That one repetitive, dissonant chord just nails it all together, demonstrating how music theory "truth" can instantly turn into a "lie"....brilliant.
Now, if you listen to Airplane's version, you'll notice they have "straightened out" that chord, thus, abandoning the essence of the original, subtle message, in my opinion....diluted for the masses.
I don't think truth can ever become a lie. Like a diamond can be cut by a master diamond cutter, set on a lovely piece of velvet and the rainbow hues of the facets be clearly seen, it can remain in the ground, it can be buried in mud, thrown in the garbage, but a diamond it remains no matter the environment in which it is placed. A person becomes a lier when he lies, but the truth itself is unchanged.
Jesus Christ is truth and anyone's opinion of Him does not change who He is. The more care a person gives to Him the more of the rainbow hues of the facets of Him a person can see, but what we see and hear of Him does not change who He is. We sange "O Word of God Incarnate" in twi although we probably were fed a hash version, but the words of the song are pretty wonderful:
O Word of God Incarnate
O Word of God incarnate, O Wisdom from on high,
O Truth unchanged, unchanging, O Light of our dark sky:
We praise You for the radiance that from the hallowed page,
A Lantern to our footsteps, shines on from age to age.
The Church from You, our Savior, received the Gift divine,
And still that Light is lifted over all the earth to shine.
It is the sacred Vessel where gems of truth are stored;
It is the heaven drawn Picture of Christ, the living Word.
The Scripture is a banner before God's host unfurled;
It is a shining Beacon above the darkling world.
It is the Chart and Compass that over life's surging tide,
Mid mists and rocks and quicksands, to You, O Christ, will guide.
O make your Church, dear Savior, a lamp of purest gold,
To bear before the nations Your true light as of old.
O teach your wandering pilgrims by this their path to trace,
Till, clouds and darkness ended, they see You face to face.
vp may have taught that Eve changed the truth into a lie, but that does not make it so. Truth is truth. Eve decided to believe a lie and changed her destiny and ours as well, but the truth stood. The truth was that in the day she ate she would surely die, which she did. Truth did not change. She believed something other than the truth and suffered the consequences, as does anyone who decides to believe a lie. But truth is unchangeable, unchanging.
If something is "true" it can not be "untrue" at the same time. If something is false it can't be true either.
I could change something about that thing that's true, and come up with something else, but that won't be the original thing. It will be something else.
Think of it as "true north" - yeah, yeah there's lots of different definitions of "north" but there is position, direction and point that is established on the planet earth as "north". That is basically fundamentally true, and "north" all the time. Anything else is not "north", it's another position, direction, point.
If water's hot - it can't be cold at the same time. Right?
It can BECOME cold but then....it's not hot anymore is it?
If I say "the sun is shining, don't take an umbrella" and it's raining outside and dark clouds everywhere - what I said wasn't true.
I can change what I said, correct it, say "it's raining, take an umbrella" - and that's now true - but it's not what I originally said.
I think the proposition that "truth can become a lie" is fundamentally incorrect, I see it the same way you're describing it Kit.
Roy, I'm not sure exactly what you're saying but it seems like you mean that - someone can change something about "truth" and make it into something else, through deceptive means like the "serpent" as an example. Now - that thing, the original "truth" is something else though, the actual original "truth" did not change. (in the examples you've given if I'm understanding you correctly)
The touchstone for the "truth" of a proposition in classical critical thinking is how well the proposition accords with objective reality. Essentially... what socks said!
One of the areas this touches on and that's long been discussed on GS by many is the relationship between "truth" and "logic".
In TWI parlance "truth" was "logical" and the use of logic would support something that was true. Classic example - The Trinity...which couldn't be true because it wasn't logical when stated as "one God in three persons and three persons in one God"......basically he proposed that logically how could there be three separate persons in one 'god'? In VP's presentation on the subect one could work regressively back from the two conclusions and one would be logical/true, another would be illogical/untrue.
Buuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuut.....the relatiionship between logic and perception was never accounted for, handled or explained. The rules of logic applied came from somewhere - where and why focus on "mathematical exactness and scientific precision"?
And why in a field where the impossible occurs all the time (waters part, dead rise, blind see) and events roll out when and how they do based on the "will", the intentions of God......is everything required to be "logical' by the standards of human mathematics and when compared to scientific endeavor? Math exactness I kinda get but if it's anything like science.......it will mean it's going on a long arch of experimentation, observation, review, adjustment and learning,
I don't believe in a true Trinity but for different reasons, none of which VPW or his books really covered at all - but IMO he developed his requirements for "working the Word" and what was and wasn't logical and therefore true or untrue and refused to account for the fact that his initial perception that the Bible "fit like a hand in glove" is one that isn't stated so by the Author.
