Political Crossfire Forums

[connermt]

cap'n queasy wrote: Quote: To a man with no nerves, fire isn't hot because he can't feel it burn his skin

Yet his skin is still ruined. And this is because fire is most assuredly hot. And that is a fact that cannot be disputed. One might be of the opinion that fire is not hot but that doesn't help you much if you stick your hand in a fire.

Hot seems to be a descriptive term, nothing more. What ruins the skin is a physical & chemical reaction, not 'hottness'. Fire burns the skins, so does some acids. You can put your hand over a flame w/o touching the fire & feel the heat, but you can put your hand over acid & not feel heat, but they both still burn &, in some cases, both feel 'hot' to the touch. So I guess it is all skematics....

[connermt]

cap'n queasy wrote: The problem lies not in finding the Truth, but knowing what it is you are looking at.

Truth is not subjective, a statement is either true or it is not true.

It is only one's opinion of truth that is subjective.

Quote: The problem lies not in finding the Truth, but knowing what it is you are looking at. Very true
Quote: Truth is not subjective, a statement is either true or it is not true. True only if the truth can be proven. Meaning, you can't technically & undoubtably prove to others what you believe to be true of God is true (or can you?).
Quote: It is only one's opinion of truth that is subjective. Again, true if truth is totally proven.
Once someone has the undisputable facts, it is then their decision to accept the facts as truth or not.
Many years ago, most people thought the earth was flat, some believed is was 'round'. Eventually the earth was proven it was 'round', it then became truth & people had the choice to accept it or not.

[MJB]

connermt wrote: An open mind is required for belief in anything IMO

I agree.

Quote: but simply believing, while may be proof for you (or someone else) doesn't make it true for everyone.

One may believe something that is true, or he may believe something that is false. Belief cannot make something true, and it does not prove something to be true. Belief is simply that, belief.

Quote: You have to know to look for something before you go looking for it.

Well - I don't know that I would say exactly that, but rather, that it is much more likely one will find something, if he at least wonders, or is curious enough to want to know what's out there, in order to decide to look and see what, if anything, he might find.

Quote: But until IT is proven, IT is only a goal; something to find - IT is not the truth until it is proven.

This is where we seem to be having our main problem.

I'm not speaking of something such as having the goal of climbing a mountain, for instance, where it only becomes a reality once the climb is accomplished.

I am speaking of something that is true, as in something that IS. Say a man and his wife have a romantic weekend, and the wife becomes pregnant (under natural conditions, mind you). Though her pregnancy begins at the time of conception, and that is the truth of it, she may not be aware of her pregnancy until some time later. But nonetheless, it is true that she is pregnant, and has been from the moment conception took place. She may go weeks, maybe even months, before she finds out, but in the interim, she was still, of a truth, pregnant.

So, as per this thread, either God exists, or he does not. Whether or not I think he exists, or whether or not anyone else thinks he exists, has no baring on the truth of the matter. If God exists, then he exists, in which case, that is a truth that no man's opinion can alter.



By the way - can anyone tell me if the email notification is working? If so, mine's not (though I do have it checked).

[connermt]

MJB wrote: connermt wrote: An open mind is required for belief in anything IMO

I agree.

Quote: but simply believing, while may be proof for you (or someone else) doesn't make it true for everyone.

One may believe something that is true, or he may believe something that is false. Belief cannot make something true, and it does not prove something to be true. Belief is simply that, belief.

Quote: You have to know to look for something before you go looking for it.

Well - I don't know that I would say exactly that, but rather, that it is much more likely one will find something, if he at least wonders, or is curious enough to want to know what's out there, in order to decide to look and see what, if anything, he might find.

Quote: But until IT is proven, IT is only a goal; something to find - IT is not the truth until it is proven.

This is where we seem to be having our main problem.

I'm not speaking of something such as having the goal of climbing a mountain, for instance, where it only becomes a reality once the climb is accomplished.

I am speaking of something that is true, as in something that IS. Say a man and his wife have a romantic weekend, and the wife becomes pregnant (under natural conditions, mind you). Though her pregnancy begins at the time of conception, and that is the truth of it, she may not be aware of her pregnancy until some time later. But nonetheless, it is true that she is pregnant, and has been from the moment conception took place. She may go weeks, maybe even months, before she finds out, but in the interim, she was still, of a truth, pregnant.

