(February 22, 2014 at 5:45 pm)Mr. Moncrieff Wrote:

(February 22, 2014 at 5:38 pm)Lek Wrote: Bad choice. You don't determine the truth. The truth is what it is no matter what we believe it is, even Dr House thinks he discovered it.

Truth resides in that which we hold as proven; it is without doubt or angst.

Not true. We're continually finding things that are proven true, but were true even before we proved them to be so. Our angst has nothing to do with the truth. I'm anxious about Russsia being able to destroy us with missles, but it's still true.

(February 22, 2014 at 6:16 pm)Lek Wrote:

(February 22, 2014 at 5:45 pm)Mr. Moncrieff Wrote: Truth resides in that which we hold as proven; it is without doubt or angst.

Not true. We're continually finding things that are proven true, but were true even before we proved them to be so. Our angst has nothing to do with the truth. I'm anxious about Russsia being able to destroy us with missles, but it's still true.

Are you denying my truth by positing that all truths are unknowable?

I always found this a marvelous example of of scholarly (even among xtians) integrity.

From William Dever's book, Who Were The Early Israelites......

Quote:Quote:Between 1965 and 1972 Joseph Callaway, an American archaeologist and Southern Baptist Theological Seminary professor who had studied method with Kenyon, reopened the investigation. And he confirmed Marquet-Krause's results beyond doubt. To his credit, he acknowledged the excavations of Ai as a major blow to the "conquest theory." He put it this way in 1985":

For many years, the primary source for the understanding of the settlement of the first Israelites was the Hebrew Bible, but every reconstruction based upon the biblical traditions has floundered on the evidence from archaeological remains....(Now) the primary source has to be archaeological remains.

Moreover, Callaway -- a southern gentleman of great moral character-- took early retirement from his very conservative seminary rather than risk being the cause of theological embarrassment.

So, rather than lie about their finds - like modern ark hunters - true scholars dig up the evidence and publish their findings.

Professor Callaway died in 1982 but he set a proper example.

(February 22, 2014 at 6:19 pm)Mr. Moncrieff Wrote:

(February 22, 2014 at 6:16 pm)Lek Wrote: Not true. We're continually finding things that are proven true, but were true even before we proved them to be so. Our angst has nothing to do with the truth. I'm anxious about Russsia being able to destroy us with missles, but it's still true.

Are you denying my truth by positing that all truths are unknowable?

It's not "your" truth or "my" truth". It's "the" truth. Truth is knowable, but we don't know all the truth and it's not how we feel about it that makes it true.

(February 22, 2014 at 10:55 pm)Lek Wrote:

(February 22, 2014 at 6:19 pm)Mr. Moncrieff Wrote: Are you denying my truth by positing that all truths are unknowable?

It's not "your" truth or "my" truth". It's "the" truth. Truth is knowable, but we don't know all the truth and it's not how we feel about it that makes it true.

If there is only 'one' truth as you say, why are there so many 'versions' of it? Islam, Judaism, Christianity, Mormon, Hinduism, etc.

All of them contradicting one another. It would seem that 'truth' is in the mind of the beholder, and not objective at all.

What is truth?
How do you define truth?

Truth should be the accurate representation of reality, through words.
The trouble arises when our perception of reality is impaired by missing data, preconceptions and biases... giving rise to the many "truths" we observe today. At most, one of them it's correct... I go with the scientific one.

Moncreif : What do you mean by 'My truth'? Are you claiming that truth is subjective?

[let's ='là bạn điên' pid='608421' dateline='1393139846']
Moncreif : What do you mean by 'My truth'? Are you claiming that truth is subjective?
[/quote]

No. That we have both posited differing truths. Thus definable by ownership of that suggestion of truth.

A suggestion does not always imply fact. At least not when religious folk are talking.

(February 23, 2014 at 3:57 am)Mr. Moncrieff Wrote: [let's ='là bạn điên' pid='608421' dateline='1393139846']
Moncreif : What do you mean by 'My truth'? Are you claiming that truth is subjective?

No. That we have both posited differing truths. Thus definable by ownership of that suggestion of truth.

A suggestion does not always imply fact. At least not when religious folk are talking.
[/quote]

Sorry. I have a degree in Philosophy and you make no sense. Truths do not differ. Opinions differ and beliefs differ but truth does not please explain.

Truth is based upon evidence, not opinion.