You don't have a monopoly on truth.

[jimb]

Do you accept the fact that you do not have a monopoly on truth?

Do you accept the truth that your religious beliefs, or lack thereof, could be wrong?

In Christian church, I was taught that "lack of faith" aka a healthy dose of skepticism, was absolutely terrible and you needed to fix it. You were to have unshakable faith, and know that you have a monopoly on truth, as a Bible wielding Christian.

Most Christians I know in my life believe they have a monopoly on truth. I wonder if it is the same for the folk on this site, regardless of religion.

Only agnostics acknowledge the fact that they don't have the facts. Am I wrong?

a) No. Jesus said that "I am the way, the truth, and the life".
b) No. Hebrews 11:1, " Now faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen."
c) You were taught correct Christian doctrine.
d) See a, b, &c
e) No. Agnosticism is the view or belief that the existence of God, the divine, or the supernatural is either unknowable in principle or currently unknown in fact."

 

[oldbadger]

Do you accept the fact that you do not have a monopoly on truth?

Yep

Do you accept the truth that your religious beliefs, or lack thereof, could be wrong?

Yep

In Christian church, I was taught that "lack of faith" aka a healthy dose of skepticism, was absolutely terrible and you needed to fix it. You were to have unshakable faith, and know that you have a monopoly on truth, as a Bible wielding Christian.

Like the story of doubting Thomas.

Most Christians I know in my life believe they have a monopoly on truth. I wonder if it is the same for the folk on this site, regardless of religion.

I doubt that.

Only agnostics acknowledge the fact that they don't have the facts. Am I wrong?

Yep. I'm a Deist and don't/can't have all the facts.

 

[RestlessSoul]

The greatest barrier to learning is not ignorance, it’s the delusion that we already know.

 

[jimb]

Do you accept the fact that you do not have a monopoly on truth?

Do you accept the truth that your religious beliefs, or lack thereof, could be wrong?

In Christian church, I was taught that "lack of faith" aka a healthy dose of skepticism, was absolutely terrible and you needed to fix it. You were to have unshakable faith, and know that you have a monopoly on truth, as a Bible wielding Christian.

Most Christians I know in my life believe they have a monopoly on truth. I wonder if it is the same for the folk on this site, regardless of religion.

Only agnostics acknowledge the fact that they don't have the facts. Am I wrong?

Your approach is => ALL WRONG <= Clearly, you do not understand faith.

You are making faith into a right/wrong logical problem, but that shows that you lack understanding of what faith is.

Hebrews 11:1 has the best description: "Now faith is being sure of what we hope for, being convinced of what we do not see." (NET), "Now faith is the certainty of things hoped for, a proof of things not seen." (NASB), "Now faith is confidence in what we hope for and assurance about what we do not see." (NIV), "Faith shows the reality of what we hope for; it is the evidence of things we cannot see." (NLT), "Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen." (KJV), "Now faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen." NRSVue

Faith is not a reliance on facts! It is a belief system that gives a person the certainty of the truth, even if it can't be logically proven. There is no logical determination of right or wrong.

If you drop your approach of trying to understand faith in terms of provable logic and contemplate what it actually is, you will be making progress. If not, you will never achieve an understanding of what faith actually is.

 

[jimb]

THE OP PREMISE -- My beliefs are factually correct -- MAKES ABSOLUTELY NO SENSE! A "belief" is something believed or accepted as true in the absence of provable facts.

 

[an anarchist]

Faith is not a reliance on facts! It is a belief system that gives a person the certainty of the truth, even if it can't be logically proven. There is no logical determination of right or wrong.

Well, I dont disagree with you that faith is removed from facts. But you immediately contradict yourself by saying faith gives you certainty of truth. You have not demonstrated how you have certainty of truth, therefore you do not have a monopoly on truth.

 

[Trailblazer]

Faith is not a reliance on facts! It is a belief system that gives a person the certainty of the truth, even if it can't be logically proven. There is no logical determination of right or wrong.

