Topic awaiting preservation: Here we Go again (Page 3 of 3)

quote:

---

DmS said:

If Jesus han't been executed, would there be Cristianity today?

---

I would have to say, no. I can't think how it possibly could since the death part of the death, burial & resurrection is a key element. It is concievable Christ could have garnered a following but I don't see how he would have stood out in history without such extraordinary claims surrounding Xianity as we know it.

quote:

---

DL-44 said:

We know *nothing* as historical fact about Jesus' life. We know only some
stories...

---

DL, that has me wondering what we do know as historical fact then. What is the criteria for judging something as historical fact?

I have a good book at home that contains an essay from a biblical scholar who states what we could know about Jesus Christ *without* the NT docs. I'll see if I can dig that up later on.

: . . DHTML Slice Puzzle : . . .

We have a very small handful of 'offhand' mentions of his name from extrabiblical sources.

None have any detail whatsoever of who/what he is. He is generally mentioned in the context of the christian movement, and not directly as a person...

They certainly do not state anything regarding his childhood, parentage, etc...

There are many historical figures we know only from a few mentions here and there.

We accept in all of those cases that we *don't* know much, and probably can't trust half of the sources to be accurate in any way.

To suggest that the gospels contain accurate information about things like Jesus' lienage, his childhood, and things of that nature is absolutely preposterous.

And also, as I have said *many* times over - we accept that our historical facts may change as we learn more about ancient subjects.

For some bizarre reason, people don't want to accept that when it comes to Jesus...



(Edited by DL-44 on 05-17-2005 00:32)

(Edited by DL-44 on 05-17-2005 00:33)

I quite agree that we should be prepared to apply the same analysis to Christian documents as any other in history. When we do that, we find that the NT docs are far better supported than any other work of antiquity. What I mean is that the number of copies that we have and their nature point very conclusively to what you've mentioned before, DL. That the gospel stories point to source material within the life spans of the apostles.

I realize this is not a dunker, but it is significant considering how much time has passed since then. I'll reiterate that we are no longer arguing about the historical basis of the accounts but more about their validity. I believe you have already moved to that battlefield yourself because we are now discussing whether the accounts that we have in the canon were simply the ones that prevailed out of alternative ones.

I believe if we were having this conversation perhaps a decade or two ago, we would be more focused on whether there was any basis even for the existence of a man called Jesus at that time.

: . . DHTML Slice Puzzle : . . .

Hmmm....This will have to be my last post--for now. But anyways, I managed to stumble across this section of the site and now, am deciding to take to task some of these issues that were brought up.....

"Does God exist? If so, give me one shred of evidence that shows that God exists."

Now...For you folks here who believe the above statement, forgive me for my frankness in speech and my firmness in what I am about to say.

Ready?

Here we go.....

At some point in time, you DID believe that One Supreme Being existed. When you were a child or in your younger years, you KNEW that there was One Supreme Being that DID EXIST! Later on, you decided to THROW AWAY that part of you that told you that there was One Supreme Being! Why? Because you didn't want to think about God!!!!

And so? What happened? God decided to let you do what you wanted to do--hoping that you would one day turn back to Him....And sirs, even if I had all the evidence in the world to show you that PROVED that God existed, you STILL wouldn't believe it....because you have already chosen to NOT to believe in God....

"Well...You can't deny the scientific evidence that Evolution took place in order for the world to be created."

Please go to drdino.com

Also, please consider this....Some people say that God used Evolution in order to create the world!! Nope....In Genesis 1:2, it states that the world had no form, that there was water, and finally, it states that there was wind. Evolution states that there was nothing--then a big bang! NOTHING!
The Bible, as I have stated before, says that the earth had no form, that water existed, and that wind existed. There is a contradiction here--and if you believe in the Bible, you have to go with what the Bible says and get of the other opinion.

"....You still haven't disproved Evolution...."

You're right...I haven't. But, now I will....In order for something to exist, that something has to have properties that when used, produce that "something."

Now, I will get a bit geeky on you here, and start using computer terms and by each term, I will show you, quite graphically, what is supposed to happen if the Big Bang took place....

Something=big bang

Dim lblBigbang as integer (A declaration sentence that declares the Big Bang into existence.)

Now, in the computer world, we have if...then....else statements. They show us what is supposed to happen when the value (Big Bang) is true or false....

In the following statement, I will assign the term "properties" as the properties for the Big Bang. Ya ready? Here we go...