Not to side track to Trinitarian debates or what VP did or didn't say or whether right or wrong........just thinking out loud.
thanks Kit Sober and cman and socks and Steve Lortz
the book of Genesis has both
Genesis 2:16 And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat: 17 But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.
God's truth
Genesis 3:2 And the woman said unto the serpent, We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden: 3 But of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die.
Eve truth
Eve had every right her person truth that was only limit
it does make it less the truth
in Eve mind she was right
truth is not black and white
there degrees of truth were we do know enough
there degrees of lies were we do not know enough
God kills people or destroy them I can find it in the Bible
God kills people to make them better
God destroy people to make them better
John 10:10 the thief {Christ| cometh not, but for to steal, and to kill, and to destroy: I {Christ} am come that they might have life, and that they might have it more abundantly. 11 I {Christ} am the good shepherd: the good shepherd giveth his {Christ} life for the sheep.
you have to see truth as more than your minds could handle and Less than you think
Hmmmm, I really don't know what you're trying to say Roy.
Apparently we don't agree on what the definition of "truth" is or the definition of things that are true.
On face value, what you're saying simply isn't correct.
The person "Eve" in Genesis had a right to their own opinion, yes. And apparently that person thought they were right, yes.
However in that instance they weren't. There was no "degree" of right or wrong there, nor shades of black and white that made it partly right or partly wrong.
Any shades of understanding that a person has isn't what defines the truth of a reality - it does for them, their perceptions might be this or that or anything and for that person they're understanding might lead them to a conclusion that is, in fact, not correct.
I really don't understand where you come up with something like you're saying. As an opinion it's fine but I don't think it's possible to come up with that view from the information that's in Genesis relevant to the characters in the record. The information in Genesis doesn't lead one to the conclusion that there were degrees involved in what was right and wrong to do.
Simply stating that there are things we don't understand or understand fully or may never know and understand doesn't preclude the fact that there are things we can understand at any given point in time.
Is there a hard and fast "truth"? I mean in anything at all. 1 + 1 = 2, unless you are working in binary. You might consider what you weigh to be fact, truth, but it is dependent on where you are. You likely weigh ever so slightly less at a high altitude or on the moon.
When it comes to God, I think we are muddling through. Does anyone have truth? Does absolute truth matter? I am 65 years old. My beliefs have been evolving for 65 years, on anything you can name. When I was younger, I thought learning "facts" meant I knew something. As I've gotten older, the more I learn, the more I realize how much I don't know. What learning has done for me is create more questions, more and more questions.
Janet
You're right. We weigh less on a high altitude or the moon because gravity is less on the moon or a high altitude. As far as 1 + 1 = 2, this is true also providing a person knows how to count and is honest.
However, if we take the statements:
(a) When we take one object (or unit) and add it to another, then the sum, after counting again the number of objects, "is" two objects.
(b) When we take one object (or unit) and add it to another, then the sum, after counting again the number of objects, "is not" two objects.
In the case of (b), the liar gets his ontology all backwards and knows it. What I'm driving at is the liar has knowledge of ontology and gets it backwards for the purpose of deceiving.
I would express it differently though - things are knowable within their own or say, a context.
Rather then say "I can't know" for sure, I recognize that there are things that I do, in fact, know - "for sure". That's just the way it is. I suppose if I shoved it down other's throats I'd be a jerk but for my myself and I and those close to me, it's a good thing. That's who I am, being anything else would be deceptive. If someone wants to say I'm wrong or that I can't know that way, fine. That's what they say. Yet, there are things that we all accept and rely on everyday, both big and small that we don't worry about whether we "know them as true" or not - we simply know them as we do and we function accordingly and giving them some thought we understand why and how we know those things. It's not really complicated, as I think you know.
The fact that we can share what we know and are learning with one another is a part of how we learn. So there's a benefit to discussion.
Recommended Posts
Ham
perhaps when truth becomes exclusive..
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
Well, you should have figured I would post THIS.
That one repetitive, dissonant chord just nails it all together, demonstrating how music theory "truth" can instantly turn into a "lie"....brilliant.
Now, if you listen to Airplane's version, you'll notice they have "straightened out" that chord, thus, abandoning the essence of the original, subtle message, in my opinion....diluted for the masses.
Edited by waysiderLink to comment
Share on other sites
Twinky
It's a good question, Roy.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
year2027
God first
thanks Ham and wayside and Twinky
Ham - yes my friend
wayside - I understood Music to see if off note but I not has musical as you my friend
Twinky - yes it is my friend
with love and a holy kiss Roy
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ham
I've thought a little further.. when does truth become a lie? Maybe the fraction of a second after some numbnuts puts a greasy price tag on it..
