Posted on 09/20/2013 4:29:03 AM PDT by spirited irish
Yes....
The prelude to half-Truths,
The prelude to half-Truths,
like; evolution, atheism, pantheism, democracy?..
By zealots of any stripe. The end justifies the means.
Happy Thanksgiving to all!
If He didn't care to, there would be no such thing as justice.
God alone knows objective truth. He alone speaks objective truth. He IS Truth. For when He says a thing, it is. It is because He said it.
For he spake, and it was done; he commanded, and it stood fast. - Psalms 33:9
Sounds perilously like "Universal Now"... '-)
~~~~~~~~~
Happy and blessed Thanksgiving, Dear Sisters in Christ!
I pray your Thanksgiving was happy and blessed also!
Presumably you refer to the question in your back quote? Surely, no doubt resides in your mind that Judeo-Christians judge that it is Socialist louts, obviously seeking to hi-jack America, who pose a grave threat? The Judeo-Christian Tradition poses no threat to liberty. You have no logical reason to believe otherwise.
In the meantime, I note that nowhere in your reply is to be found an answer to the question I posed. I’ve asked it for nine years and have yet to receive an honest reply.
As for your observation to boop to the effect that “The capitalization of ‘Truth’ to a proper noun for which no established definition exists is a gambit to establish control by introducing a term that you get to define.” If recollection serves (and admittedly my forum memory goes back a mere 9 years), it was the Darwin Mullahs and Imams (that is, the self-proclaimed “defenders” of Science on this forum) who introduced the capitalized sobriquet “Truth” as a form of derision against Christians, usually expressed in a Romanesque and wholly uppercase mode, “TRVTH,” accompanied by scornful hoots proclaiming that there is no “truth” in Science, all “scientific” facts being subject (of course) to further discovery. Boop was simply being precise in carefully defining philosophical and religious (or perhaps sometimes mathematical) “truth” (or “proof”) from scientific “facts.” But you would seek to gain some ephemeral and imaginary advantage from your mischaracterization. Do you not understand that a significant portion of the assembly is aware of your mischaracterization and to what extent you are embarrassing yourself?
(if I’ve mischaracterized your intent to any significant extent, betty, please so inform the forum).
Here’s wishing everyone a most joyous Thanksgiving (even those who very much would like us all to forget to whom it is we are giving thanks). I hope everyone had as good a Thanksgiving as did I. There is nothing like being with family this time of year. Let us be grateful for what we have and may it fall to everyone.
No, I was only trying to distinguish legitimate Truth from tons of other "Truths" which are anything but.
Should I cite a mild example? "Truth" claims of, oh say, tree-huggers seem to me anything but.
betty boop: "I see Truth, however, as the very Order of the universe, as embedded in all aspects of Nature.
The world is the way it is and not some other way because it is the reification of its essential organizational principle which is its Truth."
Of course I agree with all of that, certainly in general, if not in every specific.
Was merely hoping to distinguish between, dare I say it: true Truth and pretend Truth. ;-)
FRiend, it's important to keep in mind that science itself makes no use of, or claims to the words "truth" or "Truth".
Those are reserved for philosophy and theology, and are defined by those disciplines according to their own rules and logic.
In those we sometimes find such qualifiers as "epistimically true", "ontologically true" and "God's Truth".
None of these words have anything to do with science.
Science itself is far too humble to make any such claims.
In science we have only observed facts, confirmed theories plus tons and tons of uncertainties between them.
As to the validity of truth-claims of the various philosophies and theologies, those are matters of some logic and some faith.
Surely, you do not disagree?
The charge is heresy - a disagreement about doctrine among believers of the same faith. If the Socialist louts are the grave threat, why is time being wasted on this distraction?
Mischaracterization? As soon as the term was used, there was disagreement over exactly what it means. It's all right there in the thread. It wasn't a mischaracterization, it was predictable and turned out to be as predicted.
No, but propaganda does, and that along with the common propaganda tactic of polarization will eventually produce the argument that anything that isn't about truth (or Truth) must be about lies.
Spirited to Bro: “Now if it was true that your church—and you— goes by what God’s Revelation to man says then your pride would not be so offended by “Falling Stars...” that you have repeatedly tried to undermine the veracity of the author and joined with other offended posters in having the essay removed to the religion forum.”
Bro the sophist responds: Well, thank you! tacticalogic, at last the truth comes out! They can’t stomach spirited irish on the religion forum — she’s been banished! Or should I say shunned!
Spirited: Only the painfully twisted, upside-down, self-deluded reasoning of a sophist would see vindication of ‘self’ in those remarks.
