It used to be accepted that the priests and religious rulers had a pipeline to God and that they ultimately were in charge of "the truth". Whatever they said was believed to be the truth.
It used to be accepted "truth" that the Earth was flat, that the Earth was the center of the universe, and, more recently, that we had 9 planets in our solar system....
Is "the truth" that most people seek to believe really the "how" and "why" are we here? A search for purpose?
A lot of those who think they have "the truth" become so egotistical and dependent on their particular truth that they will go to absurd extremes to defend it - even to the point of killing. At least scientists have the "Scientific Method" as some sort of standard for their truths, but even that's fallible.
It's all relative and subject to change at any moment.
I recall something in a sociology class about how truth is something that a group, society, or culture group agrees to.
Kuhn's book "The Structure of Scientific Revolutions" enforced this point and showed that people agree to something until something better comes along.
In reading John Lynn's letter, I noticed he made reference to truth with a capital T, does this mean CES has two truths? It sounds like they took what VPW taught about Truth and Fact and simply changed the terminology.
God's Word is truth and that's where VP got it from.
Jhn 17:17 Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth.
-and-
1Ki 17:24 And the woman said to Elijah, Now by this I know that thou [art] a man of God, [and] that the word of the LORD in thy mouth [is] truth.
Can anything outside of God's Word be Truth, Oldies? My eyes are brown, is that truth or simply fact. If God game me revelation about something, is that truth or fact? If I receive a personal prophesy for someone, is that truth or fact?
Sorry, Oldies. I really wasn't trying to be tricky. I was simply looking for your point of view. If you reread my opening post, I offered several theories/definitions on truth, with a link to more. I really am curious about how various people understand this word.
Here I'll tell you my understanding. I think truth is a relative thing, a matter of perspective. It is fact mixed with how our brain processes the fact, how it mixes it with our past experiences. Not sure that communicates well, but it is the best I can do at the moment.
If Abby said "It is truth that my eyes are brown.", would that be the truth or a lie?" Let's make it easy Oldies. If her eyes are brown, it is truth.
If she said "It is truth that my eyes are blue.", and her eyes are actually brown. Then that would be a lie. Or she would be extremely confused.
Not necessarily so, Notta. If I understand Oldies perspective right, the color of my eyes would be factual, not a truth. That was kind of the point of this thread. Language can be a tricky thing, even when we all more or less speak the same one. Certain words have one connotation to one person, and an entirely different connotation to someone else. Words can also change meaning over time, like the word bad meaning good.
From a socialogical point of view, the words we use effect the way we think, the way we perceive, because most people think with words (I say most, because some people are visual thinkers - but that is most frequently found among people on the autism spectrum).
So, for instance, when we were in TWI we had certain words we never used, other words that had one meaning to us and an entirely different meaning to those outside of TWI. I would guess, CES probably has a bit of its own vernacular as well.
Matthew 5:27 Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not commit adultery:
28 But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart.
Matthew 19:16 And, behold, one came and said unto him, Good Master, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life?
17 And he said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God: but if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments.
18 He saith unto him, Which? Jesus said, Thou shalt do no murder, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness,
19 Honour thy father and thy mother: and, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.
Mark 10:17 And when he was gone forth into the way, there came one running, and kneeled to him, and asked him, Good Master, what shall I do that I may inherit eternal life?
18 And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God.
19 Thou knowest the commandments, Do not commit adultery, Do not kill, Do not steal, Do not bear false witness, Defraud not, Honour thy father and mother.
Is the Bible clear that adultery should not be committed?
John 8
1But Jesus went to the Mount of Olives. 2At dawn he appeared again in the temple courts, where all the people gathered around him, and he sat down to teach them. 3The teachers of the law and the Pharisees brought in a woman caught in adultery. They made her stand before the group 4and said to Jesus, "Teacher, this woman was caught in the act of adultery. 5In the Law Moses commanded us to stone such women. Now what do you say?" 6They were using this question as a trap, in order to have a basis for accusing him.