Link to comment
Share on other sites
year2027
God first
thanks Ham
you make me laugh and smile my friend
with love and a holy kiss Roy
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Kit Sober
I don't think truth can ever become a lie. Like a diamond can be cut by a master diamond cutter, set on a lovely piece of velvet and the rainbow hues of the facets be clearly seen, it can remain in the ground, it can be buried in mud, thrown in the garbage, but a diamond it remains no matter the environment in which it is placed. A person becomes a lier when he lies, but the truth itself is unchanged.
Jesus Christ is truth and anyone's opinion of Him does not change who He is. The more care a person gives to Him the more of the rainbow hues of the facets of Him a person can see, but what we see and hear of Him does not change who He is. We sange "O Word of God Incarnate" in twi although we probably were fed a hash version, but the words of the song are pretty wonderful:
Link to comment
Share on other sites
year2027
God first
thanks Kit Sober
whether you believe or not Eve changed the truth of God by adding unto it
truth is not truth when you add anything to it
both are written in the book of Genesis
with love and a holy kiss Roy
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Kit Sober
vp may have taught that Eve changed the truth into a lie, but that does not make it so. Truth is truth. Eve decided to believe a lie and changed her destiny and ours as well, but the truth stood. The truth was that in the day she ate she would surely die, which she did. Truth did not change. She believed something other than the truth and suffered the consequences, as does anyone who decides to believe a lie. But truth is unchangeable, unchanging.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
cman
the deal with Eve seems more of a negotiation deal
I think God was there in the mix as well
Link to comment
Share on other sites
socks
Is this just semantics or what?
If something is "true" it can not be "untrue" at the same time. If something is false it can't be true either.
I could change something about that thing that's true, and come up with something else, but that won't be the original thing. It will be something else.
Think of it as "true north" - yeah, yeah there's lots of different definitions of "north" but there is position, direction and point that is established on the planet earth as "north". That is basically fundamentally true, and "north" all the time. Anything else is not "north", it's another position, direction, point.
If water's hot - it can't be cold at the same time. Right?
It can BECOME cold but then....it's not hot anymore is it?
If I say "the sun is shining, don't take an umbrella" and it's raining outside and dark clouds everywhere - what I said wasn't true.
I can change what I said, correct it, say "it's raining, take an umbrella" - and that's now true - but it's not what I originally said.
I think the proposition that "truth can become a lie" is fundamentally incorrect, I see it the same way you're describing it Kit.
Roy, I'm not sure exactly what you're saying but it seems like you mean that - someone can change something about "truth" and make it into something else, through deceptive means like the "serpent" as an example. Now - that thing, the original "truth" is something else though, the actual original "truth" did not change. (in the examples you've given if I'm understanding you correctly)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Steve Lortz
The touchstone for the "truth" of a proposition in classical critical thinking is how well the proposition accords with objective reality. Essentially... what socks said!
Love,
Steve
Link to comment
Share on other sites
socks
Better put, Steve, thanks!
One of the areas this touches on and that's long been discussed on GS by many is the relationship between "truth" and "logic".
In TWI parlance "truth" was "logical" and the use of logic would support something that was true. Classic example - The Trinity...which couldn't be true because it wasn't logical when stated as "one God in three persons and three persons in one God"......basically he proposed that logically how could there be three separate persons in one 'god'? In VP's presentation on the subect one could work regressively back from the two conclusions and one would be logical/true, another would be illogical/untrue.
Buuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuut.....the relatiionship between logic and perception was never accounted for, handled or explained. The rules of logic applied came from somewhere - where and why focus on "mathematical exactness and scientific precision"?
And why in a field where the impossible occurs all the time (waters part, dead rise, blind see) and events roll out when and how they do based on the "will", the intentions of God......is everything required to be "logical' by the standards of human mathematics and when compared to scientific endeavor? Math exactness I kinda get but if it's anything like science.......it will mean it's going on a long arch of experimentation, observation, review, adjustment and learning,
I don't believe in a true Trinity but for different reasons, none of which VPW or his books really covered at all - but IMO he developed his requirements for "working the Word" and what was and wasn't logical and therefore true or untrue and refused to account for the fact that his initial perception that the Bible "fit like a hand in glove" is one that isn't stated so by the Author.
Not to side track to Trinitarian debates or what VP did or didn't say or whether right or wrong........just thinking out loud.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
year2027
God first
thanks Kit Sober and cman and socks and Steve Lortz
the book of Genesis has both
Genesis 2:16 And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat: 17 But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.
God's truth
Genesis 3:2 And the woman said unto the serpent, We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden: 3 But of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die.
