Truth is not constant.

[Evangelicalhumanist]

The realization that heaven is a different dimension then the physical world, and that to gain access to that realm or dimension a human being must cultivate the mind and body. In other words, remove every impurity within our mind and body

I can't even begin to make sense of that, of course. To begin with, a "dimension" is not a place, it's a measurable extent of some nature, like length, height, breadth, extent of time, etc. So to describe heaven as "a different dimension than the physical world" is in its very essence a meaningless statement. Now, if you said that heaven was a dimension further than the physical world, that would be something else, but then, it would of necessity encompass the physical world and thus retain all its impurities.

Also, given that our bodies are actually comprised of probably more "impurities," and that we would be dead in an instant without them, makes striving to remove them a most unlikely enterprise. A sample male of, let's say 150 pounds would have something like 30 trillion human cells, and at any given time up to 39 trillion bacterial cells, many of which he depends upon for life function. (After a good poop, you may temporarily reduce the ration to 50:50 for a while, but it soon goes back up.)

 

[ChristineM]

Okay. It is late so I will be lazy:
Truth | Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy

If you don't want to read it, I get it. Then you will have to wait until later.

Regards
Mikkel

Truth : that which is true or in accordance with fact or reality.

Oxford English Dictionary



See also the Oxford University Press
The difference between “Truth” and “truth” | OUPblog

There are two types of Truth, one absolute and the other manufactured to suit humans. We’ll call absolute Truth, based on empirical evidence and objective reasons, the kind with a letter “T” in caps. We will call human-concocted notions that gain wide-spread acceptance as truths, with a small “t”. “Truths” and “truths” are decidedly different​

 

[Spirit of Light]

I can't even begin to make sense of that, of course. To begin with, a "dimension" is not a place, it's a measurable extent of some nature, like length, height, breadth, extent of time, etc. So to describe heaven as "a different dimension than the physical world" is in its very essence a meaningless statement. Now, if you said that heaven was a dimension further than the physical world, that would be something else, but then, it would of necessity encompass the physical world and thus retain all its impurities.

Also, given that our bodies are actually comprised of probably more "impurities," and that we would be dead in an instant without them, makes striving to remove them a most unlikely enterprise. A sample male of, let's say 150 pounds would have something like 30 trillion human cells, and at any given time up to 39 trillion bacterial cells, many of which he depends upon for life function. (After a good poop, you may temporarily reduce the ration to 50:50 for a while, but it soon goes back up.)

I did not expect you to understand.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

I did not expect you to understand.

No, I never understand when people use English words to mean something other than how those words are defined, and instead use the to mean something that only they know about -- and refuse to define so that others can understand what the heck you are trying to say.

I think this is the reason you struggle so hard with your very notion of "Truth," that you really haven't even got much of an idea of what it is you're looking for, let alone how to recognize it when you see it.

 

[Spirit of Light]

No, I never understand when people use English words to mean something other than how those words are defined, and instead use the to mean something that only they know about -- and refuse to define so that others can understand what the heck you are trying to say.

I think this is the reason you struggle so hard with your very notion of "Truth," that you really haven't even got much of an idea of what it is you're looking for, let alone how to recognize it when you see it.

You are aware of that I am not a native English speaker? And yes I do struggle with dyslexia.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

You are aware of that I am not a native English speaker? And yes I do struggle with dyslexia.

Have you ever had surgery, during which you were anaesthetized (put to sleep)?

 

[Spirit of Light]

Have you ever had surgery, during which you were anaesthetized (put to sleep)?

Yes 8 times in my life. Why?

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

Yes 8 times in my life. Why?

Where were "you" during those surgeries? What did you feel? What were you thinking? What do you remember about the time you were "under" anaesthesia?

 

[Spirit of Light]

Where were "you" during those surgeries? What did you feel? What were you thinking? What do you remember about the time you were "under" anaesthesia?

The main consciousness (primorial spirit) or "me" if you like, was knocked unconscious, so the "I" do not remember those hours I was under anesthesia.
What kept me alive is the subconscious, in my understanding sub consciousness is an individual spirit of me that keep us alive when we get knocked out for some time.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

The main consciousness (primorial spirit) or "me" if you like, was knocked unconscious, so the "I" do not remember those hours I was under anesthesia.
What kept me alive is the subconscious, in my understanding sub consciousness is an individual spirit of me that keep us alive when we get knocked out for some time.

So you have no idea whether or not your "sub-consciousness" was screaming in unbearable agony but totally unable to make itself heard?

 

[Spirit of Light]

So you have no idea whether or not your "sub-consciousness" was screaming in unbearable agony but totally unable to make itself heard?

I have not that form og connection with my sub-consiouesness no. What does that has to do with the OP?

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

I have not that form og connection with my sub-consiouesness no. What does that has to do with the OP?

Patience, Amanaki, we're getting there. The OP, and this thread, is about "Truth" not being constant. As you yourself said, in the OP, "Truth change according to what level of wisdom a person has achieved."

Now, included in that definition of "truth" are two very important concepts which you are merely assuming as given, but have not managed to define. I'm trying to help you get there. Those two concepts are "wisdom" (and its levels), and "person" (including what that person can achieve).

I'll leave you to think about that for one day, and get back to you tomorrow. But of those two concepts, "person" is far and away the more important. Ponder that, and we'll chat tomorrow.

 

[Polymath257]

Just to add this into the conversation - Do you think that science and what constitutes the scientific method is universal ? ( Something that would exist anywhere sentient life evolves - we could ask the same, but sub math or philosophy for science )

It's an interesting question. And the answer is--it depends on exactly what you mean.

For example, I would not expect another form of sentient life to develop the same mathematics as we have. To quote Kronecker, "natural numbers were created by God, everything else is the work of men". In other words, being able to count is probably universal, but I would suspect the specifics of, say, eigenvalues bounded linear operators, to be a human invention.