But Jesus bent down and started to write on the ground with his finger. 7When they kept on questioning him, he straightened up and said to them, "If any one of you is without sin, let him be the first to throw a stone at her." 8Again he stooped down and wrote on the ground.
9At this, those who heard began to go away one at a time, the older ones first, until only Jesus was left, with the woman still standing there. 10Jesus straightened up and asked her, "Woman, where are they? Has no one condemned you?"
11"No one, sir," she said.
"Then neither do I condemn you," Jesus declared. "Go now and leave your life of sin."
Does this mean that Jesus went against the truth? I don't think so. The line of demarcation in TWI was either it was on the Word or off the Word, and ONLY the Word is truth. I think John 8 is a great example to not bind yourself in Words and doctrine. People are more important than that.
But, Notta, how do you reconcile those verses with the verses that show men with multiple wives?
How do you know that YOUR interpretation of those verses is 'THE truth'?
The problem is that anyone can use scripture to prove anything they want. It's sort of like my job as an analyst. When a sales rep calls with a request for information I ask them what they are trying to prove and show to the client, then tailor my information to that goal. It's not lying, but I can pretty much make the numbers show whatever they want them to show IF I know what it is they want the customer to see.
Once I know the desired outcome, I determine which criteria to use (e.g. domestic sales, certain product sales, certain customer classes, etc.) to prove the requested 'truth'. My reports are always "the truth" but that truth is dependent upon the desired 'proof'/'outcome'/'result' of the salesman. I believe we/leaders/religions do the same with the scriptures. Not to mention the fact that the scriptures we have today are the ones approved of by a contingency of politicians with ulterior motives. There's much that has been suppressed because it did not condone whatever control and power that political contingency may have had and/or wanted.
What seems plain and clear common sense to one may not appear that way to others with ulterior motives or a different upbringing and religious teachings. Just look at how craiggers used scripture as justification for having sex with other men's wives.... Who's version is "the truth"?
I'm not trying to be contentious, just showing how one can not use the Bible as their standard for truth because it's so reliant on private interpretation and that's really all any church offers, isn't it? Their private interpretation of what the Bible says "the truth" is.
Actually I was trying to show that the Bible shows two different aspects of a point. I guess Iwasn't doing a very good job making my point. I just wanted to show that we were taught in TWI that there is black and white, no gray EVER!! Then I wanted to show the gray area with the example of the woman found in adultery.
Truth is is a tricky word. Like that Oldies??
But I still think if Abby has brown eyes and says she has blue eyes, it is not the truth..... Abby, I am just using you as an example. I don't mean anything by the example. Maybe I better excuse myself now.
Don't you dare excuse yourself (unless you farted)!!
I just didn't get your point - and that's not your fault! I shouldn't be booth-hopping anyway. I'm just spreading germs along with the gum I keep putting under the tables. I think it's time me, my orange juice and Robotussin head off to bed....
You're right - the Bible isn't Black & White like we were taught and that's why I think it can't be considered "the truth" no matter what one's 'TRUTH' is.
"The Word of God works with a mathematical exactness...?"
Why did it never occur to us that language is not exact? It is rich with nuances of meanings that are not always easily quantifiable. Perhaps it is when we think we have weighed and measured it, Truth passes thru our fingers as the waves of the sea.
Paul said the letter killeth but the Spirit gives life.
Buddha said when I point to the moon, don't mistake my finger for the moon.
HHMMMMMMMMMMM? Didn't Pilate ask Jesus Christ that same question? "What is truth?"
One of the most outstanding examples of Churchianity is the perpectual ability to speak in vague terms. "Truth is relevant to the person perceiving it" is what I'm told most often by scholors. If that is "true" then there is no such thing as "truth". IMHO lanquage is as precise as math.