So, as per this thread, either God exists, or he does not. Whether or not I think he exists, or whether or not anyone else thinks he exists, has no baring on the truth of the matter. If God exists, then he exists, in which case, that is a truth that no man's opinion can alter.



By the way - can anyone tell me if the email notification is working? If so, mine's not (though I do have it checked).

You have to know to look for something before you go looking for it. Meaning that if you want to prove "X", you need to go looking for it (looking to prove it). Granted you may find other things while looking for "X" that may or may not have anything to do with "X".
I don't think there are many people who would disagree with the idea that just because we don't know something to be true doesn't mean it does/doesn't exist. Throughtout human history, the earth has always revolved around the sun, but people didn't really know that for a fact for a long time. That doesn't mean, of course, that the earth only started revolving around the sun the instant we figured that out.

I suppose, at least speaking about the truth of God, that it is't proveable simply because it takes belief in God; belief in something we can't physically see & touch or run experiments on to show proof.
That & the fact that, even with people who believe in God, still don't agree 100% on the totallity of God (who/what God is, the trinity, etc.)
That last point, in of itself (at least IMO), is a major stumbling block that keeps some people from believeing in God.

"How can I believe in something when I see other who are suppose to believe in it disagree on it?"

[cap'n queasy]

connermt wrote: cap'n queasy wrote: Quote: To a man with no nerves, fire isn't hot because he can't feel it burn his skin

Yet his skin is still ruined. And this is because fire is most assuredly hot. And that is a fact that cannot be disputed. One might be of the opinion that fire is not hot but that doesn't help you much if you stick your hand in a fire.

Hot seems to be a descriptive term, nothing more. What ruins the skin is a physical & chemical reaction, not 'hottness'. Fire burns the skins, so does some acids. You can put your hand over a flame w/o touching the fire & feel the heat, but you can put your hand over acid & not feel heat, but they both still burn &, in some cases, both feel 'hot' to the touch. So I guess it is all skematics....

I believe the word you mean is semantics. And and that is precisely what you are trying to obscure the point with.

What I'm telling the guy is that it doesn't matter if his opinion is that fire is harmless when you put your hand in it. That's a subjective opinion.

The truth, which is an absolute, is that fire will destroy your hand if you stick it in a fire.

It is a big mistake to confuse subjective opinion with absolute reality.

You can test the truth of my statement by building a campfire and sticking your hand into it. :lol:

[cap'n queasy]

Quote: Again, true if truth is totally proven.


Whether a bunch of people think something is proven or not is irrelevant to the truth.

If something is true, it is true. If it is not true, then it's not true.

What we think of it doesn't matter that much. At all actually.

[Snarf]

psholtz wrote: cap'n queasy wrote: Quote: To a man with no nerves, fire isn't hot because he can't feel it burn his skin

Yet his skin is still ruined. And this is because fire is most assuredly hot. And that is a fact that cannot be disputed.
Good point..
Fire is not 'hot', fire 'burns' skin. Hot is a purely subjective term. If you lived on the sun, this place would be a 'cold' frozen hell even when you set it on fire...

[Snarf]

cap'n queasy wrote: Quote: Again, true if truth is totally proven.


Whether a bunch of people think something is proven or not is irrelevant to the truth.

If something is true, it is true. If it is not true, then it's not true.

What we think of it doesn't matter that much. At all actually.
Actually, it makes a huge difference, a 'fly planes into buildings' and kill people difference. What we believe is the truth, whether valid or not. If it weren't for that very fact, the whole God business would have gone away long ago as proof of His existence is profoundly lacking...

[connermt]

cap'n queasy wrote: connermt wrote: cap'n queasy wrote: Quote: To a man with no nerves, fire isn't hot because he can't feel it burn his skin

Yet his skin is still ruined. And this is because fire is most assuredly hot. And that is a fact that cannot be disputed. One might be of the opinion that fire is not hot but that doesn't help you much if you stick your hand in a fire.

Hot seems to be a descriptive term, nothing more. What ruins the skin is a physical & chemical reaction, not 'hottness'. Fire burns the skins, so does some acids. You can put your hand over a flame w/o touching the fire & feel the heat, but you can put your hand over acid & not feel heat, but they both still burn &, in some cases, both feel 'hot' to the touch. So I guess it is all skematics....

I believe the word you mean is semantics. And and that is precisely what you are trying to obscure the point with.

What I'm telling the guy is that it doesn't matter if his opinion is that fire is harmless when you put your hand in it. That's a subjective opinion.