The conscience of the sophist is polluted and depraved, and a depraved conscience is the most destructive force in political, legal, social, economic, and cultural life. This is because though the intellect remains intact, reason is warped and inverted, thus useless for pursuit of the good, the just and the true. In short, guided by a depraved conscience, reason is used in pursuit of the preservation of self-image at any cost. This is sophistry.
In a penetrating analysis of sophistry, J. Budziszewski observes that the sophists’ view of reality is paradoxical because it ultimately denies reality. Sophists are shock troopers of evil says Budziszewski, and according to their satanically-inverted view of reality:
“Man is the measure of all things, but man has no fixed nature. Man measures all things by his words, but words have no fixed meanings. Language is not an instrument for finding truth, but for changing it. Those who can master it, master all. It is a good creed for rogues, and commends itself to tyrants in every age.” (What We Can’t Not Know, Budziszewski, p. 167)
Sophistry is the religion of America’s left-right Ruling Class and legions of like-minded individuals. Sophistry says autonomous man is a free-thinker, thus the maker of his own truth and morality even though sophistry denies the reality of both truth and morality. It says depraved man
can unmake and then remake himself. Thus man is free to divinize himself as in days of old. Males can be females and females can now be males, or they can be androgynous, that is, transgender.
Sophistry’s’ favorite Scripture is “judge not.” The only judgment is the judgment against moral judgment. The only sins are the ideas that sin and immutable truth exists. The only truth is the idea that truth does not exist. Evil is the idea that evil exists. The greatest evil of all however, is to dissent against sophists.
Sophists are braggarts who love to boast of their scientifically-informed reason, yet reason is actually escape from reason. By way of unreason, arrogant sophists claim that God is dead, or just a jump-starter for evolution, His Revelation a myth, and evolutionary theory absolutely true, but sophistry also says that words have no fixed meaning. There is no truth in sophistry. Therefore,
God is not dead but rather evolutionary theory is, for as it must begin with the spontaneous generation of something from nothing, then Darwinism is also nothing. This means that Godless evolutionary theory is as meaningless as
spontaneous generation and the much-vaunted reason of sophists.
Sophistry is all the rage in contemporary America, even though it prefers longer, more intellectual sounding names to dupe the gullible. Thus for example, it calls itself postmodernism, empiricism, naturalism, epistemological relativism, anti-foundationalism, pragmatism, situational ethics, pluralism, multiculturalism, interfaith, evolutionary humanism, trans-humanism, positivism, rationalism, and progressivism.
And “anti-evolutionists” exist only in the feverish brains of Darwinians.
“In reality, there are no such critters.”
Tell that to my MAC OSX dictionary . . . or to Dictionarty.com . . . or to Wikipedia . . . or to thefreedictionary.com . . . or to anyone on this forum who is not a dedicated defender of the Darwinianist perverted version of Science.
“I've never seen a thread or poster on FR whose purpose was “to attack and disparage Christianity”.
To “see” one must look. I’ve quoted a number Darwinians who do exactly that (attack and disparage). See my post #128 (to you), this thread. Bear in mind, the Forum is watching.
“I've avoided no issues raised by Ms boop, nor refused to answer any questions, though she does refuse to answer my questions.”
Name them (the “questions” boop refuses to answer) and demand that they be answered. I think it likely that the outcome will be that boop has given you answers, but that you do not like the answers (and that you therefore prefer to pretend your questions have not been answered - ‘tis a common tactic of Alinsky devotees).
From Marx to the present, it has been the mantra of all Liberals/Socialists/0bamatrons, that it is Science generally, and The Theory of Evolution particularly, which “proves” that Capitalism and the Judeo-Christian God are both dead.
Speaking of unanswered question - Since you seem to understand (see post #81) that my main objection is to Scientists of an Atheist persuasion, primarily if not entirely, who misrepresent themselves as speaking authoritatively, not personally, that Science proves God does not exist, why do you tell me all these things you apparently know I know?
“it is the anti-evolutionists who have declared war on science”
How can you expect to be taken seriously when you cannot even frame the issue accurately?
It is the Darwinian Mullahs and Imams who make war against the Judeo-Christian Tradition and invoke the name of Science for their inspiration.
“the “Socialist louts” don't log on Free Republic”
Where have I said that “Socialist louts” do?
“All of the subject changing and attempts at intimidation are coming from your side, FRiend, some even from you.”
So you assert. The assertion does not prove the fact. Prove the fact.
If it’s purely political, is it still heresy?
Depends on what political kingdom you belong too..
heresy, sedition, espionage, agitprop.. are all related..
Marxists and democrats preach too..
Thank you for all your informative, engaging posts, dear spirited irish!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.