Is there such a thing is absolute truth


Registered Senior Member
Is this irony or what ? Even the subject sentence holds a mistake : a typo turned the 'as' into an 'is' and a whole different meaning came over the sentence...

True and false ! Two choises !
Things are so simple if we only have to choose between these two. As a matter of fact, it is the simplest possible of choises because you need two possibilities in order to be able to choose.
But can we split up everything between these two poles or are there more choises ? Is there maybe a continuum between the poles, can the poles be reached ?
Can something be absolutely true or absolutely false ?

One could say that math holds absolute true or false statements but this is only so in relation to certain axiomes that define the kind of math you are working with.
Classical logic offers a framework with which we can tackle a whole set of problems a label them true or false, but again logic needs premises and the argument falls or stands with the truth values of these.
May be I should ask are there absolute premises, who are intrinsicly right or wrong ?
If we are looking for absolutes, we are bound to come up with god, he could be our ultimate reference, the intrinsicly right premise from which all other arguments follow. Right ? Wrong !
See what I am doing ? I'm asking you to agree with me on a certain premise again namely that god is the ultimate premise, anyone is free to agree or not on that so it is not an ultimate premise !
So if there are no extremes of right and wrong, if there only are shades of grey is the question : DOES GOD EXIST answerable ? Not on itself, only in relation to something else, mostly this is ones own experience with life and ideas about this subject. Nobody is free of prejuge, everyone is made by his or her history and experiences sensations and ideas in respect to this background.

we are midgets standing on the backs of giants,

[This message has been edited by Plato (edited June 24, 1999).]
Yes, there is an absolute right and wrong. I'm not arrogant enough to assume that I always can recognize the difference. We are also born into a set of circumstances that are the result of many right and wrong decisions that have been snow-balling and rippling for eons that we can not control. But the only decisions that you have to be responsible for are your own. Pick a grey topic, and let's debate. That's my warped idea of a good time. LOL!

God loves you and so do I!
Well, I don't know about absolute truth we can all agree on. But I guess there is a class of personal absolute truths.

For example, Plato, are you presently processing information? This can only be 'yes', there can't possibly be a 'no' or anything in between, as long as you are able to come up with _some_ kind of an answer! Hmmm... And actually, if you _are_ able to answer, I think *everybody* would have to conclude that you were processing information at that moment! An absolute, universal truth. So there.

I am; therefore I think.
Am I processing information ?
What is this, the modern version of the cogito ergo sum of Descartes ? I thought you didn't like the man's idea's ;)
It seems you got me cornered there but what about the 'I' in the sentence ? Suppose 'I' am a schisofraniac with multiple personalities, is it still possible to talk of 'I am processing' or should that be 'we are processing' ?

And Lori, to give you a topic :) how do you see an undividable sole in this psychiatiric phenomenon ? Do schisofraniacs have multiple soles ?

we are midgets standing on the backs of giants,
Hi there Plato.
I can answer that one. If you´d read the bible you´d know that the soul signify the body, or some times the life force, not a spirit who flies up to heaven when you die.
So NO, scitzofrenics doesn´t have more than ONE soul.
What the ...? About processing info; you guys lost me there for a minute. Thanks for the topic, albeit a weird one. I'm not sure it's relevant for debate, but to add my two cents, no, you only have one soul. That soul could ultimately have many personalities, as I am not a multiple, but have many moods to react to different situations in my life. It's like normally I'm a pretty placid person, and it takes a lot for someone to piss me off, but once they do, it's like someone totally different jumps in and handles it. The "in your face bitch from hell", that's who. I think that the psychologists have examined this phenomenon very in-depth, and their findings indicate that this disorder has to do with severe emotional and/or physical abuse. The personality types stem from "turning into" the best personality to handle the situation. With therapy, the personalities can eventually become "blended" into one person, as was originally. When I was thinking about topics for debate, I was thinking more along the lines of every day decisions that we all are faced with. Things like abortion, homosexuality, the death penalty, honesty, marriage, environmentalism, money, murder, prostitution, drugs, strip-tease, birth control, Jerry Springer and Howard Stern (I detest these people), animal rights (I'm sure I'll get a laugh out of that one), women's rights, war, politics, and on and on...

God loves you and so do I!

Jerry Springer and Howard Stern (I detest these people)...and on and on...
God loves you and so do I!