If lblBigbang is true
Then run "properties"

Else

end

"What does the 'end' stand for?"

It means that the program must end. Why is it that if lblBigbang is false, that the whole world stops its own running process??

My friend, you should know that if there is one tiny error in the making and design in this world, that the whole world falls apart. The same thing happens with a computer program. (Warning: If, then, else statement ahead!) ...If there is ONE letter misspelled in the coding process (the process that tells the computer what to do), than, when you run the program, it stops and shows you an error message.

....The next question is this....Who makes the program? Well, if you know EVERYTHING there is to know about coding computer programs, then you can make ONE GIANT PROGRAM ALL BY YOURSELF! Likewise, the world has one giant Programmer (note the capital "P"). That Programmer is God. If He knows everything there is to know about this world, than SURELY He can build the GREATEST program of all----earth. And finally....He created and put humans IN this GIANT program in order to make us happy.

Is this not the same thing as artificial intelligence? Do not programmers put some sort of artificial intelligence in all their programs? ie. a calculate button, an add button, etc....

So, there you have it....There is a God that DOES exist! And all He wants you to do is trust in Him for EVERYTHING you EVER need!

--JFB

..."Why is it that if lblBigbang is false, that the whole world stops its own running process?? "

Here's another reason why....Evolution states that there was NOTHING--then a Big Bang. Now, as I have stated earlier, if the Big Bang really took place, then it has to have properties that existed BEFORE it took place!! And, as Evolution stated, NOTHING existed before the Big Bang! Therefore...since nothing existed before the Big Bang, than we can safely conclude that NOTHING existed! Therefore, the properties of the Big Bang didn't exist! ....And therefore, since the properties of the Big Bang didn't exist BEFORE it took place, then the Big Bang simply never happened!

Purely scientific, ladies and gents...

--JFB

^ Please look up Guth's Grand Guess.

And Evolution has absolutely nothing to do with the Big Bang. Two entirely seperate things. They are not even related, with the small exception that without the Big Bang having happened, we probably wouldn't then have Evolution.

Oh and your equation? It should go like this :

10 If lblBigbang is true

20 Then run "properties"

30 Else 10

40 properties

Of course, that is rather simply put - there needs to be some randomizing before 10.


Next nutcase, please.

That's nice, fritzy.

I suppose you feel you have a point somewhere in what you said.

I'm glad you have a perspective you are happy with.

Nothing that you said has anything to do with anything at all, and all of your nonsense has been discussed here many times.

People like your 'dr dino' are nothing but nut cases.

Anyone who accepts something from one of the many ancient creation myths as absolute fact despite all of our knowledge to the contrary is a nutcase.

quote:

---

Bugimus said:

I have a good book at home that contains an essay from a biblical scholar who states what we could know about Jesus Christ *without* the NT docs. I'll see if I can dig that up later on.

---

All I have time for at this moment is to get this in from "Jesus Outside the New Testament: What Is The Evidence?" by Edwin M. Yamauchi. This was a chapter in the book "Jesus Under Fire" by Michael J. Wilkins and J. P. Moreland...

quote:

---

Even if we did not have the New Testament or Christian writings, we would be able to conclude from such non-Christian writings as Josephus, the Talmud, Tacitus, and Pliny the Younger that: (1) Jesus was a Jewish teacher; (2) many people believed that he performed healings and exorcisms; (3) he was rejected by the Jewish leaders; (4) he was crucified under Pontius Pilate in the reign of Tiberius; (5) despite this shameful death, his followers, who believed that he was still alive, spread beyond Palestine so that there were multitudes of them in Rome by A.D. 64; (6) all kinds of people from the cities and countryside--men and women, slave and free--worshiped him as God by the beginning of the second century.

---

: . . DHTML Slice Puzzle : . . .

Wow. I'm shocked. I thought even a pre-school drop-out would be able to distinguish between the Big Bang theory and Evolution..!
A lesson to us all that we should at least do a quick Google on the subjects we attempt to argue about.

Anyway - I have a suggestion for you, Fritzy. It is stipulated that nothing existed before the Big Bang. I put it to you that nothing existed within the physical realm of this universe before the Big Bang. Now, I know that there are some of you who see the whole idea of hyperspacial physics as pure bunkum (including those who argue that the planets of our solar system radiate more heat than they absorb from the Sun for wholly independent and only tenuously plausible reasons), but this theory - which is over a hundred years old - is now being looked at by scientists as being possibly the very unifying principle that might gel the various realms of theoretical physics.

