William wrote: ↑Thu Oct 26, 2023 7:44 pm
[
Replying to Data in post #111]
Then why did you ask me?
I did not ask you specifically re the OP question.
My questions to you are specific to the answers you have provided, even that the answers were sparse. ( Just a "no" in both responses.)
The real question is, why did you respond with any answer, if the subject itself has no bearing on your beliefs? This is where "no" in and of itself is no explanation, but does convey the implication it is founded on an unspecified belief you have.
And do I not constantly have, primarily, the obstacle of Christianity in my discussions on the Bible? Pointing out that Alexander the Great did to Jewish thinking what Constantine the Great did to Christian teachings? That's what you are trying to do to the Bible, the same as them, and good for you, I wish you well, and all three are valid. But if you want the truth, that's valid as well.
There has been no attempt by anyone contributing to this thread topic to validate "the truth" so that is a moot statement you have made.
Perhaps you can share this "truth" with the reader, to show WHY you answered "no"?
Do you realize, and correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think you have heard one thing I've said. To me, talking to people is like talking to the cat.
That makes no immediate sense. The readers are "people" not "cats" but what of that?
For example, I've never said I was a Christian. I'm not a Christian.
So what? You obviously regard the bible as some type of authority, so that in itself implies you are at least a supporter of biblical teaching, whatever theology you believe in re that.
And even if you were not, you should still be able to provide a reasonable critique which offers the reader something more substantial than "No" as an answer.
In these days of PC I cannot say what this looks like, but anything like useful discussion is not it. Just (in case this point had been missed or not stated before) "truth" is - first, using meanings, not words:
.What is actually so no matter what humans think about it. That the earth goes round the sun was true, even though humans once thought the sun went round the earth. Plus - validated human models (science) of whatever is true. Thus the 'Fact' that the earth goes around the sun is supposedly proven by evidence, though everyone accepts it because 'science says so'. and the fact is we rely on Authorities and do not (and cannot) research everything ourselves. Fakes and frauds exploit this to peddle lies and misinformation, guessing that people will not check and will swallow whatever the loudest voice and the most news - sites wants to put out.
Thus the other 'truth' is what people believe. "What, then, is your truth" as a JW said to me in the one discussion I had in my home (the last time I did as, if you let them in, they Interpret this as as an assurance you'll sign up as soon as they have trotted out their stock apologetics to any questions, and they get very aggressive if you don't). One can call them 'models of reality' but it isn't, as it is faith -based, not evidence based. Evidence is admitted, twisted and rejected according to whether it serves the faith or not. I know this is so, as I have seen it. Even the Bible is dismissed if it says what is different from the Faith. Truth is whatever is in their heads, and you may sell your Chinese real estate shares and invest in that.
Stop me if you've heard this one before. "What is truth?" asks Pilate. It was an intriguing question, though somewhat predictably the faithful don't think about it or discuss it but merely throw it in the face of the doubters like "The fool hath said in his heart..." or "Thinking themselves wise...." But I realised that it was a good question, and Pilate never got an answer.
Aside a possible theatrical rightness dumbell apologetic (like for why Mark doesn't have an ending) I think the answer is what 'Truth' is and why Jesus doesn't say, as that would expose the sham. In fact we already know. The truth is Jesus, or rather Faith in Jesus. Evidence, much less reason, is nothing to do with "Truth" Aka "Faith" in the theist (and indeed, cultist, faddist and conspiracy -theorist) sense, but in the good old kneejerk I believe this...fiddle evidence and logic to suit it, and IF..but IF there is anyone there to demolish the poor apologetics, the Faithful stalk off with an expression of miffed outrage, or slide into the silent depths with a muttered "I don't care what you say...I still believe" as though their denial had won the case.
That, is a Truth, friends and you may sell your Picasso and buy that the Faithful think it is all about them, and what they admit or deny, and it is not about the case. Why do they do that? Because, for the Biblical apologist (specifically), Truth/Faith is about the validity of what Belief they have because Faith enabled God to download Truth into their heads, so.....
.......
It is right no matter what the Facts are.
Which is why they can Never, never, ever, admit to being wrong about anything in their doctrine as, if they do, the whole Lie comes crashing down (does a Lie crash? Let's have a vote on it
) and Revealethed God -truth in the bonce, Folks is what it's all about and is a fascinating study, both in false reasoning and in human self - justification (n.b critical thinking removes from personal belief and puts evidence first - wherever it leads. Theists - even if they use the expression - never understand this, let alone never do it).
I do not apologise for the length of this, as the bishop said to the actress, but the doctrinal pie - fight between William and Data while horribly riveting like watching an Amazonian ant - war, is bewildering until one understands that "Truth" = Faith which = Self justification.
