It is what it shouldn't be

[Nancy]

Shouldn't "truth" be defined?

God provide a definition in His Word concerning what truth is.

It'[s odd nobody has posted what God says truth is

Well to begin with, Jesus is Himself Truth. We were given the 10 commandment's to show us what sin is, pointing to truth from His very finger. Oh, don't you see such truth say, in Proverbs? True every time!
We know right from wrong at a very early age. A baby's first words are many times "no " lol. Usually Mama or Papa.

So, what are your particular passages where what God says is truth?

 

[Big Boy Johnson]

So, what are your particular passages where what God says is truth?

Jesus said the Holy Ghost would lead us in to ALL Truth (John 16:13),
and Jesus said God's Word IS Truth (John 17:17)

These are not my particular passages, this is what Jesus said about Truth and what Truth is

 

[Jay Ross]

ScottA said:
That is like a tree full leaves but no branches. Not likely or reasonable to consider as accurate.

@Jay Ross said:
What's missing is those branches, not branches of "belief", but branches of known truth--which is the core of Christianity. Some of us actually "know" what the truth is.

I did not say "Some of us actually "know" what the truth is. " Jay did.

The two statements that you attributed to me were both made by ScottA

ScottA said:
That is like a tree full leaves but no branches. Not likely or reasonable to consider as accurate.

What's missing is those branches, not branches of "belief", but branches of known truth--which is the core of Christianity. Some of us actually "know" what the truth is.


1Corinthians 10:12
"Wherefore let him that thinketh he standeth take heed lest he fall."

Nancy, you lose credibility when you make errors in attributing statement to the wrong person(s).

 

[Wrangler]

You might have faith in Jesus as your proof. But I have a world full of consequences due to what faith causes as proof.

Faith in Jesus is not my proof. I am my proof as every witness is. I have first hand experience with the accused and it is my testimony that a divine power interacted with me, touched me, gave me direction and transformed my life.

In civil courts throughout all of human history, cases are often decided on circumstantial evidence and eye witness testimony. This doesn't fly with unbelievers. IMO, unbelievers seek an unreasonable standard of proof.

I'm not sure about the wording of your 2nd sentence. Everyone has faith. The only question is, what do you have faith in? I strongly believe I'll be going to bed now.

 

[ScottA]

I'm sorry about that previous comment (That was a cheap shot) If you are really interested in proof. Then you can find it in what I've been discussing about beliefs, here on this forum.

But you're missing the point, you don't understand. Those "consequences" are not what is, but what was. All of this is the consequence of what was before the world began--you caused all this--we all did. We are the seed that was planted in the earth by God after we chose this, and here we are growing like so many weeds. And this--this is our opportunity to change. And you risk losing that opportunity by not knowing that.

This is our [your] chance to tell God what you'd really rather have going for you in the future--and if it is in accord with his good intentions--he'll make it happen just like he made all this happen.

That's why you're here.

 

[Nancy]

The two statements that you attributed to me were both made by ScottA


Nancy, you lose credibility when you make errors in attributing statement to the wrong person(s).

Sorry Jay...I don't know why it messed up.
Either way you were both in agreement

 

[GodsGrace]

You'd agree with me exactly on point that beliefs are the problem in or society. But in your case you'd argue that your beliefs happen to be the exception to the rule. Right? Because it's certainly not what you believe that's adding more problems, it's all those other people and their incorrect beliefs.

How are beliefs problems?
Are you suggesting that there should be no beliefs?

YOU believe there are no beliefs...
so YOU have a belief too.

You know Zbme...
there are 3 causes of problems/suffering:

US
OTHERS
NATURE

I don't really know what you're getting at here, but it seems to me
(which step is this on your diagram?) that Christianity answers a lot of questions that we humans have.

An agnostic is searching.
A priest (a Catholic Priest) once told me that if we're searching for God we've already found Him.

Guess it depends on what one is searching for.

 

[GodsGrace]

You might have faith in Jesus as your proof. But I have a world full of consequences due to what faith causes as proof.

How is faith proof?
IS faith proof?

If I could PROVE something...
why would I need faith?

 

[Lambano]

How are beliefs problems?
Are you suggesting that there should be no beliefs?

YOU believe there are no beliefs...
so YOU have a belief too.

All that we call “knowledge” is just “beliefs” that are justified for the “right” reasons. Then the question becomes, “What are the right reasons to believe something is true?”

 

[GodsGrace]

All that we call “knowledge” is just “beliefs” that are justified for the “right” reasons. Then the question becomes, “What are the right reasons to believe something is true?”

Do we need to define knowledge first?

awareness or understanding especially of an act, a fact, or the truth : actual knowledge in this entry. b. : awareness that a fact or circumstance probably exists.

source: A dictionary


Knowledge is an awareness of facts, a familiarity with individuals and situations, or a practical skill. Knowledge of facts, also called propositional knowledge, is often characterized as true belief that is distinct from opinion or guesswork by virtue of justification. While there is wide agreement among philosophers that propositional knowledge is a form of true belief, many controversies focus on justification. This includes questions like how to understand justification, whether it is needed at all, and whether something else besides it is needed. These controversies intensified in the latter half of the 20th century due to a series of thought experiments called Gettier cases that provoked alternative definitions.

source: Knowledge - Wikipedia


So you're asking what are the REASONS why we believe something?
The REASON would be the JUSTIFICATION....


PS
IOW are the right reasons for knowledge also considered a belief??

 

[Big Boy Johnson]

I am my proof as every witness is.

And your proof is also in the fact that you have guns are are looking forward to blowing someone's brains out???

 

[GodsGrace]

Faith in Jesus is not my proof. I am my proof as every witness is.

Is a witness PROOF
or
Is a witness EVIDENCE?