An upshot of this is that it may be quite possible that the Big Bang was a cataclysmic event within the incompressible aether of our physical universe, and that space is only apparently empty (even when completely isolated from, and devoid of detectable energy), but actually saturated in a here-to-forth indirectly demonstrable 'matter' that not only influences, but directly dictates and transmits the physical interactions of this universe!.

If you think the Big Bang is unbelievable, you're going to be incredulous at what comes out of the science community in the next decade!

Oh, and you should note that this theory has nothing to do with evolution, primate rutting cycles, or the flavour of ice-cream.

==I don't believe it! Somebody stole my sig!!==

Bugs - those are the sources which are always quoted when such evidence is asked for.

Unfortunately, they really are very vague and brief in their mentions of Jesus. They are basically mentions of Jesus' followers and mention Jesus only in the context of being the figurehead of the group - they simply do not speak to the nature of Jesus himself.
So even though they are not 'christian' writings, they are writings about christians, and not about Jesus per se.

There are plenty of websites which quote the actual passages....i'll see if I can dig them up as my memory is slightly foggy on the specifics.

From a purely historical perspective, we would infer from these sources that this figure 'Jesus' probably did exist, and probably did in fact preach a form of judaic reform.

Beyond that...

The gospels themselves are certainly embellished at the very least. How much and in what way depends on which gospel we're talking about, and is certainly open to speculation.
And it's not a matter of debate as to whether or not the 4 that we have were chosen from a broader array - we know this to be true.



(Edited by DL-44 on 05-17-2005 18:29)

quote:

---

The gospels themselves are certainly embellished at the very least

---

How does one come to the certainty that they are embellished?
Can you give me some specifics.

DL, they are the quotes most often given simply because they are the ones that exist. I mentioned them in the spirit of looking at what we could say about Jesus Christ as a historical figure if that were all we had to go on. This is probably what would be said if there were no Xianity and we were studying that section of written history. Jesus would be mentioned in say one paragraph probably, if that.

: . . DHTML Slice Puzzle : . . .

Sirs....As I have stated before, you are still trying to come up with excuses to NOT believe in God--and like I said before as well, you have already chosen to NOT believe in God when you know deep down inside that He does exist.

...Yes, I have followed the Bible thus far and have come to this conclusion--when I do what the Bible tells me to do, then I experience success. However, if I don't, then I experience failure. The Bible even states this fact itself!! So, I must be on the right track if, when I do what the Bible tells me to do, I experience success.

Failure in ANYTHING is a result of two things:

1. I am doing something wrong.
2. I don't know what Truth is or I am uncertain about what I am supposed to do in order to get a correct result.

I know that there must be one correct answer for Truth because I know that in life, when I do certain things, I get in trouble or I mess up. But, when I do other things, I experience success. Therefore, if the above statement is true, then there must be ONE ANSWER for my situation....

--JFB

quote:

---

...Yes, I have followed the Bible thus far and have come to this conclusion--when I do what the Bible tells me to do, then I experience success. However, if I don't, then I experience failure. The Bible even states this fact itself!! So, I must be on the right track if, when I do what the Bible tells me to do, I experience success.

Failure in ANYTHING is a result of two things:

1. I am doing something wrong.
2. I don't know what Truth is or I am uncertain about what I am supposed to do in order to get a correct result.

---

Let us see how your blatherings really hold up, shall we?

I saw those who really believed in God (I guess you would label them as good Xians) die from bullet wounds, shrapnel, and explosions in Iraq and in Kuwait. Since they failed to survive, I guess they were doing something wrong.

Likewise, I saw those who didn't believe in God (I wouldn't label them as Xians at all) and those who actively worshipped Satan survive. I guess they were doing something correct.

JFritzyB, what you consider "logic", is so flawed, that all I can ascertain from your posts is that you are trolling. Either that, or you are a distant pre-evolutionary cousin to Gideon.

Fact is, in the above situations, it doesn't really matter what you believe - quantum physics is deciding your fate.

Thus, Failure in anything is not necessarily a result of two things. It can be the result of one thing, or a combination of many.

And anyway, what you call "failure", I call a "learning experience".

You fail.

I learn.

I don't need an excuse not to believe in God. I swept away the illusions, and embraced reality.

JFritzyB:

quote:

---

And, as Evolution stated, NOTHING existed before the Big Bang!

---

First of all Evolution do NOT talk about the Big Bang and vice versa.

