Mike047,
What is your point?
"What Is Truth"
by LoneWolf 19 Replies latest jw friends
-
-
mike047
FRED; I thought you might be interested in a conversation about it.
Apparently not. Going to watch football now. See you tomorrow, maybe. -
sf
Patty Lovelace, one of my favs, sings it well w/ her "Trouble With The Truth" song:
"Oh the trouble with the truth is it just won't let me go..."
Her lyrics express me well, in many of her songs.
Perhaps I'll kareoke it sometime in yahoo, perhaps.
sKally
-
Klaus Vollmer
already Pilate asked about truth and washed his hands in innocence
-
Erich
LoneWolf and amazing:
please note:
your articles are interesting, but sorry:
You completely confounded the term "truth" with "cognition"!Klaus Vollmer.
Do you speak German? -
Erich
The term "truth" is always subordinated to the term "provableness"
(see mathematical logic; Goedels Axiom etc.)
Please let me explain it:
You both can observe a murderer in the park-garage of a supermarket killing a customer and stealing his car.
The incident is "true".
But is this incident compatible with the "truth" in the Holy Bible (in your opinion? )
You can stick a paper on your brand-new car, with the
statement: brand-new, 220 HP, 4500 ccms, first-property.
The text is " true ".
Or do you think its not?
A friend drives 20 miles with the car, and crashes against a tree.
The car is scrap metal.
Is the same text now "true" ???? -
LoneWolf
Eric ---
Keep in mind that those definitions are not mine. They originate with an acquaintance of mine who is a professor of ethics in an eastern university.
Your points are of course valid in the absolute sense. However, what he is doing is using a broader definition in order to illustrate how the common man views and interprets things. Both are appropriate, depending upon the circumstances.
I guess we could say that some problems are only solved by the use of straight math. Others require quantum theory.
LoneWolf
-
Erich
I think we should build a bridge between our bible-semantics and the present scientific terminology.
Jehovahs Witnesses have been the one and only religion who said there is no immortal soul, and the hope for the greatest part of mankind is
everlasting life here on earth, and not in heaven.
These "revolutionary" belief make JW's more credible in the eyes of scientists as we (and the GB) suppose... There are many scientists today, who presently see the mankind standing at the doorstep to a new global system where these dreams get true.
Why are we not able to formulate our biblical hope in a manner the scientists can understand and follow it? Maybe we could find big allies in our fight for Jehovah and his Kingdom.... -
LoneWolf
An excellent question!!
LoneWolf
-
Erich
Hello LoneWolf:
Look at Frenchy's "Pre-conceived Ideas" and the answer of Marvin Shilmer, who posted:
>....might these statements be preparation for some dramatic doctrinal shifts regarding current "cherished" ideas ?...>Perhaps it is?
Maybe an angel came to Don Adams (the new president of the GB) and gave him the "srolles to be opened" (Re 20:12)
(That's no zynism).