The truth, which is an absolute, is that fire will destroy your hand if you stick it in a fire.

It is a big mistake to confuse subjective opinion with absolute reality.

You can test the truth of my statement by building a campfire and sticking your hand into it. :lol:

Yeah my brain said one thing my figers wrote something else :lol:
Did anyone say fire is not hot? When I was 16 I worked fast food. My hands got used to being burned so much that it takes A LOT of heat to actually burn them now. The truth of this is that it takes much more heat to burn my hands than it does most other people. Does that mean fire isn't hot? No. What it DOES mean is that you will say a fire is hot long before I would. That is perception & fact.
Likewise, if fire & hot were the same thing, than it would mean that ONLY fire could be hot. That is not the case. Therefore, HOT is a description of fire.
When speaking about GOD & TRUTH, the only proof you have of what you believe is truth is your belief & expereinces, which can't be proven to others. In addition, I hazzard to guess that, if you claim to be a christian, then what you believe in isn't what every single christian believes in. Are you saying then that their truth isn't right because it isn't the same as your truth? Probably, but that just means that your PERCEPTION of truth is different than my PERCEPTION of truth.
If you have a way to prove that YOUR TRUTH is the absolute truth, please share because you would be the first person in history to do so & you need to be put in the history books. :wink:

[cap'n queasy]

Quote: My hands got used to being burned so much that it takes A LOT of heat to actually burn them now.
Put the semantics aside, because they are irrelevent.

Go out to your back yard, start a campfire and stick your hand in the flame for a minute and then come back and tell me what happened.

If you would like to make a small wager I bet 10$ you won't try to tell me fire is not hot anymore. :lol:

[connermt]

cap'n queasy wrote: Quote: My hands got used to being burned so much that it takes A LOT of heat to actually burn them now.
Put the semantics aside, because they are irrelevent.

Go out to your back yard, start a campfire and stick your hand in the flame for a minute and then come back and tell me what happened.

If you would like to make a small wager I bet 10$ you won't try to tell me fire is not hot anymore. :lol:

You know what I am saying - you just want to argue. It is very simple:
While I accept that this is your stance & resepct your beliefs & the ability to make your decisions about your belief(s), you can't show w/o any doubt that what you believe to be true is the ONLY truth that mankind should accept &/or embrace.

PS: Being HOT is a property of fire, as well as many other things in the universe. HOT doesn't burn, destroy, etc. It is simply one of a perceived description of fire.

[mattwa33193]

cap'n queasy wrote: Quote: Again, true if truth is totally proven.


Whether a bunch of people think something is proven or not is irrelevant to the truth.

If something is true, it is true. If it is not true, then it's not true.

What we think of it doesn't matter that much. At all actually.

Exactly.

[mattwa33193]

But religion is where truth gets scary weird.

Every single belief system that believes in an omnipotent God can be true at the same time. Only belief systems with no omnipotent God preclude all others.

Think about it.

[garyd]

Blew that one Mattwa there is a uniqueness to reformation Christianity that cannot be denied.

Islam believes in an omnipotent God but that God left everything including your salvation and that of others up to man hence it becomes fairly easy to justify conversion by the sword.

It is the same trap all too many religionist of whatever stripe fall into.

Yet reformation Christianity which brought Christianity back to its roots and attempted to wrench it from the hands of an apostate Roman Catholic Church states that salvation rather than being though man's efforts is entirely the work of God. In this case one can at best be a watchman warning a condemned world of that which is to come for no law law you can pass no weapon you can weild and no eloquence you can produce can save even one human soul from its intended fate.

[mattwa33193]

garyd wrote: Blew that one Mattwa there is a uniqueness to reformation Christianity that cannot be denied.

Islam believes in an omnipotent God but that God left everything including your salvation and that of others up to man hence it becomes fairly easy to justify conversion by the sword.

It is the same trap all too many religionist of whatever stripe fall into.

Yet reformation Christianity which brought Christianity back to its roots and attempted to wrench it from the hands of an apostate Roman Catholic Church states that salvation rather than being though man's efforts is entirely the work of God. In this case one can at best be a watchman warning a condemned world of that which is to come for no law law you can pass no weapon you can weild and no eloquence you can produce can save even one human soul from its intended fate.

You missed my point. If you start with the assumption of an omnipotent God, omnipotent being the operative word here, then it is possible that all belief systems are correct, even contradictory ones.

Don't put handcuffs on God.