "truth". Then that is mere belief. And what the guy said was just a claim.

I'm amazed that you are arguing this...
Your post was crystal clear.

What you mean by "truth" is mere belief / claim / opinion (maybe true, maybe not; not in evidence; not demonstrable)
What you mean by "Truth" is mere truth (factual, verifiable, demonstrable).

So... you use words incorrectly. You define them differently then the rest of us. This makes communication unnecessarily difficult.