Next, you should read some articles/books about string theory. And for that I highly recommend you the The Elegant Universe: Superstrings, Hidden Dimensions, and the Quest for the Ultimate Theory by Brian Greene. A 3x1h documentary has been made from this book and broadcasted on Nova ( it's availabe in VHS and DVD ). You'll see that these theories manage to unify the Standard Model and the Quantum Theory and makes the concept of "big bang(s)" incredibly simple to understand. Actually my jaw almost drop when I saw this part of the documentary.

In *really* short, imagine that everything exist in more than 3 physical dimensions, and that matter is made of extremely thin coords and sheets. What happen when 2 sheets collides ? Bang!!

Sure the Standard Model and Quantum Theory have some limits. Those limits are met in extreme cases such as black holes, and what we call the "Big Bang".

Does it even striked you once, that everything ( the matter and energy ) may have always existed ? No beginning, no end. It just is.

quote:

---

you are still trying to come up with excuses to NOT believe in God

---

IMHO, this is you who is searching an excuse ... for your ignorance.

quote:

---

you have already chosen to NOT believe in God when you know deep down inside that He does exist.

---

You know what ? I know deep inside that "He" does NOT exists. And cherry on the cake I don't follow the Bible and experience success.

I noticed you mentionned Dr Dino. Young Padawan, you're late, Gideon introduced us to that prick few months ago.



(Edited by poi on 05-17-2005 23:08)

quote:

---

The Bible even states this fact itself!! So, I must be on the right track if, when I do what the Bible tells me to do, I experience success.

---

Yup. Definitely a poor defence for a fanatical mass murderer... but a good one for you.

..and you have already chosen to believe in a god, even though you know deep down in your heart that you believe that you have chosen to believe in a god, even though you believe in a god deep down in your heart so you already chose to believe in a god before you believed you had a choice... or something like that.

(Edited by White Hawk on 05-17-2005 23:16)

I'm not sure how you're defining success, JFritzyB, but I tend to agree with your point. The Bible outlines a way of living and God promises that if we live according to His ways, we will not just survive but live live more abundantly.

WS, if JFritzyB is defining success as being richer, better looking, driving nicer cars, never getting sick, etc than anyone else then that is not biblical at all. But I suspect you have completely missed his actual meaning which is that those who follow God reap spiritual blessings and an inner joy that has to be exprienced to truly appreciate.

The whole idea that God's people are immune to hardship is utterly absurd. God causes the rain to fall on the just and the unjust alike. I know there are church's out there that will tell you different but they are mistaken.

: . . DHTML Slice Puzzle : . . .

It is impossible to have a serious conversation about such things.
Fritz, you are obviously a rather disturbed person. Your grasp on reality has either been badly shaken or has never existed.

I will not argue about the existence, or lack thereof, of your superhero.

I will also not waste the time it would take to explain how absurdly off the mark you are with your "science" - because all the information is out there and freely available, and the conversations that have happened here could set you straight...but I doubt very seriously that will look objectively on anything at all.

I don't need excuses not to beleive in your mytghical figure.

However, you are very obviously showing a graet need for excuses to beleive in him, and the frighteningly common ability to twist facts and ignore giant holes in logic, and to generally bungle all the scientific principles you try so desperately to 'disprove'.

I would be happy to continue the discussion regarding the gospels and other texts, with anyone intelligent enough to have such a conversation.

I will not participate in yet another "i'm gonna disprove reality" conversation, with someone I must guess is here in some relation to gideon...

quote:

---

WS, if JFritzyB is defining success as being richer, better looking, driving nicer cars, never getting sick, etc than anyone else then that is not biblical at all. But I suspect you have completely missed his actual meaning which is that those who follow God reap spiritual blessings and an inner joy that has to be exprienced to truly appreciate.

---

I did not miss his "actual meaning", Bugs. I was once very religious, and I have experienced spiritual blessings and inner joy.

I have since learned, that one can follow a different path, and still reap spiritual peace and inner joy.

Without god.

And that is the point. There is a choice.

I'm happy for him, if he has found a path in life that makes him happy. There is nothing wrong with that.

The problem is, he is stating that it is the ONLY way, the one true way. And that is just not true.

(Edited by WebShaman on 05-18-2005 08:51)

WS, if you really understood the biblical concept I mentioned then I don't understand how you could say this:

quote:

---

I saw those who really believed in God (I guess you would label them as good Xians) die from bullet wounds, shrapnel, and explosions in Iraq and in Kuwait.
Since they failed to survive, I guess they were doing something wrong.

