What is the truth?

by hardtobeme 40 Replies latest jw friends

  • Fisherman
    Fisherman

    "What is truth?"-Pontius Pilate

    You are not seeing the obvious.

    New American Standard Bible

    37Therefore Pilate said to Him, "So You are a king?" Jesus answered, "You say correctly that I am a king. For this I have been born, and for this I have come into the world, to testify to the truth. Everyone who is of the truth hears My voice." 38Pilate said to Him, "What is truth?" And when he had said this, he went out again to the Jews and said to them, "I find no guilt in Him.…

    1: Obviously, Jesus knew (he so declared) "the truth"( how could Jesus testify to something that he did not know?)

    compare English Standard Version .." and you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.”

    2; Pilate did not wait to hear Jesus answer, he went out again.

  • Ruby456
    Ruby456

    fisherman, one can testify to truth without knowing all truth. Surely you realize this. as far as I know Jesus never said that truth was a body of knowledge that once known would be know for all time.

    so as far as I'm concerned you have not said anything that refutes my post.

    edit: according to Scott Atran, the author mentioned on previous page, humans like to claim to have strategic knowledge via supernatural entities to gain the upper hand. If this is what you are claiming for Jesus then surely you know that you are inviting my skepticism?

  • Vidiot
    Vidiot
    "Truth" is whatever the GB says it is, as far as they're concerned.
  • Fisherman
    Fisherman

    "the truth"

    New American Standard Bible
    12"I have many more things to say to you, but you cannot bear them now. 13"But when He, the Spirit of truth, comes, He will guide you into all the truth; ....................

    English Standard Version
    Jesus said to him, “I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.


    " and you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.”

    Again, obviously

    Weymouth New Testament
    "In most solemn truth," answered Jesus, "I tell you that before Abraham came into existence, I am." (Jesus claimed to have existed before Abraham was born.)

    "The truth" is not something that can be learned intellectually, obviously, it is something that not everyone knows, however, the truth is something that can be known. Your posts reveal that you do not know what "the truth" is.

  • Crazyguy
    Crazyguy

    Here is the truth, the Jews would have never tride a man during the passover week, never convicted a man for saying he's the messiah many at the time were supposedly doing so and never killed a man on or near passover. Pilate would never have released a man that killed Romans. The Jews would have broken 7 of thier own laws to prosecute and then kill Jesus during this week. There is the Truth!

  • OnTheWayOut
    OnTheWayOut

    Jehovah’s Witnesses use this phrase, “the truth,” constantly. Since it is an established fact in their minds, anything new said from the platform or printed by the Watchtower Organization is accepted as the truth. There is no room for doubt. The average Witness doesn’t even try to think and interpret the scriptures for himself or consider where he stands on issues, but relies totally upon the Watchtower organization to do that for him.

    What is the Truth? If asked, “What is the truth?” Jehovah’s Witnesses will answer most likely like this: “The truth is that which is firm, trustworthy, stable, faithful, and established as fact.” Fair enough but they will go on to say “Jehovah God is truth, in that His judicial decisions, law, commandments, and word are truth. He cannot lie according to Titus 1:2.”

    Seeking an answer elsewhere, Webster defines “truth” as:
    (1) being true; specif., a) sincerity; honesty b) conformity with fact c) reality; actual existence d) correctness; accuracy
    (2) that which is true
    (3) an established fact.

    Wikipedia says “ there is no single definition of truth about which the majority of philosophers agree.”

    In John chapter 18, Jesus told Pontius Pilate that he came into the world to “bear witness to the truth,” but when Pilate asked, “What is truth?” there was no answer from Jesus. There are various opinions on how to define and identify truth. Even with Webster telling us that truth is “that which is true,” I could make a statement and say that it is a true statement, but that just leads to questions such as these; What is a true statement? Is it different from a statement made truthfully? Such highly abstract discussions will get us nowhere.

    Some feel that truth is subjective and personal, that one man’s truth comes from his inner feelings and thinking, his viewpoint. Many add that truth is relative, only defined by its comparison to something else. This would be similar to the abstract question, “What is beauty?” In subjective truth, different persons would have different truths.

    Outside of philosophy, truth is not generally thought of in subjective terms. Truth is determined by existing realities, based on facts independent of the mind. Most people think that truth is objective. Some go so far as to say that only absolute truth matters. "Absolute truth" is defined as inflexible reality: fixed, invariable, unalterable facts. Absolute truth requires an absolute standard. Even here, we can run into trouble. If I make the objective statement that “Earth is the third planet out from the sun,” another person could ask, “Whose definition of ‘planet’ are you using?” “Is it possible that there are other undiscovered planets between the earth and sun?” “When you say ‘out from the sun,’ do you mean in distance or a straight line?” With religious doctrine, it is no different. Whose translation are we using, and which ancient Greek or Hebrew meaning are we applying? The Watchtower claims that our perspective on truth should come from the absolute authority of the creator of all things. They teach that the creator determines what is right and what is wrong, and that the absolute truth we seek is knowledge of His will for His creation. This is “the truth” that, unlike beauty, does not lie in the eye of the beholder. It’s just a shame that we need humans to interpret what that absolute truth is, and to tell us what they think God’s will is for us.

