• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Truth is not constant.

Spirit of Light

Be who ever you want
like Sodom and Gomorrah needed to die

and someone bargained
if 100 men are good.....spare the all the people?
yeah
if 10 men are good.....spare all the people?
yeah
if but one man is good.....spare the people?

and the one man was removed from the people
and the people were not spared

did I get that right?
The truth in your words can be found in the Bible, so yes you are right
 

ChristineM

"Be strong", I whispered to my coffee.
Premium Member
Truth change according to what level of wisdom a person has achieved.
It means two people do not see the same truth, because no person hold the exact same wisdom level.
Relative truth and conditional truth are two different truths, but they are both true.


I see truth as "that which is true or in accordance with fact or reality."

Some people see it as "a belief that is accepted as true"

I prefer my version, there is less confusion and people know what truth you are actually talking about because truth is the same for everyone.
 

exchemist

Veteran Member
That seems to be saying that if we don't know everything that we cannot know anything.
I don't have to know how a rock formed in order to know that it massed 1kg.

I'm not so sure. Once, we thought the mass of an object was constant. Now, since the early c.20th, we think that if the temperature of your rock changes, so does its mass. So our conception of even that has changed.

But fair enough, I do accept there are things we can say to be true, given that we define the limits of what we mean sufficiently precisely. And a great deal more things can be said to be approximately true, or true enough to treat as true without worrying pedantically about the constraints on their strict validity.
 

ppp

Well-Known Member
As assessed from your current level of wisdom? ;)
Like I said. Echo chamber politics. No meaning. His (and your?) definition is ego driven; designed to declare anyone who does not buy his (and your?) opinion as truth to be at a lower level of "wisdom". It's the standard classist claptrap that we have seen from humans through the history of our species.

"...an echo chamber is a metaphorical description of a situation in which beliefs are amplified or reinforced by communication and repetition inside a closed system and insulates them from rebuttal."
 

Spirit of Light

Be who ever you want
Like I said. Echo chamber politics. No meaning. His (and your?) definition is ego driven; designed to declare anyone who does not buy his (and your?) opinion as truth to be at a lower level of "wisdom". It's the standard classist claptrap that we have seen from humans through the history of our species.

"...an echo chamber is a metaphorical description of a situation in which beliefs are amplified or reinforced by communication and repetition inside a closed system and insulates them from rebuttal."
So my question was ego driven :confused:

Since truth is not constant, I guess that prove I do not hold the full truth, ergo not driven from an ego saying I know better then you.

My question or OP are often made so discussion occur. That do not mean I know everything. I ask to get others views and understanding.
 

Onoma

Active Member
I get what OP is saying, I think..

A great example is where Einstein was once quoted as saying that “There is not the slightest indication that [nuclear energy] will ever be obtainable ", yet that same year Fermi successfully split the uranium atom. By 1939 they understood it was possible to create a chain reaction

I think when you start invoking mathematics though, the question of " Do proofs exist independent of the mind ? " should come into play, iow " Does immutable truth exist independently, or is all truth mutable ? "

The mathematician Paul Erdőse spoke of " The Book ", a visualization of a book in which God had written down the best and most elegant proofs for mathematical theorems. He himself doubted the existence of God, whom he called the "Supreme Fascist" (SF). He accused God of hiding his socks and Hungarian passports, and of keeping the most elegant mathematical proofs to Himself.
 

Thief

Rogue Theologian
keeping the most elegant mathematical proofs to Himself.
and of course....one equation was enough to inspire the bomb

and politics enough to find a use for it

if God surrendered His power of creation......

oh oh
 

mikkel_the_dane

My own religion
I see truth as "that which is true or in accordance with fact or reality."

Some people see it as "a belief that is accepted as true"

I prefer my version, there is less confusion and people know what truth you are actually talking about because truth is the same for everyone.

But you can't see that as see.

If we are play this game there are several kinds of truth even in philosophy.
 

Spirit of Light

Be who ever you want
If that is an earnest question, then warrant it. If it is simply a prop for more rhetoric, no thanks.
It was asked in honesty. Reason being to me it often seems like everybody is wrong except for you, according to your posting. But I could be wrong.
 
Top