I believe it's evidence if I remember correctly.

IOW, if I testify against someone, I am giving witness...
but I cannot PROVE that the person committed the crime.

I have first hand experience with the accused and it is my testimony that a divine power interacted with me, touched me, gave me direction and transformed my life.

In civil courts throughout all of human history, cases are often decided on circumstantial evidence and eye witness testimony. This doesn't fly with unbelievers. IMO, unbelievers seek an unreasonable standard of proof.

Correct. Unbelievers seek a standard of proof that does not exist.

I'm not sure about the wording of your 2nd sentence. Everyone has faith. The only question is, what do you have faith in? I strongly believe I'll be going to bed now.

The other poster is correct Wrangler....
Everyone has faith in something...
the only question is what.

Unbelievers have faith in the material world and that everything came from nothing/ science, etc.


FAITH
complete trust or confidence in someone or something.

 

[Wrangler]

Is a witness PROOF
or
Is a witness EVIDENCE?

It’s a bit of semantics. In practice, courts are said that one side proved their case … wait for it …. based on the evidence. So, it’s a bit like the target and the path the arrow takes to reach the target.

Said differently, we are convinced of a verdict, the hypothesis is proved based on the evidence.

 

[Lambano]

Everyone has faith. The only question is, what do you have faith in? I strongly believe I'll be going to bed now.

 

[GodsGrace]

Who's going to bed...
Who's having a beer...
I think I'll have myself a shot of Bailey's Irish Cream!

A Christmas treat.

Is this a sin?
I sure hope not.

 

[Wrangler]

It’s a bit of semantics. In practice, courts are said that one side proved their case … wait for it …. based on the evidence. So, it’s a bit like the target and the path the arrow takes to reach the target.

Said differently, we are convinced of a verdict, the hypothesis is proved based on the evidence.

Oh, just thought of something else. Evidence is a matter of facts. Here is the evidence for and against a premise.

Proof is a conclusion, opinion or judgment based on the facts. I have an example from yesterday.

I take a couple of prescription meds at night in my living room chair. Every night I use the same small glass and leave a small amount of water in it. I’m meticulous about putting the glass on a coaster.

When we came home from visiting family, here is the evidence I found.

• The glass had no water in it.
• The glass was half off the coaster.

These facts proved to me that my thirsty cat drank out of my glass.

 

[GodsGrace]

Oh, just thought of something else. Evidence is a matter of facts. Here is the evidence for and against a premise.

Proof is a conclusion, opinion or judgment based on the facts. I have an example from yesterday.

I take a couple of prescription meds at night in my living room chair. Every night I use the same small glass and leave a small amount of water in it. I’m meticulous about putting the glass on a coaster.

When we came home from visiting family, here is the evidence I found.

• The glass had no water in it.
• The glass was half off the coaster.

These facts proved to me that my thirsty cat drank out of my glass.

This is interesting Wrangler.
Didn't mean to carry it this far.

Could you speak to this?
I don't claim to be knowledgeable on this....

IS evidence a matter of fact? (as you stated).

Can you be SURE your cat drank from your glass?


Here's another example:
Someone gets mugged on a street.
I see the incident.
I believe I know who the mugger is.
I give evidence in court as to his identity.

Can we be sure it was the person I accused?

 

[Wrangler]

IS evidence a matter of fact? (as you stated).

Yes, evidence is synonymous with a fact in logic.

Can you be SURE your cat drank from your glass?

No. And this goes back to our unbelieving friends. What is the standard of proof? In courts, there are 2 standards: criminal and civil. In a criminal case, the standard is the highest - beyond "reasonable" doubt. They say this means 90% SURE. The standard is not the unbelievers standard of being beyond ALL doubt - including unreasonable doubt.

Most court cases are civil and the standard is lower based on "a preponderance of the evidence." The standard is "more likely than not." They say this means 51% SURE.

In coming to conclusions that don't involve the court system, the standard can be even lower, but we don't say it's PROOF. There is a whole branch of philosophy, Epistemology, that deals with the study of knowledge, how we know things and what is the limits of that knowledge.

Regarding my cat, I left out of the presentation my eye witness testimony. I saw him on more than one occasion jump up on the end table, sniffing my medicine glass, looking for a drink. Even caught him drinking it a time or 2. Certainly, the "preponderance of the evidence" supports the verdict that it was my cat who did the deeds.

 

[Gottservant]

Truth applies, where there is a choice of interpretation. (selah)

 

[GodsGrace]

Yes, evidence is synonymous with a fact in logic.


No. And this goes back to our unbelieving friends. What is the standard of proof? In courts, there are 2 standards: criminal and civil. In a criminal case, the standard is the highest - beyond "reasonable" doubt. They say this means 90% SURE. The standard is not the unbelievers standard of being beyond ALL doubt - including unreasonable doubt.

Most court cases are civil and the standard is lower based on "a preponderance of the evidence." The standard is "more likely than not." They say this means 51% SURE.

Yes. True.

In coming to conclusions that don't involve the court system, the standard can be even lower, but we don't say it's PROOF. There is a whole branch of philosophy, Epistemology, that deals with the study of knowledge, how we know things and what is the limits of that knowledge.

I agree actually.
There is no real PROOF that Jesus resurrected....
all the FACTS would lead to this conclusion.

Regarding my cat, I left out of the presentation my eye witness testimony. I saw him on more than one occasion jump up on the end table, sniffing my medicine glass, looking for a drink. Even caught him drinking it a time or 2. Certainly, the "preponderance of the evidence" supports the verdict that it was my cat who did the deeds.

Right. And he'll NEVER obey you and stop jumping on that table!
I know because I've always had a cat - this one is 16 years old and I fear he'll be the last one for me.
(the next one would outlive me!).