When have ever looked at a faucet and questioned which handle was "hot" and 'cold'? Or school zone signs. Did you ever look around for an airplane to land in a school zone? Of course, there are exceptions to language not being exact, but I've rarely seen it in the Bible. When I have, it's always because of the figures of speech, which explained the exception.
Once again, I'm in the doctrinal area. My forbidden zone. I must always walk so softly in such a forum. To make it simple for myself, I stick to the absolutes.
The adversary is absolutely a liar. The antithesis of a lie is the truth. God is true and as such warrants our homage and even our obedience. Granted my obedience is less than perfect. But God still warrants it.
I remember a peice of a little saying VPW said on so many occassions. "Truth on the lips of the towns greatest sinner is still: TRUTH! ! ! "
One of the frustrations as a HFC I experienced was that people didn't want to "hear" the truth. It messes up churchianity to be confronted with the truth.
Our country is at a very important crossroad. If it's ever a time for "America Awakes", it's now. The politicians are confused, and without answers. The average person on the street is aware something is awry, but can't put their finger on it.
If anyone is left in the country with an ounce of perception of the truth, it's those of us who still have a Bible and can read it. (there was more to this post... but I'll stop here and let the mud start flyin' for those of you who wish to start slinging mud)
When have ever looked at a faucet and questioned which handle was "hot" and 'cold'? Or school zone signs. Did you ever look around for an airplane to land in a school zone? Of course, there are exceptions to language not being exact, but I've rarely seen it in the Bible. When I have, it's always because of the figures of speech, which explained the exception.
If anyone is left in the country with an ounce of perception of the truth, it's those of us who still have a Bible and can read it. (there was more to this post... but I'll stop here and let the mud start flyin' for those of you who wish to start slinging mud)
No flaming Y, just some questions. I agree there are figures of speech in the Bible. I have also noticed there is a great amount of disagreement among Christians over which verses are literal and which are figures of speech. How does one determine who has the truth and who doesn't then?
Likewise, there are many many people who still read their Bibles, and yet again you will stiff find a large amount of disagreement among them over what it says in numerous places. I tend to think many, probably most of those people who are still reading their Bibles do so because they want to understand, they want to know God, they want to do God's will. So again, how does one determine which group has the truth and which group does not?
Y, how do you reconcile that with the fact that there are many people who would agree with what you're saying yet believe totally different interpretations of the scriptures?
What makes your, personal version of truth 'THE TRUTH'?
Could it be those who "don't want to hear the truth" really just don't agree with your interpretation of 'the truth'?
The 'exactness' examples you use may be 'absolute', but much of language isn't really that black & white/cut & dried. There's much in language that is vague. There are examples from scripture in my previous posts on here.
Has anybody ever played that game Telephone? One person says to the person next to him/her, "I like Abigail!" The next person hears and passes along, "I like a big ale!" The 3rd person hears and passes along, "Looks like a big gale!" And so on.
Jesus said and I quote, "I am the way, the truth, and the life" (JCOP pg 130). His thoughts were God's Word. He spoke God's Word. He lived God's Word. Did this make him God?
From what I've managed to gather, as followers of the Lord Jesus Christ for the manifestation of the more abundant life, this is what we are to do also.
Recommended Posts
Belle
Hmmm.... good question.
It used to be accepted that the priests and religious rulers had a pipeline to God and that they ultimately were in charge of "the truth". Whatever they said was believed to be the truth.
It used to be accepted "truth" that the Earth was flat, that the Earth was the center of the universe, and, more recently, that we had 9 planets in our solar system....
Is "the truth" that most people seek to believe really the "how" and "why" are we here? A search for purpose?
A lot of those who think they have "the truth" become so egotistical and dependent on their particular truth that they will go to absurd extremes to defend it - even to the point of killing. At least scientists have the "Scientific Method" as some sort of standard for their truths, but even that's fallible.
It's all relative and subject to change at any moment.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
soulsurfer
I recall something in a sociology class about how truth is something that a group, society, or culture group agrees to.