Speaking of multiple personalities... ;)

Not to pick on you, Lori, but I was wondering about the concept of Christian love and how "real" that phenomenon is? I rarely see a Christian who truly seems to feel love for his/her fellow man - right now I can only think of one person I know personally who is a Christian and who seems to love everyone. My husband and I were discussing this issue recently, so I wanted to bring it up here if you don't mind. It is my view that this is the most important concept that Christ taught, but the one that is also the most difficult for his disciples to follow. What do you think? Do you think that Jesus wants you to love Jerry Springer and Howard Stern, no matter how unlovable they might seem to you? You might say that you don't really mean that you detest them, only their actions - but don't you think your words have impact?

An ye harm none, do what ye will.
Well then please allow me to clarify...I detest some of the behaviors of Jerry Springer and Howard Stern. In particular, their chosen means of a profession. Do I really need to go into what I don't like about what they do? I'd really rather not have to have that tantrum right now. Man, I could go on and on for hours about what I hate about what they do and what they stand for! But let me make this perfectly clear...they are human beings just like I am, and God loves them just as much as He does me, and honestly, I love them as fellow sinners as well. But I absolutely detest what they do. You know, there are things about myself that I detest just as much if not more. I could never do what they do. But I've done other things, that in God's eyes, would be just as bad...I still do I'm sure. But I give a shit...I really do. And they don't. They know somewhere down in their hardened hearts that they're doing something wrong, and they don't care. They're making too much money. They're weak...they're not righteous men. I think it's safe to say we all know that right?

You may think I'm a nut, but I'm fastened to the strongest bolt in the universe.
The concept of Christian love is something we are called to aim for, this doesn't mean we are expected to achieve it. Most of what Christians were called to do isn't about do's and don'ts, it's about seeing how God is and then striving to be more like that. Along the way it's expected that we will trip up. I've never been perfect since the day I was born, and I never will be, this doesn't mean I shouldn't try and emulate Jesus. This is why many Christians seem to fail, because like everyone else, we're not perfect.
Hey Francis,

Do you think that most christians understand just how far from it we all are? Like born again, spirit-filled christians even, do you think that most people have a realistic perception of just how far from "perfect", or far from Jesus we really are? I don't think that most christians do have a good idea. I get the impression that most think that they're pretty close, or at least closer than they actually are. But I don't. The more I get to know Him, the more I understand just how incredibly far off the mark I am. As humans, we can't really even completely define what "good" is, so how would we even know if we're close? I don't know...I just get the total opposite impression about myself. Getting saved definately isn't about getting "fixed", it's about getting "saved". I mean, my life has changed for the better for sure. I'm not saying there's no peace, no victory, no blessings, no answered prayer. It's just that I'm sure that I'm just scratching the surface of what He is and what He means and what He is capable of and what I am capable of in Him. Does that make sense? What do you think?

You may think I'm a nut, but I'm fastened to the strongest bolt in the universe.

Excellent point. The more I grow and the more I learn the more I realise how far from perfect I really am and the more I realise how great God's grace is. This is the point of christianity, a realisation of what we are, this was the whole point of the Old Testament law, to help people see their imperfection. We are far from it, that's why God's love is so amazing and I am thankful for it every day.

As for your original question, I don't think many Christians do realise how imperfect we are, this can be observed through church history and our endless shows of arrogance. I'm even guilty of it myself, my topic on some problems with atheism is a perfect example. I jumped in and proclaimed that I know the absolute truth. While I believe there is absolute Truth, I cannot truly proclaim to know it all as I don't know everything. I think as Christians we are so often guilty of looking at ourselves as better than everyone else, and this just isn't so. But even I continually need to be humbled to learn this. That's why I am now going to make myself look stupid by not replying to Onslaughts last post to my topic. While I could, it would not be very productive of me and would once again be a brandishing of my sometimes youthfull arrogance, which is in no way a product of Christlikeness. I do believe it's good for us to voice our opinion, but to rubbish another persons perceptions doesn't acheive anything. If our beliefs are rubbished retaliation in an angry fashion would also be unproductive.
The biggest thing we need to continually remind ourselves as Christians is that like everyone else we are far from perfect, and that includes you and I.

God Loves ya no matter what! :)

[This message has been edited by Francis Ritchie (edited August 03, 2000).]
Absolute truth. We flounder in an ocean of possibilities, searching for safe harbor. Our absolutes are valid only as far as we can see.

It's all very large.
How are Jerry Springer and Howard Stern bad people? I can see how some people like you wouldn’t like Stern, but Jerry? What is wrong with Jerry Springer? He admits time and time again in interviews what a freak show his show is, and he is a pretty religious person. I remember on one flashback episode of his, he gave what I consider to be the best Final Thought that he ever had. It was about his dad and his truck, a beat up old truck he would never get rid of, one that he had since his father come over here from Germany during WW2. If you could have heard it, I’m sure you would think differently of him. It doesn’t matter if he associates himself with the people on his show just by being on his show, if he didn’t take the job someone else would have, and it might have been the “Someone7 Show”. Besides, he basically just walks around asking questions anyway, anyone could do what he does. Judge not least ye be judged you, or are you a hypocritical Christian?

