no truth but fact

[Jaskin]

Not only mine, but many's.

Not a teacher.

So you must be subscribing to the consensus theory of truth.

 

[Raymott]

Not only mine, but many's.

Of course. And many others see the lies and contradictions in it, and understand how and why it was written, and historical basis of the story, the almost arbitrary edition by the early Church fathers, etc. It's an argument that simply goes nowhere. You believe it; I don't. Neither is going to change each other's opinion. Others will say the same about the Koran or the Bhagavad Gita or the Buddhist Scriptures. I don't think this is the right place to discuss it.

Obligatory English content: "Not only mine, but many people's."

 

[MikeNewYork]

That is the inherent problem with the word "truth". It is subject to a vote. That means that it is not an absolute.

 

[emsr2d2]

Not only mine, but many's.

Not a teacher.

That is irrelevant. It has nothing to do with the English language and any discussion about religion can become very heated and opinionated, on this site and any other. Regardless of the subject matter, the number of people who believe something gives no indication of how true it is.​

 

[Raymott]

I disagree. Truth isn't democratic. Truth might be absolute, and even if everybody believes something else, that doesn't affect the truth (unless, of course, it does, but I don't think that's how truth works). I believe truth is independent of who votes for it.

It must be a real bummer though for scientists to prove a new theory conclusively, and yet get only 49% of people believeing in it, therefore making it (in a democratic truth system) false. I believe that's the reason Evolution is clearly false in the USA, and nothing may be said time have evolved there, since it doesn't have majority approval yet.

So, you're some form of Pope with a funny hat, Mike. Do you say that truth is democratic? And how fallible would that opinion be?

 

[emsr2d2]

I believe that's the reason Evolution is clearly false in the USA, and nothing may be said time have evolved there, since it doesn't have majority approval yet.

Sorry, Raymott, I don't understand what the fragment I have bolded means.

 

[Raymott]

Sorry, Raymott, I don't understand what the fragment I have bolded means.

I was just trying to edit it. I'm stuck with a dinosaur computer this weekend which takes ten minutes just to edit a word, if it feels like it.
"and nothing may be said to have evolved there." There are possibly other typos. You'll have to be patient with me until tomorrow!

 

[MikeNewYork]

My hat is no funnier than your Yoda character. Do you think you possess all wisdom?

And the proof that evolution hasn't visited Australia is the duck-billed platypus. :lol:

 

[Raymott]

Yes, your hat is much, much funnier than my Yoda character. I don't know Yoda that well; is he meant to be the source of all wisdom? I just picked that avatar because he looks a bit like me. Maybe I'll change it if it's giving the impression that I'm as wise as you are infallible.

 

[MikeNewYork]

People who live in glass houses should not throw stones.

 

[Raymott]

Er ... right. Time to terminate this discussion, I'd say. We seem to be on different tracks.

 

[emsr2d2]

Children, children! We don't pretend for one instant that we all agree on everything here. The world would be a very dull place if we did. The simple fact is that we will never find a single truth (on any subject) on which everyone in the world agrees.

 

[MikeNewYork]

I agree. But Raymott wandered off the track to make it personal. There was no need for that.

 

[emsr2d2]

Oh, enough already. Surely we haven't reached "But he started it" and the like.

Thread closed.