Kuhn's book "The Structure of Scientific Revolutions" enforced this point and showed that people agree to something until something better comes along.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Abigail
Yes, that is one of the theories, Soulsurfer.
In reading John Lynn's letter, I noticed he made reference to truth with a capital T, does this mean CES has two truths? It sounds like they took what VPW taught about Truth and Fact and simply changed the terminology.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sushi
Abraham Lincoln once stated (perhaps on more than one occasion
):
History is agreed upon set of lies.
(edited to attribute correctly)
Edited by SushiLink to comment
Share on other sites
Ham
I think that once they label it truth with a T, they are calling it God.
Then the package is fully baked, so to speak.. no other options.
"Truth" doesn't change by their definition.
Neither do they.. at least seldom.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
oldiesman
WOW what an easy question. :)
God's Word is truth and that's where VP got it from.
Jhn 17:17 Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth.
-and-
1Ki 17:24 And the woman said to Elijah, Now by this I know that thou [art] a man of God, [and] that the word of the LORD in thy mouth [is] truth.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Abigail
Can anything outside of God's Word be Truth, Oldies? My eyes are brown, is that truth or simply fact. If God game me revelation about something, is that truth or fact? If I receive a personal prophesy for someone, is that truth or fact?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
oldiesman
I'm not answering any trick questions. :)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Abigail
Sorry, Oldies. I really wasn't trying to be tricky. I was simply looking for your point of view. If you reread my opening post, I offered several theories/definitions on truth, with a link to more. I really am curious about how various people understand this word.
Here I'll tell you my understanding. I think truth is a relative thing, a matter of perspective. It is fact mixed with how our brain processes the fact, how it mixes it with our past experiences. Not sure that communicates well, but it is the best I can do at the moment.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Belle
Not really all that easy.....
Who's interpretation of God's word is truth?
Which parts of the Bible really are God's word?
What about those scrolls that are also considered by some to be God's word, but weren't included in the Bible for political reasons?
What is the "truth" that those scriptures claim?
Is the Bible the only place to get this alleged "truth"?
"And Jesus said unto him, Verily I say unto thee, Today shalt thou be with me in paradise."
Is this true? Is it "THE Truth"? How can one know? Which interpretation is true?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nottawayfer
Trick questions? I don't get it.
:wacko: :wacko: :wacko:
If Abby said "It is truth that my eyes are brown.", would that be the truth or a lie?" Let's make it easy Oldies. If her eyes are brown, it is truth.
If she said "It is truth that my eyes are blue.", and her eyes are actually brown. Then that would be a lie. Or she would be extremely confused.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Abigail
Not necessarily so, Notta. If I understand Oldies perspective right, the color of my eyes would be factual, not a truth. That was kind of the point of this thread. Language can be a tricky thing, even when we all more or less speak the same one. Certain words have one connotation to one person, and an entirely different connotation to someone else. Words can also change meaning over time, like the word bad meaning good.
From a socialogical point of view, the words we use effect the way we think, the way we perceive, because most people think with words (I say most, because some people are visual thinkers - but that is most frequently found among people on the autism spectrum).
So, for instance, when we were in TWI we had certain words we never used, other words that had one meaning to us and an entirely different meaning to those outside of TWI. I would guess, CES probably has a bit of its own vernacular as well.
Is that correct Oldies?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
washingtonweather
its sortof like --did time exist before clocks?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nottawayfer
We were taught God's Word is truth.
Exodus 20:14 Thou shalt not commit adultery.
Deuteronomy 5:18 Neither shalt thou commit adultery.
Matthew 5:27 Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not commit adultery:
28 But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart.
Matthew 19:16 And, behold, one came and said unto him, Good Master, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life?
17 And he said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God: but if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments.
18 He saith unto him, Which? Jesus said, Thou shalt do no murder, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness,
19 Honour thy father and thy mother: and, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.
Mark 10:17 And when he was gone forth into the way, there came one running, and kneeled to him, and asked him, Good Master, what shall I do that I may inherit eternal life?