Even Stern isn’t someone to detest. He stayed with his wife for around 2 decades (she wanted the divorce), he has admitted on his show before that most of what he says is just for the show. His opinions on subjects like child abuse and such are probably similar to your own. He isn’t someone to detest just because he makes money, the only reason why he (and Jerry Springer) makes money is because his show is entertaining. Basically, he is just a normal guy who entertains his millions of fans for 4 hours every morning Monday through Friday, he does so much more for many more people than you ever will, that I can guarantee you.
Howard Stern and Jerry Springer might be nice enough people in their private lives. It's their behavior in public that I believe Lori was expressing her opinion on. For my part, I have never gone for that "Lowest Common Denominator" thing. I find them more disgusting and insulting than entertaining. But even though Jerry and Howard are nice enough people in private, what about another man who was a vegetarian, didn't drink, enjoyed the company of good friends, tickling babies, playing with his dog, and fought to maintain the environment in his country while vastly improving the lives of his fellow country men through social change and economic programs? Okay, so in public he ordered the deaths of over 3 million Jews. Still, on the personal level, Adolph Hitler seemed like a pretty swell guy.

Because of their ability to reach so many people, celebrities such as Jerry Springer and Howard Stern have as much influence on people as Adolph Hitler, if not more. The only difference is that Hitler got elected to office. It is my opinion that people who have that much influence should not use that influence to lower the standard of behavior and civilization.
Howard Stern may behave questionably on his show (though I’m not exactly sure how having a desire to look at naked females is wrong, which is the only really questionable thing he does), but Jerry just cracks jokes at people and asks questions. Howard might warrant complaints about his behavior in public, but any criticism on Jerry Springer’s actions is unfounded. He doesn’t run his show, he didn’t design the show, he just stands there, asks questions, and sometimes cracks a joke (which is always followed by a “just kidding”). Comparing Hitler to HS and JS is totally unwarranted, they are just entertainers, they don’t have a political agenda or anything. Why don’t you say the same thing about Chris Rock? His comedy is much more vulgar, or Eddie Murphey, or any number of stand up comics who ever lived, or ME even (yes, I’ve told dirty jokes before, am I also comparable to Hitler?). Granted, they don’t have as large an audience, but that doesn’t matter.

That is far from the only difference Hitler has with HS and JS (they’re both Jews for crying out loud). Just because you don’t like this type of entertainment, doesn’t allow you to dictate what people can listen or watch. Who are you to decide what a standard of behavior and civilization should be? Maybe you have more in common with Hitler than they do.
By comparing Stern and Springer to Hitler, I was demonstrating the fact that a person can have a totally respectable personal life, but if they use their public influence to perpetuate what most people see as wrong with the world, then they are, in my opinion, behaving irresponsibly. They are part of the problem and not the solution. I'm no puritan and I don't try to tell people how to live. I just believe that we don't need to be flaunting our flaws as though they were virtues. We all have our perversions or secret little turn-ons. They might be socially disgusting or they might be totally innocent but fun to get away with. It's good to face these issues, but I'd rather not have it flung in my face. I believe that such issues as are the fare of shows such as Springer's are best dealt with from the psychiatrist's couch. That is my opinion.
What do people see as wrong with the world? That there are people in it, who have relationship problems? That males like to see naked women? Some extremely minor “problems” indeed. Maybe hypocritical Christians judging people so harshly is what is wrong with this world. Maybe religion itself is what is wrong with this world. It’s all subjective isn’t it? What solution to what problem are you referring to? How would you prefer this world to be? You mean the problems that 90% of relationships have are being presented as virtues? How so? How is anything being flung in your face? Is anyone making you watch these shows at gunpoint Monday through Friday?

Only in America, stupid, irresponsible America, do we censor everything. HS and JS’s shows are censored in the extreme, they aren’t anything they could be like. In Europe and Asia (Japan especially), they only censor hardcore pornography on television. Do they have problems like America does? Of course not. What’s wrong with our society goes so much deeper than what these shows are showing us. Here’s a few “flaws” for ya, I believe it was 230 million pornographic videos are sold here every year. 90% of all pornography worldwide is filmed in LA. In the civilized world, we have by far the highest crime rates, and we also censor everything. Not saying censorship is the reasons for this, but it sure as hell hasn’t stopped these things has it?