Eve truth
Eve had every right her person truth that was only limit
it does make it less the truth
in Eve mind she was right
truth is not black and white
there degrees of truth were we do know enough
there degrees of lies were we do not know enough
God kills people or destroy them I can find it in the Bible
God kills people to make them better
God destroy people to make them better
John 10:10 the thief {Christ| cometh not, but for to steal, and to kill, and to destroy: I {Christ} am come that they might have life, and that they might have it more abundantly. 11 I {Christ} am the good shepherd: the good shepherd giveth his {Christ} life for the sheep.
you have to see truth as more than your minds could handle and Less than you think
as the lie that I once believe
with love and a holy kiss Roy
Link to comment
Share on other sites
socks
Hmmmm, I really don't know what you're trying to say Roy.
Apparently we don't agree on what the definition of "truth" is or the definition of things that are true.
On face value, what you're saying simply isn't correct.
The person "Eve" in Genesis had a right to their own opinion, yes. And apparently that person thought they were right, yes.
However in that instance they weren't. There was no "degree" of right or wrong there, nor shades of black and white that made it partly right or partly wrong.
Any shades of understanding that a person has isn't what defines the truth of a reality - it does for them, their perceptions might be this or that or anything and for that person they're understanding might lead them to a conclusion that is, in fact, not correct.
I really don't understand where you come up with something like you're saying. As an opinion it's fine but I don't think it's possible to come up with that view from the information that's in Genesis relevant to the characters in the record. The information in Genesis doesn't lead one to the conclusion that there were degrees involved in what was right and wrong to do.
Simply stating that there are things we don't understand or understand fully or may never know and understand doesn't preclude the fact that there are things we can understand at any given point in time.
I'll leave you to your ponderings. Peace!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
year2027
God first
thanks Socks
there are many tones in truth that make the sound of like-love-hate-love-like
I am hearing God teaches me by being wiling to be a fool I am wise
socks that which sounds wrong is right with God
with love and a holy kiss Roy
Link to comment
Share on other sites
year2027
on another board
Is there a hard and fast "truth"? I mean in anything at all. 1 + 1 = 2, unless you are working in binary. You might consider what you weigh to be fact, truth, but it is dependent on where you are. You likely weigh ever so slightly less at a high altitude or on the moon.
When it comes to God, I think we are muddling through. Does anyone have truth? Does absolute truth matter? I am 65 years old. My beliefs have been evolving for 65 years, on anything you can name. When I was younger, I thought learning "facts" meant I knew something. As I've gotten older, the more I learn, the more I realize how much I don't know. What learning has done for me is create more questions, more and more questions.
Janet
You're right. We weigh less on a high altitude or the moon because gravity is less on the moon or a high altitude. As far as 1 + 1 = 2, this is true also providing a person knows how to count and is honest.
However, if we take the statements:
(a) When we take one object (or unit) and add it to another, then the sum, after counting again the number of objects, "is" two objects.
(b) When we take one object (or unit) and add it to another, then the sum, after counting again the number of objects, "is not" two objects.
In the case of (b), the liar gets his ontology all backwards and knows it. What I'm driving at is the liar has knowledge of ontology and gets it backwards for the purpose of deceiving.
Edited by year2027Link to comment
Share on other sites
socks
That's reasonable Roy. I get that approach.
I would express it differently though - things are knowable within their own or say, a context.
Rather then say "I can't know" for sure, I recognize that there are things that I do, in fact, know - "for sure". That's just the way it is. I suppose if I shoved it down other's throats I'd be a jerk but for my myself and I and those close to me, it's a good thing. That's who I am, being anything else would be deceptive. If someone wants to say I'm wrong or that I can't know that way, fine. That's what they say. Yet, there are things that we all accept and rely on everyday, both big and small that we don't worry about whether we "know them as true" or not - we simply know them as we do and we function accordingly and giving them some thought we understand why and how we know those things. It's not really complicated, as I think you know.
The fact that we can share what we know and are learning with one another is a part of how we learn. So there's a benefit to discussion.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
year2027
God first
thanks Socks
Yes my friend
with love and a holy kiss Roy
Link to comment
Share on other sites
cman
I'd be willing to see that the truth changes in perspective.
Not leaving behind lies but that which was true, still is.
There is relationships between the individual and truth in perspectives.
And those relationships can be revisited,
and that very truth seen more clearly, if we missed it the first time around.
Torn down and built again you could come up with the same truth.
And with even more in addition because of the many relationships involved.
Edited by cmanLink to comment
Share on other sites
Steve Lortz
That has prety much been my experience since leaving TWI.
Love,
Steve
Link to comment
Share on other sites
year2027
God first
thanks cman and Steve
the tearing down of believes is how one gets strong
what I once believe to be truth is lies of yesterday
my friends
with love and a holy kiss Roy
Edited by year2027Link 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.