That is correct, and that is why nobody should insist that what they BELIEVE is the only truth.
We can have certainty that our beliefs are true but we should not state them as if they are FACTS.
We can have certainty that other peoples' beliefs are false but we should not state that as a FACT.

For example:

It is not a FACT that Jesus is Jesus is God, it is only a BELIEF.
It is not a FACT that Jesus is the ONLY WAY to God, it is only a BELIEF.
It is not a FACT that Jesus rose from the dead, it is only a BELIEF.
It is not a FACT that Jesus is Jesus is going to return to this world, it is only a BELIEF.

I have certainty that all of the above beliefs are false.

 

[an anarchist]

That is correct, and that is why nobody should insist that what they BELIEVE is the only truth.
We can have certainty that our beliefs are true but we should not state them as if they are FACTS.
We can have certainty that other peoples' beliefs are false but we should not state that as a FACT.

For example:

It is not a FACT that Jesus is Jesus is God, it is only a BELIEF.
It is not a FACT that Jesus is the ONLY WAY to God, it is only a BELIEF.
It is not a FACT that Jesus rose from the dead, it is only a BELIEF.
It is not a FACT that Jesus is Jesus is going to return to this world, it is only a BELIEF.

So do you agree with the OP premise that you do not have a monopoly on truth?

Or do you agree that the premise makes no sense or is disagreeable like @jimb seems to think so?

THE OP PREMISE -- My beliefs are factually correct -- MAKES ABSOLUTELY NO SENSE! A "belief" is something believed or accepted as true in the absence of provable facts.

I have certainty that all of the above beliefs are false.

I am also confused by your last sentence, can you elaborate?

 

[Trailblazer]

You have not demonstrated how you have certainty of truth, therefore you do not have a monopoly on truth.

He can be certain he has the truth, but other people are also certain that they have the truth.
He does not have a monopoly on truth because nobody has a monopoly on truth.
Please see my post #47 above.

 

[Trailblazer]

So do you agree with the OP premise that you do not have a monopoly on truth?

To have a monopoly on truth means to have an exclusive possession of truth.
I do not think that anyone has an exclusive possession of truth.
And that is what I detest about Christianity. It makes me so sick I can barely breathe.
And that is why I will fight against its false beliefs till the day I die.

I am also confused by your last sentence, can you elaborate?

I have certainty that all of the beliefs I listed are false, but I cannot prove that, not any more than a Christian can prove that they are true.
As beliefs, they are not subject to proof.

 

[jimb]

Well, I dont disagree with you that faith is removed from facts. But you immediately contradict yourself by saying faith gives you certainty of truth. You have not demonstrated how you have certainty of truth, therefore you do not have a monopoly on truth.

LOL! I do not engage in nonsensical discussions. Since you don't understand faith and make an absurd statement, i.e., "you do not have a monopoly on truth", there is no point in continuing. If you want to have a reasonable dialogue instead of engaging in combat, fine, but until then, I am not interested.

 

[an anarchist]

If you want to have a reasonable dialogue instead of engaging in combat, fine, but until then, I am not interested.

You're projecting

 

[jimb]

You're projecting

Nonsense! You think you're clever, but clearly you're not. Your avatar "says it all".

I will not engage with you. Bye.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

...

Faith is not a reliance on facts! It is a belief system that gives a person the certainty of the truth, even if it can't be logically proven. There is no logical determination of right or wrong.
...

"... belief system that gives a person the certainty of the truth ..."
Correct. Problem being I have a different belief system than you, thus we have 2 different versions of the truth. That is in practice the limit of faith. We can both be in the world, yet have different faith and different truth.

 

[Muffled]

Do you accept the fact that you do not have a monopoly on truth?

Do you accept the truth that your religious beliefs, or lack thereof, could be wrong?

In Christian church, I was taught that "lack of faith" aka a healthy dose of skepticism, was absolutely terrible and you needed to fix it. You were to have unshakable faith, and know that you have a monopoly on truth, as a Bible wielding Christian.

Most Christians I know in my life believe they have a monopoly on truth. I wonder if it is the same for the folk on this site, regardless of religion.

