Originally posted by Ghost of a DukeYou have no such personal knowledge about God.
You have personal knowledge of falling off your bike. You have no such personal knowledge about God or the creation of the universe, to justify any truth claims..
If I find a painting left by a painter I would know the painter exists, no?
Originally posted by FMFIsn't the purpose of our discussions to communicate our beliefs to each other? If I believe in universal truth should I not communicate this to you so that you can try to understand my beliefs?
So what do you actually think you are achieving with regard to everyone when you declare that your superstitious beliefs about supernatural things constitute "universal truths"?
If it has no consequence to me, for example, that you declare your beliefs to be "universal truths", what is your purpose for doing it when you talk to me?
Originally posted by FetchmyjunkI don't see why not ~ I understand that you have notions regarding supernatural things about which you are certain, but what is the purpose of you adding the adjective the adjectives "absolute" and "universal" to people with different beliefs and who already get that you feel certain about yours?
Isn't the purpose of our discussions to communicate our beliefs to each other?
Originally posted by FMFThe purpose is to communicate that I believe truth is universal and not relative. I think you already know this yet you continue to flog a dead horse.
I don't see why not ~ I understand that you have notions regarding supernatural things about which you are certain, but what is the purpose of you adding the adjective the adjectives "absolute" and "universal" to people with different beliefs and who already get that you feel certain about yours?
Originally posted by FetchmyjunkBut the thing you communicate to me by attaching the term "universal" etc. etc.to the import and application of your beliefs comes across as a kind of inarticulate bombast. And yet I suspect that isn't what you seek to communicate.
If I believe in universal truth should I not communicate this to you so that you can try to understand my beliefs?
Originally posted by FMFYou clearly have issues with me using the words 'universal truth', so for now I think 'truth' alone will suffice.
But the thing you communicate to me by attaching the term "universal" etc. etc.to the import and application of your beliefs comes across as a kind of inarticulate bombast. And yet I suspect that isn't what you seek to communicate.
Originally posted by FetchmyjunkThe "issues" are yours not mine. Every time you use the word "universal" it's as if you are feeling the need to say you're 'very, very, very certain you're right' as if doing so affects the traction of whatever notion or personal opinion of yours it is you are referring to.
You clearly have issues with me using the words 'universal truth', so for now I think 'truth' alone will suffice.
Originally posted by FMFIf I wanted to say I was very very very certain I would. The word 'universal' has nothing to do with my certainty.
The "issues" are yours not mine. Every time you use the word "universal" it's as if you are feeling the need to say you're 'very, very, very certain you're right' as if doing so affects the traction of whatever notion or personal opinion of yours it is you are referring to.
Originally posted by FetchmyjunkYour certainty is the only thing your use of the word "universal" has to do with. It has absolutely on other connotation and adds no information other than it indicates your attitude towards the personal opinion you are expressing.
The word 'universal' has nothing to do with my certainty.
Originally posted by FMFActually it does and I have explained to you before that I said it as a distinction from relative truth.
Your certainty is the only thing your use of the word "universal" has to do with. It has absolutely on other connotation and adds no information other than it indicates your attitude towards the personal opinion you are expressing.