18 And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God.
19 Thou knowest the commandments, Do not commit adultery, Do not kill, Do not steal, Do not bear false witness, Defraud not, Honour thy father and mother.
Is the Bible clear that adultery should not be committed?
John 8
1But Jesus went to the Mount of Olives. 2At dawn he appeared again in the temple courts, where all the people gathered around him, and he sat down to teach them. 3The teachers of the law and the Pharisees brought in a woman caught in adultery. They made her stand before the group 4and said to Jesus, "Teacher, this woman was caught in the act of adultery. 5In the Law Moses commanded us to stone such women. Now what do you say?" 6They were using this question as a trap, in order to have a basis for accusing him.
But Jesus bent down and started to write on the ground with his finger. 7When they kept on questioning him, he straightened up and said to them, "If any one of you is without sin, let him be the first to throw a stone at her." 8Again he stooped down and wrote on the ground.
9At this, those who heard began to go away one at a time, the older ones first, until only Jesus was left, with the woman still standing there. 10Jesus straightened up and asked her, "Woman, where are they? Has no one condemned you?"
11"No one, sir," she said.
"Then neither do I condemn you," Jesus declared. "Go now and leave your life of sin."
Does this mean that Jesus went against the truth? I don't think so. The line of demarcation in TWI was either it was on the Word or off the Word, and ONLY the Word is truth. I think John 8 is a great example to not bind yourself in Words and doctrine. People are more important than that.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Belle
But, Notta, how do you reconcile those verses with the verses that show men with multiple wives?
How do you know that YOUR interpretation of those verses is 'THE truth'?
The problem is that anyone can use scripture to prove anything they want. It's sort of like my job as an analyst. When a sales rep calls with a request for information I ask them what they are trying to prove and show to the client, then tailor my information to that goal.
It's not lying, but I can pretty much make the numbers show whatever they want them to show IF I know what it is they want the customer to see.
Once I know the desired outcome, I determine which criteria to use (e.g. domestic sales, certain product sales, certain customer classes, etc.) to prove the requested 'truth'. My reports are always "the truth" but that truth is dependent upon the desired 'proof'/'outcome'/'result' of the salesman. I believe we/leaders/religions do the same with the scriptures. Not to mention the fact that the scriptures we have today are the ones approved of by a contingency of politicians with ulterior motives. There's much that has been suppressed because it did not condone whatever control and power that political contingency may have had and/or wanted.
What seems plain and clear common sense to one may not appear that way to others with ulterior motives or a different upbringing and religious teachings. Just look at how craiggers used scripture as justification for having sex with other men's wives.... Who's version is "the truth"?
I'm not trying to be contentious, just showing how one can not use the Bible as their standard for truth because it's so reliant on private interpretation and that's really all any church offers, isn't it? Their private interpretation of what the Bible says "the truth" is.
Edited by BelleLink to comment
Share on other sites
Nottawayfer
Belle,
Actually I was trying to show that the Bible shows two different aspects of a point. I guess Iwasn't doing a very good job making my point. I just wanted to show that we were taught in TWI that there is black and white, no gray EVER!! Then I wanted to show the gray area with the example of the woman found in adultery.
Truth is is a tricky word. Like that Oldies??
But I still think if Abby has brown eyes and says she has blue eyes, it is not the truth.....
Abby, I am just using you as an example. I don't mean anything by the example. Maybe I better excuse myself now. 
Sorry for the derail Abby.
Edited by NottawayferLink to comment
Share on other sites
Belle
Don't you dare excuse yourself (unless you farted)!!
I just didn't get your point - and that's not your fault! I shouldn't be booth-hopping anyway. I'm just spreading germs along with the gum I keep putting under the tables.
I think it's time me, my orange juice and Robotussin head off to bed....