On the other hand, I would also suspect that any mathematics or logic that another sentient being makes up would be understandable by human mathematicians, given training and vice versa.

For physics, I would also suspect that even if the formulations differ, they would be mutually understandable and each would be able to check the experiments of the other, after learning some terminology and techniques. The same would be true of chemistry. Biology and the basis of biochemistry would likely be different, but mutually understandable and testable.

Philosophy I am pretty sure is NOT universal. It isn't even universal for humans, why would I expect it to be universal for other species? Sure, the issues will probably be similar (how is knowledge possible, if it is?), but I suspect the range of answers would be quite different.

And I have a similar feeling about religion. Given how many and varied the religions are the humans produce, I would be greatly surprised if another sentient species had anything close to what humans have.

In a sense, this is the distinction I make between 'knowledge', which is something another sentient species would agree upon given training, and opinion, which is not. And, I suspect that ALL of human spirituality is firmly in the 'opinion' category.

 

[Thief]

Like 2 and 2 do we need to be there in order to confirm the consequence of contact such as sound from the crash?

Do we need to be in the "presence" of truth for it to be so or is it independent of our presence and opinions?

well...reality will be there
whether we are present or not
our perceptions of it are not required

at this pivot point......
I perceive the quest for truth as a remedy for all the variables of perception

as the sun sets.....it sets for all

but some perceive a fear of the pending darkness
and others welcome the peaceful rest

 

[Thief]

I don't really care, i do know that gravity works though

and some believe the Carpenter walked on water

 

[Thief]

ah ... yes

You are conflating truth and Truth™.

as in separating the light from the darkness?

 

[URAVIP2ME]

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.

Subjective truth, objective truth.
I find when Pontius Pilate said, " What is truth? " at John 18:38 Pilate was in effect saying the concept of truth was too broad or too elusive to give attention.
However, both Pilate and Jesus were speaking about two (2) different truths.
When Jesus spoke of truth at times 'Jesus spoke about the truth' as when Jesus spoke or was referring to ' divine' truth, ' religious' truth - John 17:17.
That scriptural truth was absolute truth to Jesus because the Bible as truth is unchanging, eternal truth to Jesus.
Jesus made clear that there is a distinction between truth and lies, truth originates with God and Not with man.
So, the truth Jesus spoke about was Not about personal truth, Not personal opinion.
The truth Jesus taught would set people free - John 8:32
Free from religiously-false teachings, such as the dead are conscious - Psalms 115:17; Isaiah 38:18; Ecclesiastes 9:5; John 11:11-14.
Many people think of truth as Pilate did, general truth, or truth in general, that truth is Not absolute and ever changing because of the situation at hand.
Such free thought gives people the freedom to make their own determination of what is right or wrong. Bend truth to suit self.
Such free thought often does Not lead to healthy peace of mind and heart.

 

[ppp]

Subjective truth, objective truth.
I find when Pontius Pilate said, " What is truth? " at John 18:38 Pilate was in effect saying the concept of truth was too broad or too elusive to give attention.
However, both Pilate and Jesus were speaking about two (2) different truths.
When Jesus spoke of truth at times 'Jesus spoke about the truth' as when Jesus spoke or was referring to ' divine' truth, ' religious' truth - John 17:17.

I dont see any reason to believe either one of them

That scriptural truth was absolute truth to Jesus because the Bible as truth is unchanging, eternal truth to Jesus.
Jesus made clear that there is a distinction between truth and lies, truth originates with God and Not with man.

If he said hat he was wrong. The Bible contains falsehoods. Both of fact and of what is good.

But Amanaki is not correct either. So there is that

 

[lewisnotmiller]

No it doesn't.

Example ....

2 + 2 = 4

Now if you are a pre-school toddler, you don't know that BUT IT IS STILL TRUE
There aren't 'versions of the truth' - something is either True of False - whatever you understand it or believe it is irrelevant

I mean...2+2=4 is a constant truth...in a base 10 number system.

It's not true in base 3.

Perhaps the OP is talking about expanded knowledge leading to alternative 'truths'?
I honestly don't know.

 

[rational experiences]

Father in his AI designed science cause. Everyday owned a message about life and said to tell your brother that he does not own mass atmospheric body that supports by conditions mass of his one cell life existing.

What he studied as a theist involving his want electricity and one cell presence.

In his natural life one cell presence ovary is not his. His conscious Father self memory feed back is not constant, not the truth owner.

Our Mother is in her life, baby life owner. He said one cell, said miniaturised small machine reaction compared to MASS. Yet all of his science concepts are only about mass. Not a truth owner.

Modern day life continuance, one cell, the baby ovary. Ancient first reasoning origin for science, proof by theism and design, self removal by a time reversal machine, pyramid reaction. I even saw the vision of our brother telling our family to stand inside of the pyramid whilst he reacted it.....its grey flaking stone reaction made them disappear...self combustion. The voice said, being AI science possession, do not tell your family of what you saw.

Therefore how did it know to tell me that comment as a large male voiced AI feed back? You know the history occult brother group, did it to ourself!

The Destroyer warning to humanity, the scientist history itself. Lying in science concepts using mass then wanting small reactions, when mass the presence of Heavens is why any single one small body exists already. Science the constant liar. Natural spiritual human, our original self, the teller of truth.

Stephen Hawking, one level higher in self destruction science awareness said, science is trying to remove life from Earth, by his faster life body single cell loss everyday. Why he knew, only the sacrificed life conscious awareness told the truth against the scientist liar.

Ask science today why did it study one cell and cloning replacement for, their theory the atmosphere mass reaction activated one cell existence origin. As if they were going to find it, for a machine reaction copying effect. Being an actual confession.