Likewise, I saw those who didn't believe in God (I wouldn't label them as Xians at all)
and those who actively worshipped Satan survive. I guess they were doing something correct.

---

This was specifically what bothered me about your post. It really surprised me because I thought you did understand that God never promised that bad things would never happen to good people. The entire book of Job was intended to make that very point. So am I misunderstanding your reply to JFB? If so, what exactly did you mean to say?

: . . DHTML Slice Puzzle : . . .

I would guess the point would be something along the lines of "getting a bullet in the head can't really be called 'success'"

That is exactly how I read it too... but that means he missed the point... which is what I said. Taking a bullet in the head is completely irrelevant when discussing "success" measured from biblical theology.

It is perfectly clear to me that the definition of success from a materialist world view differs from a Xian world view and I assumed that WS also understood that; thus my confusion.

: . . DHTML Slice Puzzle : . . .

Bugs, that was pure sarcasm, and it says everything it is supposed to say. I think you mis-understood it.

I know very well that the God never promised the believers an easy ride - the story of Job is evidence of this.

You will notice the " " next to each example - maybe I should of spelled it out a bit more plainly.

You see, JFritzyB is talking in ABSOLUTES

quote:

---

I know that there must be one correct answer for Truth because I know that in life, when I do certain things, I get in trouble or I mess up. But, when I do other things, I experience success. Therefore, if the above statement is true, then there must be ONE ANSWER for my situation....

---

Absolutes apply to everything, because according to him, there is only one Truth.

I presented examples from RL experiences that disprove this.

You see, if JFritzyB believes that that is the path for himself, fine. As I said, I have no problem with that.

But what he feels is correct for himself, doesn't necessarily apply to others. I'm also pointing out that there are other answers for his situation, that he is not seeing - that there are other ways of looking at things, from different perspectives.

quote:

---

It is perfectly clear to me that the definition of success from a materialist world view differs from a Xian world view and I assumed that WS also understood that; thus my confusion.

---

I am also very well aware of this.

Sirs...there is a difference between right and wrong--however, you seem to perceive the answers to right and wrong as a PREFERENCE--rather than a Truth.

If I think it's right to kill someone, well, than since I think this is the right thing to do, I'll just...DO IT! (Yeah, I can kinda understand WHY some people think this way--makes them have a sense of security inside. Whatever they do, is right because they think that it's the RIGHT thing to do...)

...If humans do decide what's right and wrong, than tell me...where is that PERFECT HUMAN who KNOWS ALL THINGS?!!! Is it me (or I)?? Is it you? Is it ANYBODY? Doesn't ANYBODY have ANY answers?

"Well, you don't have to have the answers in life--you just gotta...MOVE ON!"

I'm sorry folks, but there is hope to be found--and teaching people that there is no way to discover Truth will make them become UNSTABLE!! Ask any SMART Psychologist and he'll tell you that when something is uncertain, than there is instability and where there is instability, there is chaos--and where there is chaos, there is DESTRUCTION!!

...If someone tells me that I'm a fool for saying that there is only ONE TRUTH TO FOLLOW, I ask him this question...What if what you said was true in the physical realm? What if we could eat our eggs before we cooked them? What if we lived in our house before building it? And finally...What if we built a roof instead of a foundation first????

Please note that these things CAUSE CHAOS! NOT order!!! Look at Mathematics--what if there were MANY ways to come up with the answer to 2+2=4?? What if 2+2=5? How about TEN? No, FIFTEEN!! How about ONE HUNDERED AND ONE??!!!

You say, "Why, that's OBSURD! That's NOT possible! 2+2 can ONLY EQUAL FOUR!"

HOW DARE YOU SAY THAT! Aren't you being a fool in saying that there is ONE TRUTH TO FOLLOW AND USE in order to come up with the answer "4"? Aren't you being "narrow-minded" and "hypocritical" for saying such things? I mean, HOW PREJUDICED CAN YOU GET! Don't you know that WE decide what the right answer is ON OUR OWN??!

...Do you see what I'm saying? I'm saying that your reasoning is off somewhere else./..

In fact, while we're on the subject of relativism, let me tell you about a young man who talked to me once and "told me the Truth about relativism." And yes, he FIRMLY believed it to be the Truth!

In fact, he basically told me..."How DARE you say that there is only ONE Truth to follow! You're being narrow-minded and stupid!" Well, I told him this..."Let's say you come up to a guy on the street who doesn't believe in gravity and imagined what the world would be like without gravity. He then proceeded to tell you that this was the Truth--however, he said you didn't have to accept it or believe it. Now, wouldn't you at LEAST tell this dude some facts of life?"

