how can any one religion make a valid claim to be the fundamental truth?

OK...but I'm not sure that I can. My belief...from my internal mind, or "box" as you call it, is based on the Holy Spirit within me. He stepped into my box and that is why I think as I do. However, even if I imagine that I am a single relative human with no divine revelation, I do not glorify my mind enough to proclaim dogmatic assertions on the idealisms that I have experienced. The problem here is that outside of the so called box, human intellect is god. Its like John Lennons song where imagining no heaven makes everything lovey dovey. Well, this may well be true IF there were no spiritual warfare on the planet...noty just in my "mind/box" but everywhere. You are right, here...it is as if even humans like me who claim to have surrendered to a higher personal absolute then attempt to define the edicts of this absolute and expect others to conform. A curious oddity of human nature. The key is "manufacturers." If a divine cereal were imparted into the cupboards of those who accepted it, no other manmade imitation would suffice. Now...from outside the mind/box of the enlightened ones, there would indeed be no difference. Cereal is cereal, and truth is truth...all truth being relative. True. One needs to taste the product. It all depends on how the Holy Communion is marketed. Yes...IF we respect all opinions or beliefs as equally valid. If you said that your Mother was your Mother and yours alone, no matter what anyone else claimed, you would be right. Absolutely. I could claim that to me, she was my Mother. It would be proven false due to the communion between you and her. Just as Mother is an absolute, so too is God. Unless it has to do with a personal absolute and how YOU suit His tastes.

Hey wassup, and welcome to EvC forum! One interesting point that this forum in general has challenged me to do is to justify my own personal beliefs in God by examining what I believe and not what my church has taught me. It is quite illuminating, and I believe that God has helped me to use the wisdom that He gave me!In the end, it is between each of us individually and God Himself.
IMHO, anyway. Using the old cliche that "Its not about religion. Its about relationship", I would ammend the topic starting title to state "How can any one relationship claim to be the absolute truth?"
The answer is that God Himself makes the claim. Not my Pastor, or yours, or any church or organisation.This message has been edited by Phatboy, 01-18-2005 05:54 AM

I started by saying that In the end, it is between each of us individually and God Himself.
IMHO, anyway. Using the old cliche that "Its not about religion. Its about relationship", I would ammend the topic starting title to state "How can any one relationship claim to be the absolute truth?"
The answer is that God Himself makes the claim. Yes, but belief in someone being true never regresses. Once you know someone and can trust them, you will never later deny the reality of that person. But Ohnhai, while it is certainly true that you knew about God, how can you ever have known Him and then later deny His reality? While I cannot judge you or know your heart, it appears as if you merely knew about God. He was never as real to you as the knowledge that you later gained. Ask yourself what it is that verifies knowledge. And science is only verifiable through human wisdom. Because I follow a person, not a religion. Sagan, Einstein, and Hawking, respectable though they are, have never impressed me as much as Jesus Christ. If I conclude as you have done, I will be talking a different talk. Until then, I stand for what I know. (Or what I believe that I know. Gotta watch that sneaky guy!) Jar, in order to answer your question, you must first tell me how many GODS that there are. Not what the encyclopedia lists, but what you know to be true. No, but I have talked to someone who says that He was there. Should I trust Him? And if so, let us enjoy the journey together. If you go another way, perhaps it is only because you seek another destination than I do. On a global scale, is each individual on the journey? I would say so. If so, does each individual journey forth with a destination in mind, or are we all content tobe alive and enjoying each day in the midst of our journey? Perhaps we will arrive together, if an arrival ever occurs. Perhaps, but are each of us not on a path? Does it not make sense to hope that the path that you take is, in fact, the right one?
The only other option is to dismiss the notion of right and wrong and just take the path anyway. If we are flying to the moon, there may well be 6.2 billion different paths that ultimately arrive there, but there is where we will end up. I will agree with you, Rock...each one of the 6.2 billion chooses the path that they set out on. If ultimate truth were discovered any other way, it would have had to find us. Lets go back to my "moon" analogy. Paraphrasing your last statement, "either no moon exists and all paths to it go nowhere, or all paths are truly on target and are "reflections" of the same thing...namely, the moon. In which case one moon exists and reflects itself upon us...(flip it) in which case one God exists and we all reflect Him... Good question, Scraff! Keep that one on file! Charles, you are being serious, are you not? If what you suggest IS true, it is time for us to act.
I say that we should pray for God to reveal the truth to us. Do you agree, or do you have a better plan?

Even as a kid, I knew that Santa was make believe. Santa never felt real in a personal sense. I suppose that some kids are so deluded, however. Familiarity is based on trust. Humans were the only source of trust that I had until I got saved. God is a real personal presence for me now, however. How would I ever convince you of this fact? You presuppose that I am blissfully ignorant at best and delusional at worst. You have already declared, in effect, that you now believe only in modern empirical facts. Perhaps we should start by getting to know each other before even bringing higher faith into the equation. The keyword that I see in your statement is "relevance." You expect us to make a verifiable claim and yet you have dismissed the relevance beforehand. A no win situation. You seem to have already made up your mind, which is your freedom. That is your absolute right and current truth. My current truth is Jesus Christ, alive, in control, and tolerant of all of us.
Why should I deny that my truth encompasses all truth? I do not see your truth as relevant...sorry for my humanity.