You're right - the Bible isn't Black & White like we were taught and that's why I think it can't be considered "the truth" no matter what one's 'TRUTH' is.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
oenophile
"The Word of God works with a mathematical exactness...?"
Why did it never occur to us that language is not exact? It is rich with nuances of meanings that are not always easily quantifiable. Perhaps it is when we think we have weighed and measured it, Truth passes thru our fingers as the waves of the sea.
Paul said the letter killeth but the Spirit gives life.
Buddha said when I point to the moon, don't mistake my finger for the moon.
Edited by oenophileLink to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
Because if language can be treated as exact,
then we can plug in some formulas, and get
McBlessings in seconds.
That was one of the big draws of twi/pfal to a lot of people.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
YIdon'tgotochurch
HHMMMMMMMMMMM? Didn't Pilate ask Jesus Christ that same question? "What is truth?"
One of the most outstanding examples of Churchianity is the perpectual ability to speak in vague terms. "Truth is relevant to the person perceiving it" is what I'm told most often by scholors. If that is "true" then there is no such thing as "truth". IMHO lanquage is as precise as math.
When have ever looked at a faucet and questioned which handle was "hot" and 'cold'? Or school zone signs. Did you ever look around for an airplane to land in a school zone? Of course, there are exceptions to language not being exact, but I've rarely seen it in the Bible. When I have, it's always because of the figures of speech, which explained the exception.
Once again, I'm in the doctrinal area. My forbidden zone. I must always walk so softly in such a forum. To make it simple for myself, I stick to the absolutes.
The adversary is absolutely a liar. The antithesis of a lie is the truth. God is true and as such warrants our homage and even our obedience. Granted my obedience is less than perfect. But God still warrants it.
I remember a peice of a little saying VPW said on so many occassions. "Truth on the lips of the towns greatest sinner is still: TRUTH! ! ! "
One of the frustrations as a HFC I experienced was that people didn't want to "hear" the truth. It messes up churchianity to be confronted with the truth.
Our country is at a very important crossroad. If it's ever a time for "America Awakes", it's now. The politicians are confused, and without answers. The average person on the street is aware something is awry, but can't put their finger on it.
If anyone is left in the country with an ounce of perception of the truth, it's those of us who still have a Bible and can read it. (there was more to this post... but I'll stop here and let the mud start flyin' for those of you who wish to start slinging mud)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Abigail
No flaming Y, just some questions. I agree there are figures of speech in the Bible. I have also noticed there is a great amount of disagreement among Christians over which verses are literal and which are figures of speech. How does one determine who has the truth and who doesn't then?
Likewise, there are many many people who still read their Bibles, and yet again you will stiff find a large amount of disagreement among them over what it says in numerous places. I tend to think many, probably most of those people who are still reading their Bibles do so because they want to understand, they want to know God, they want to do God's will. So again, how does one determine which group has the truth and which group does not?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Belle
Y, how do you reconcile that with the fact that there are many people who would agree with what you're saying yet believe totally different interpretations of the scriptures?
What makes your, personal version of truth 'THE TRUTH'?
Could it be those who "don't want to hear the truth" really just don't agree with your interpretation of 'the truth'?
The 'exactness' examples you use may be 'absolute', but much of language isn't really that black & white/cut & dried. There's much in language that is vague. There are examples from scripture in my previous posts on here.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
CoolWaters
The Truth.
Has anybody ever played that game Telephone? One person says to the person next to him/her, "I like Abigail!" The next person hears and passes along, "I like a big ale!" The 3rd person hears and passes along, "Looks like a big gale!" And so on.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
trumpeter
Truth is not a what, it's a who. God is Truth.
Jesus said and I quote, "I am the way, the truth, and the life" (JCOP pg 130). His thoughts were God's Word. He spoke God's Word. He lived God's Word. Did this make him God?
From what I've managed to gather, as followers of the Lord Jesus Christ for the manifestation of the more abundant life, this is what we are to do also.
Edited by trumpeterLink to comment
Share on other sites
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.