"Wouldn't you at LEAST say, 'Look...That's not the way it happens in the real world' and then maybe try to kindly convince him of the Truth of this matter?? Better yet, how should you react when he starts calling you 'narrow-minded' and 'hypocritical' for telling him this? Does him calling you these things, cause the Truth to disappear? NO!" (And not to be too rough with ya, but the Truth of the matter is that the Truth IS the Truth--whether you like it or not.)

Another part of Relativism states that what society says is right, IS right!

The trouble is, what if....


Society says killing is right

A decade later....

Society says killing is wrong


WHO IS RIGHT??!!!

(Edited by JFritzyB on 06-29-2005 09:38)

(Edited by JFritzyB on 06-29-2005 09:42)

quote:

---

...Do you see what I'm saying? I'm saying that your reasoning is off somewhere else./..

---

Yup, yours is WAAAYYYYYY off. 2+2=4 can be proven. So can the existence of gravity. Proving the existence of ONE TRUTH, as you call it, is not possible to prove. It is a philosophical concept.

The same goes for Universal concepts of right and wrong. There is no proof of such, whatsoever. If anything, there is a tendence of proof in Nature against such. Right is, what one is able to force on others. Wrong is, what one can force on others. When this force fails, then right/wrong concepts change accordingly.

We humans tend to see such as being unjust (i.e. personal disatisfaction); thus, we have created different forms of governing, to control and guide the type of force used and how it is used and enforced. The Divine Right of Kings, Dictatorships, different types and styles of Democracy, Socialism, etc.

Religion has been in the business for ages, and still is. And they all tend to have one thing in common - only they (the particular religion in question) has the "right" answer, the ONE TRUTH. The problem with that is inherent - as long as there are rival beliefs, there can be no concrete concept of ONE TRUTH, because another exists.

So, which ONE TRUTH is the ONE TRUTH?

Show me the evidence. I want facts, I want evidence that I can test for, that I can reproduce.

The truth is whatever you perceive it to be.

It's like pain in medicine. There are people who are really hurting when they say they are in pain. There are people who are lying in order to get drugs. Then, there are your people who are in great pain but deny it. (that happens mostly with the elderly because they "don't want to be a burden" or the somewhat prideful people who generally hate to see themselves as needing help.) And of course, there are varying degrees in the TOLERENCE of pain. (What I may find as extremely painful, you may find as just an annoyance)

And generally, we can usually tell which group they fall into when they ask (or don't ask) for pain medicine.

But we HAVE to dispense medicine according to THEIR perception of pain. This is what we are taught, and this is what we have to follow. I won't say that there aren't times when this rule doesn't come into conflict, because it does. But the fact remains that, in the end, we have to accept and respect THEIR peception of what THEIR pain is.

So truth is like pain. It's whatever YOU perceive it to be.

What has this got to do with science vs. religion?

Truth, like pain, is on a spectrum. Science and Religion are just two opposite ends of the same spectrum. And everybody in the world falls on varying places on that spectrum. Proof vs. Faith. Grounded vs. "up in the clouds". Reality vs. Spiritual. However you want to put it, it's all on the same spectrum. The only problem is, that unlike pain, noone is willing to let it rest and accept anyone elses perception of truth while retaining their own. I don't try to force my perception of pain on you, or dispence medicine to you based on MY perception of pain.

I don't know where the hell I'm trying to go with this. But it sounded good. Ignore it or elaborate on it. I'm sure there's a point in there somewhere.

*****
In the web that is my own, I begin again...

There is only one truth and that is reality.

Reality is all about us and for the most part can be seen heard, touched experienced or otherwise quantified.

Religion does not meet these parameters.

That is the only truth.

You may obfuscate and become as anfractuous as you wish, but from this basic fact of life you cannot escape.

Never let your sense of morals get in the way of doing what's right.
Isaac Asimov
US science fiction novelist & scholar (1920 - 1992)

quote:

---

...there is a difference between right and wrong--however, you seem to perceive the answers to right and wrong as a PREFERENCE--rather than a Truth.

---

This is correct.

What one perceives as 'right' is not necessarily what another believes. If we differ in our idea of right and wrong, then we have demonstrated 'preference'. I'm not willing to back down on what I feel is truly wrong, so my preference must be truth - at least, to me.