    To discuss the question, “What is the truth” is endless in philosophy and debate, but it is not so difficult to discuss and dismiss the claim of absolute truth from Jehovah’s Witnesses. One simply has to demonstrate that what they say is false or not absolute. I say that is easy to do, but that each person must do this for themselves.

    The average Witness at your door, or in your family or congregation is not intentionally lying. He is telling you the truth and nothing but the truth, as far as he understands. That is why he can be so convincing. The untruths are coming from the organization, passed on as truths, often with both mixed together with added moral judgment values, to make them indistinguishable from each other. Their moral judgement values are subjective and Watchtower typically claims they are from God and absolute in value. I contend that you are not getting the whole truth from the Watchtower organization in virtually every case. If you see the whole truth, it will cause you to reexamine what has been told to you, and you will clearly be able to see that it is not “the truth” in an objective absolute sort of way. Once you discover that it is not the truth, you will be able to see how it is the anti-truth, a mix of misleading truths and omissions of complete facts that enables the Watchtower organization to control the lives of millions.

  • Fisherman
    Fisherman

    IT is like an equation for everything, if there was such a thing. Since everything in the universe has in common that it exists, one wonders: "Surely, there must be some relationship between everything that can be expressed mathematically." with one general formula.

    To those that know, "the truth" is the answer to everything, it is solid evidence, like a rock that one can strike with a hammer and then one uses an instrument to measure it until one knows for a fact that it is fact. (versus a testimony, conclusion, or derivative.)

    To those that do not know, it is like a man going around playing a harmonica, or it is like the prophet Ezekiel walking naked through the streets of Jerusalem using human excrement for fuel to cook his food- It all appears to be nonsensical and ridiculous, until you know and understand, or until you get hit with the truth and you are forced to know.

  • Ruby456
    Ruby456

    fisherman, I respect you pov and its highly phenomenological sense - that it is your experience - and that undoubtedly it is authentic and verifiable for those who share your experience. But my beef is that the opening post is taking a non phenomenological approach so the question here imo would be to ask if there is a strong enough probability that Jesus did not know the answer to Pilate's question philosophically.

    well, gospel writers say that Jesus remained silent when he was not making a reply. so to me he deliberately did not reply, rather than as you say Pilate by turning away, did not give him the opportunity to reply. On this understanding Pilate turned away because Jesus did not reply and Jesus did not reply because he did not know the answer.

    Furthermore if Jesus was talking about authenticity and self actualisation as forms of truth (He said I am the truth didn't he) rather than intellectual knowledge or theory as truth then he would have remained silent as he did not know the answer. From a philosophical pov this possibility is very strong.

    edit: there are many reasons why he may not have known. Another possibility is that as he said he came for the jews perhaps all his energy was directed towards them and he had never thought about truth in connection with the Romans. so on this understanding too he did not know the answer to Pilate's question.

    so, fisherman, in all, I have given you three strong reasons in support of the OP - all from the scriptures. going shopping now

  • Fisherman
    Fisherman

    that it is your experience - and that undoubtedly it is authentic and verifiable for those who share your experience.

    Not all experiences are facts. For example: Persons using mind altering drugs experience things that they believe are real at the time they experience them and so do people with psychosis or schizophrenia. Such delusions are not true and they are not facts. All facts are facts. All facts are true. (Have I not made this clear?)

    well, gospel writers say that Jesus remained silent when he was not making a reply.

    That is your conclusion when you read the verse. But That is not what the verse says.

    Furthermore if Jesus was talking about authenticity and self actualisation as forms of truth (He said I am the truth didn't he) rather than intellectual knowledge or theory as truth then he would have remained silent as he did not know the answer. From a philosophical pov this possibility is very strong. to know.

    That is nonsense. It was Jesus who first said:"....testify to the truth..." It was that subject that Jesus said he could testify to that Pilate asked what is it. Regardless of what Pilate may have associated with the word truth, Jesus would have explained the real truth that trumps everything. How could Jesus not know ALL the truth that he bore witness to? Sure, this is Jesus: "You know guys I can only testify to part of the truth, I do not have all the answers, go ask somebody else...": Bolony

    If Jesus was a phoney, then it is all a waste of time to consider what he did not know. On the other hand, if you have concluded that Jesus is who he claimed to be, then obviously he would be the one who would know" the truth"

    Given: God exists and Jesus is the son of God-Then it is and axiom that Jesus knows the truth. John 8:40

    Finally: I have nothing more to say to you on this. Either your position is that Jesus was an ordinary man, then what is written about him are lies and so it makes no difference what happened with Pilate. Or your position is that Jesus was who he claimed to be, in that case, then obviously, it is axiomatic that he knew the truth. You cannot have it both ways or ride 2 horses at the same time.

  • Ruby456
    Ruby456

    obviously Pilate did not share Jesus' starting points as the co-ordinates that Jesus was offering were for a Jewish audience. Pilate probably had a different map with different co-ordinates - one that could perhaps rival Jesus'. After all Jesus did say 'in the house of my father there are many abodes' as I have already pointed out.

    From an axiomatic perspective:

    Pilate would not have felt at home in what Jesus was testifying to and Jesus did not have the answer to what truth Pilate would have been able to use as an abode.

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit