Spirituality
03 Mar 14
03 Mar 14
A comment in another thread ("hopefully God will lead them to the truth"😉 made me wonder - do any here care to admit that there is some distance between themselves and the truth on certain issues?
OK, so some may not want to do it in here, because they don't want to give their opponents any targets. But I suspect there are some who do not like to admit this, even to themselves.
For those people - there are two possibilities.
A) You are indeed a rare bastion of truth in an uncertain world. Now, if only they could be made aware of this, they might actually listen and learn something.
B) You are so insecure in your search for truth that you cannot admit that you struggle with certain issues.
03 Mar 14
Originally posted by SwissGambitWell Pontious Pilate didn't want to know the truth.
A comment in another thread ("hopefully God will lead them to the truth"😉 made me wonder - do any here care to admit that there is some distance between themselves and the truth on certain issues?
OK, so some may not want to do it in here, because they don't want to give their opponents any targets. But I suspect there are some who do not like to admi ...[text shortened]... o insecure in your search for truth that you cannot admit that you struggle with certain issues.
Originally posted by SwissGambitSo you know his motive for asking do you?
On the contrary, he was the lone voice of truth in an angry, bloodthirsty mob.
Not everyone who asks a question wants a true answer.
For example, have you ever been told in your life that you are inadequate, that you fall short, that you just don't measure up? No one likes hearing that even though at times it is true for us all. What seperates the men from the boys is some accept the criticism and take it to heart as truth and others simply get mad and walk away.
In regard to Jesus, however, men often baited him with questions to try and find fault with him. Pilot may have been doing the same.
03 Mar 14
Originally posted by SwissGambitI am not sure what you are asking here.
- do any here care to admit that there is some distance between themselves and the truth on certain issues?
Are you asking whether I know everything? Of course I do not claim to know everything, and I don't think anyone here does.
Are you asking if I admit that I lie about certain issues? If so, no, I generally do not lie. I do get things wrong occasionally.
Or are you asking whether I stick to a position that I believe is not entirely accurate? Or that I am not entirely sure of? But not quite outright lying? If so, its possible that I do, but I try not to. I try to make it clear when I am not sure about something.
03 Mar 14
Originally posted by whodeyA declarative statement like "I can find no fault with this man" is clear enough for me.
So you know his motive for asking do you?
Not everyone who asks a question wants a true answer.
For example, have you ever been told in your life that you are inadequate, that you fall short, that you just don't measure up? No one likes hearing that even though at times it is true for us all. What seperates the men from the boys is some accept the cri ...[text shortened]... n baited him with questions to try and find fault with him. Pilot may have been doing the same.
03 Mar 14
Originally posted by twhiteheadIt is a somewhat rhetorical question. We tend to represent ourselves as in touch with the truth, and shake our heads at the other wayward people we debate. It is a human tendency. We want to appear savvy and knowledgeable on the subjects we discuss. We don't want to yield ground unnecessarily.
I am not sure what you are asking here.
Are you asking whether I know everything? Of course I do not claim to know everything, and I don't think anyone here does.
Are you asking if I admit that I lie about certain issues? If so, no, I generally do not lie. I do get things wrong occasionally.
Or are you asking whether I stick to a position that I belie ...[text shortened]... possible that I do, but I try not to. I try to make it clear when I am not sure about something.
It's not just theists, although religion is notorious for encouraging people to think that their religion is the sole arbiter of the truth.
03 Mar 14
1 edit
Originally posted by SwissGambitI just want to establish whether or not I am guilty of this 'human tendency'. So when I say the earth is round (as opposed to flat) am I wrong to shake my head at flat earthers? Am I not really in touch with the truth but rather merely representing myself as such due to a desire to appear savvy and knowledgeable?
We tend to represent ourselves as in touch with the truth, and shake our heads at the other wayward people we debate. It is a human tendency. We want to appear savvy and knowledgeable on the subjects we discuss. We don't want to yield ground unnecessarily.
It's not just theists, although religion is notorious for encouraging people to think that their religion is the sole arbiter of the truth.
The main problem with religion, is it tends to give license to people to fabricate the 'truth'. It makes it difficult to verify peoples claims and thus they tend to engage in fabrication much more extensively.
But I agree that its not just theists. I notice that many adults lie atrociously to children without batting an eyelid.
But some of the topics here are such that one can reasonably claim to be privy to the truth of the matter and one can honestly shake ones head at other wayward people. I think the shape of the earths surface, and also its approximate age fall into that category.
03 Mar 14
Originally posted by twhiteheadYou're not wrong to shake your head at flat-earthers. I'm not saying that you can never have confidence that you are right and others are wrong. Mainly, I'm saying, be wary of one who never questions their own knowledge.
I just want to establish whether or not I am guilty of this 'human tendency'. So when I say the earth is round (as opposed to flat) am I wrong to shake my head at flat earthers? Am I not really in touch with the truth but rather merely representing myself as such due to a desire to appear savvy and knowledgeable?
[b]It's not just theists, although reli ...[text shortened]... . I think the shape of the earths surface, and also its approximate age fall into that category.
03 Mar 14
Originally posted by SwissGambitI try to admit when I am not certain, or give an estimate of certainty, but I don't think saying 'there is a small chance I could be wrong' is equivalent to 'there is a distance between what I said and the truth'.
You're not wrong to shake your head at flat-earthers. I'm not saying that you can never have confidence that you are right and others are wrong. Mainly, I'm saying, be wary of one who never questions their own knowledge.
I am not sure if I have ever really questioned whether or not the earth is flat. I don't think I have ever taken the proposition seriously enough to truly consider it.
03 Mar 14
1 edit
Originally posted by SwissGambitThat is an indication that Pilot did not want to involve himself, which explains why he deferred to king Herod.
A declarative statement like "I can find no fault with this man" is clear enough for me.
I believe that the only interest Pilot had at that time was to quell unrest in Jerusalem, more so that trying to find truth through Jesus.
To drive home my point, let's suppose that Pilot found that Jesus was the source of all truth and tried to have him spared. He would have incited the anger of the Jewish religious establishment. In my view, Pilot wanted to quell this more than letting him go free.
03 Mar 14
Originally posted by whodeyWell, yes, he recognized that he was in no position to set Jesus free, even though he thought he was not guilty. But he knew the truth.
That is an indication that Pilot did not want to involve himself, which explains why he deferred to king Herod.
I believe that the only interest Pilot had at that time was to quell unrest in Jerusalem, more so that trying to find truth through Jesus.
- Joined
- 29 Dec 08
- Moves
- 6788
03 Mar 14
Originally posted by whodeyHe was found guilty of an ecclesiastical violation by the Sanhedrin but they wanted him killed and that required him to be found guilty of a capital crime by the Romans. Pilate finally acquiesced to avoid a major riot which might cost him his job.
If Pilot was not in a position to acquit Jesus then what was he taken to Pilot?
Originally posted by SwissGambitBefore anyone goes off searching for the high and mighty truth, they should first of all try and see the simple truth right in front of their eyes.
A comment in another thread ("hopefully God will lead them to the truth"😉 made me wonder - do any here care to admit that there is some distance between themselves and the truth on certain issues?
OK, so some may not want to do it in here, because they don't want to give their opponents any targets. But I suspect there are some who do not like to admi ...[text shortened]... o insecure in your search for truth that you cannot admit that you struggle with certain issues.
Firstly......look closely at the world around you and you cannot deny intelligent design behind every thing.(from the universe to the atom)
Those who cannot accept this are dishonest and their search for truth has ended abruptly.
Without self honesty you cannot search for truth.