Can 'truth' change? (page 4)

wholewheat

There is a misconception on this board that I am against science, and that is not true. I need to explain that in Physics there are 'laws'. Physics is what is known to be an 'exacting science'. I am not talking about theories or hypothesis.

Now a law is also defined as a 'canon', and a 'canon' (according to Webster's Dictionary) is 'a general rule, law, or TRUTH'.

'Exact' is defined as ,'Marked by agreement with fact or a standard; precise or correct'.

So, is it possible that Physics, which is an exacting science, could have a 'law' that has to be updated or even corrected? If so, why can't Bible 'truths' be expanded on, even corrected? Remember, there were christians in the first century who were filled with Holy Spirit that believed that gentile christians had to be circumcised, and yet they had to be 'corrected' or 'updated' by Paul.

ItsJustlittleoldme

Thanks refiner,

I wasn't aware of these (as you can guess, I'm NOT a bible scholar, to say the least) . I guess that would mean that in

1914,1918,1925,1941, and 1975 when Jehovah uttered through his 'prophet' that the current system of things was about to end, I guess Jehovah looked down upon the earth and saw alot of people who were good in his eyes, and showed Mercy by not ending the world... Maybe the last days aren't upon us afterall :-)

Of course, I have no idea how to 'explain' the last example, as the 'slave/prophet' of today seem to utter anything they want and then change it later without even an apology for any damage they have done to the flock. Seems not only irresponsible on the part of the 'slave' to speak presumtiously but also doesn't seem like they are actually protecting the flock by uttering words that they have not PROVEN themselves first when they know the flock will interpret it as truth! (as they are expected to do)

And I am at quite a loss to explain how the 'slave' can go back and forth on 'truth', as is the example with the ressurection of the people of Sodom and Gommorah (It's a Yes/No/Yes/No/Yes/No type answer)... Maybe Jehovah was confused? Was having a bad day, and just whimsikly changed his mind over and over again?

Maybe WholeWheat can answer my questions...

Edited by - itsjustlittleoldme on 30 June 2002 22:50:2

Edited by - itsjustlittleoldme on 30 June 2002 22:50:6

refiners fire

Read your old dub publications.

They have thrown out 95 percent of what they previously believed. How can you keep a mere 5 percent of a prophetic interpretation and declare that it was ever from god? They have thrown out the Parallels, the pyramid, the 6000 year reasoning, the days of Daniel, the papal antichrist, the socialist revolution,the general church rapture...I could go on and on....and they have kept the Gentile times reasoning.

This is no mere modification, no touching up, or polishing of the mirror to clean off some dust. This is keeping the hooks and string from the back of the mirror, smashing the mirror to dust, sweeping it under a carpet, making a new mirror and hanging it on the old string and declaring it is the same mirror as before.

This is a wholesale overthrowing of an entire system of belief and rebuilding it from scratch, and all the while covering over that they have done so.

Edited by - refiners fire on 30 June 2002 23:8:35

comforter

Truth does not change. Our understanding of the truth may be altered by increased understanding.

Some scientists do espouse a verificationist working model, but others are strict falsificationists. I hate generalizations.

Comforter

hillary_step

WholeWheat,

But I will help you to make a better argument. First of all, you could start by being explicit as to how I am playing a 'semantics' game by giving me your definition of 'truth'. Another point you could make is that the Society teaches 'Fundamental Truths" which are supposed to never change. So how would I answer that? C'mon, let's make this debate fun!!!

No religion teaches 'Truth', and even if they did it would be impossible to quantify. What they teach is doctrine. These doctrines are then expoused as 'fundamental truth', but are in actuality unprovable by any laws of science. Calling something a 'fundamental Truth' when it cannot be proved as such by anything but opinion, is actually a form of lying.

Can you present an example of anything that you feel can be proved as a 'fundamental truth' that the WTS teaches?

Best regards - HS

refiners fire

Well the dubs are FALSIFICATIONISTS.

I got the old "Jehovahs Witness in the Divine Purpose" book here, their standard historical apologist work for many years

In the back flap it presents a listing of historical events in The WT org.

The events commence at 1919. Why commence the list at 1919 when the org was founded in 1879?

On the second back page there is a record of annual field service reports from 1928 thru 1958.

why commence the list from 1928 when the org was founded in 1879?

Those who have read their publications will know the answers.

These people are FALSIFIERS.

Siddhashunyata

Relative truth can change because it is incomplete . The truths reached by thought are relative truths and they change according to what is later related to them. Absolute truth is not relative and is changeless and beyond thought: it is observed directly and has the sense quality of the whole being in the parts. Controversies always will accompany thought because it is a process of fragmentation where as absolute truth is whole and can only be experienced directly. Religion and Science based on thought cannot arrive at absolute unchanging Truth.

LB

If the light were in fact getting brighter, the truth would become clearer and more apparent, not change.
The W.T.S should say the light is changing color, not getting brighter.
God cannot lie. Truth does not change. Its either true or false.

Heaven made it very clear in just a few words. But for a witness the truth has to change or it gets exposed as lies. Also if a witness did a couple of hundred study articles on how the sky is really green, well they would believe it. It would be the truth without question.

It couldn't be brainwashing right? It's the truth.

The truth changes monthly. One year I counted 14 "new lights" and that's the truth changing.

larc

Wholewheat, The difference between science and you religion is quit vast. The light of science has truely become brighter and brighter. In the last 100 years, science and technology has made tremendous progress. In the same period time, your religion has made no progress whatsoever. It seems that every time the WT drops one silly idea, they pick another one. Regarding a related subject, let me ask you a couple of questions, all related. How often has the teaching regarding screaming and rape change? Answer, 12 times. How often has the belief regarding the higher powers changed - at least four times. How many times as the interpretation of the alpha and omega changed - at least five times. Now, do you believe these are examples of the light getting brighter and brighter?

LDH

Of course, the interesting part about all of this is that science WELCOMES criticism of its methods and facts.

That's the only sure way to ever REALLY get to the bottom of any issue, and determine unalterable fact.

The WBTS, on the other hand, supresses those who wish to expose the shell game for the sham that it is; cloaked behind their "Faithful and Discreet Slave" doctrine....they tell people that they must not be doubted...they are God's Own Spokesman....they even tell people that they MAY NOT HARBOR their own ideas.

Try telling a scientist he "may not harbor his own ideas." LOL you'll get laughed off the footbal field. How far do you think Science would have progressed if no scientist were allowed to question the dogma of the scientist before her?

Lisa

Can 'truth' change?

Share this