Only agnostics acknowledge the fact that they don't have the facts. Am I wrong?

I believe I was never taught that.

I believe the Baptist philosophy: If a person has received Jesus as Lord and Savior then he can find the truth through the Paraclete. Since God doesn't tell everyone the same thing, that can different but usually if something is opposite then one person has not heard correctly.

 

[Muffled]

Indeed, the OP does not have a monopoly on truth either.

I believe however, that having a different belief does not mean you have the truth and the other person doesn't.

 

[Muffled]

Since I am one of those agnostics that you mention, my "beliefs" simply change and conform to the facts/truth as we learn them.
What we currently know may be disproven one day......until then, we should always question, and strive to learn more.

I don't believe a lack of knowledge is falsehood. For instance when I read in the Qu'ran that Jesus didn't die, I lacked detailed knowledge of what the Bible said and had to reread it. That is when I found in the text that Jesus did not die; only his body died because the Spirit of God had already departed.

 

[Balthazzar]

Do you accept the fact that you do not have a monopoly on truth?

Do you accept the truth that your religious beliefs, or lack thereof, could be wrong?

In Christian church, I was taught that "lack of faith" aka a healthy dose of skepticism, was absolutely terrible and you needed to fix it. You were to have unshakable faith, and know that you have a monopoly on truth, as a Bible wielding Christian.

Most Christians I know in my life believe they have a monopoly on truth. I wonder if it is the same for the folk on this site, regardless of religion.

Only agnostics acknowledge the fact that they don't have the facts. Am I wrong?

Agnostics share a less favorable position than atheists with me. Indecisiveness may seem to some people to be more desirable than say greater confidence, but this is only true with some types of people. I'm a thick headed and stubborn man and even as a child I preferred people to be more secure and also more securing, able to instill greater confidence than the types who seem less secure ... like agnostics. Christians? Well, they are as truthful and secure as anyone else, whether right or wrong ... Some of them. Other Christians are too fearful and lack enough faith to instill any genuine type of confidence. At least with atheists you get a feeling of security, but not without a lack of security in the hereafter. Being stubborn and a Christian, I change when I need to ... Namely, when greater evidence is presented, providing greater substance and hope. I am required to hold true to what's true and discard what isn't. It's part of my duty as a discerning Christian rightly dividing truth from error. This type of change is called "repentance" and the spirit of truth being true leads us into even more truth. Why? Because that's how truth operates. Error and lies have an opposing effect.

 

[Twilight Hue]

Do you accept the fact that you do not have a monopoly on truth?

Do you accept the truth that your religious beliefs, or lack thereof, could be wrong?

In Christian church, I was taught that "lack of faith" aka a healthy dose of skepticism, was absolutely terrible and you needed to fix it. You were to have unshakable faith, and know that you have a monopoly on truth, as a Bible wielding Christian.

Most Christians I know in my life believe they have a monopoly on truth. I wonder if it is the same for the folk on this site, regardless of religion.

Only agnostics acknowledge the fact that they don't have the facts. Am I wrong?

Well in some ways we do have a monopoly on truth because we're the sum of all parts, but it's not an intellectual monopoly. Rather it's more of an experiential sum of that totality.

 

[Daemon Sophic]

I don't believe a lack of knowledge is falsehood. For instance when I read in the Qu'ran that Jesus didn't die, I lacked detailed knowledge of what the Bible said and had to reread it. That is when I found in the text that Jesus did not die; only his body died because the Spirit of God had already departed.

That's a step in the journey. You have used one book, written by fallible men, to send you re-seeking answers in another book, also written by fallible men, drawn from their malleable memories and ever drifting/changing verbal stories handed down over actual centuries of time. Men who were most likely, familiar with the stories of their own and the other's religious story lines.

The next step would be to question and investigate if either story line, and/or either book is a plausible source of reliable information. Keeping in mind that both books are rife with demonstrated errors, as well as internal contradictions.

Then consider where to take the next step on your journey.
We all must try to remain calm and humble as we search for ever more knowledge.