Are you quite certain, then, that there is no supernatural realm of Spirit, or are you just saying that it has never been proven?

Only to the satisfaction and belief of the individual. That is why I asked you to tell me how many were in your heart. The relevance of your answer, which you may keep to yourself, by the way, is a personal and awesome matter!

Fair enough. How about any sort of inner awareness akin to ESP? Awareness of Vibes? Attitudes? Anything beyond the ordinary logic of a natural world?Put another way, whenever you have done something naughty, which we all do, have you ever felt giddy about it? Or convicted? Or aware that somehow you were not yourself?This message has been edited by Phatboy, 01-19-2005 15:37 AM

So Jar...I respect your answers. Tell me Do you consider yourself a Christian relativist? I am always reading the alternative beliefs to the ones that I grew up with. For example, the basic Christian "party line" states that Truth is absolute and that Post Modern thought is destroying the culture.
I believe this, yet I was curious as to what the "post modernists" think. So I bought a book called "The Truth about the Truth: deconfusing and reconstructing the post modern world." Lots of big words and opinions. Here is a quote:"The postmodern Enlightenment project has its own concept of progress. It's not so explicit or linear, surely
not so simple--but it's there. It is really more a concept of cultural evolution, based on the belief that the whole human race is involved in a huge learning process. This process is difficult, painful, and conflicted:it can't be reduced to things simply getting better. The postmodern Enlightenment project involves learning about learning, discovering something new about our own reality.So, as it turns out, we have not one Enlightenment project, but three: a Western one based on rational thought, an Eastern one based on seeing through the illusion of the Self, and a postmodern one based on the concept of socially constructed reality.
Jean-Jacques Rousseau made the famous revolutionary pronouncement that men are born free, and everywhere they are in chains. A couple of centuries later that still holds truth for us, but now we see that the strongest chains are symbolic ones, mind forged manacles."This message has been edited by Phatboy, 01-19-2005 23:47 AM

Topic: how can any one religion make a valid claim to be the fundamental truth?Lets break down the topic statement, shall we?
4 words...religion, valid, fundamental, and truth. I'll throw in "empirical as it is often used to validate truth claims. religion \ri-"li-jn\ n 1 : the service and worship of God or the supernatural 2 : devotion to a religious faith 3 : a personal set or institutionalized system of religious beliefs, attitudes, and practices 4 : a cause, principle, or belief held to with faith and ardor religionist n
valid \"va-ld\ adj 1 : having legal force 2 : founded on truth or fact : capable of being justified or defended : sound <~ reasons> validity \v-"li-d-t\ n validly adv
fundamental \'fn-d-"ment-l\ adj 1 : serving as an origin : primary 2 : basic, essential 3 : radical <~ change> 4 : of central importance : principal fundamental n fundamentally adv
truth \"trth\ n, pl truths \"trthz, "trths\ 1 : truthfulness, honesty 2 : the real state of things : fact 3 : the body of real events or facts : actuality 4 : a true or accepted statement or proposition 5 : agreement with fact or reality : correctness syn veracity, verity

​

empirical \im-"pir-i-kl\ also empiric \-ik\ adj : based on observation; also : subject to verification by observation or experiment <~ laws> empirically \-i-k(-)l\ adv

​

The reason that the truth behind a personal Creator and a supernatural reality is so hard if not impossible to verify is because the experiment involves human reasoning and behavior itself. We do not live in a modern world so much as we live in a postmodern world. Christian belief is distinctive and narrow minded. Many so called Christians have not lived up to the standards of morality that the Gospel suggests. This fact can be explained, although by no means justified, by the very belief of an absolute good and evil. The knowledge of "good and evil" is a relativistic freethought mentality which is itself an absolute. It is absolute in its denial of a personal God who lives within us.

​

The Spirit and the exclusive truth of this personal God is thought of and viewed as arrogant, pompous, and hypocritical by the relativistic freethought mentality of the majority.

​

From our point of view, (fundamental Christianity) the box is the universe and only God is above even this box. For this reason, many fundamentalists think that they have the go ahead to legislate morality. They do not realize that God is in control and also loves Democrats! From the relativists point of view, each individual constructs a box based on human wisdom, culture, and indoctorination. Not having experienced a "personal verifiable encounter with God, a relativist sees that only science and logic can define the "out of box" view. Again, from a fundamental point of view, your vantage point "outside of the box" is the place that God belongs and not human wisdom. That is why our concept of morality is so absolute, although as fallible humans we are no better at living it than are the relativists!

​

Perhaps some day, all fundamental religion will be outlawed on the planet and people will be forced to agree on human wisdom as the definer and source of morality. Oddly, the Christian wingnuts have
seen this reality in the "Left Behind" message of the Rapture of the Church. Even if we (as believers) were right,and even if the Bible were somehow correct, I believe that a world free from fundamental religion is destined to become a reality some day.

​

As a Believer, I must warn you: Don't expect abolishment of the fundamentals, (origin of thought) to improve humanity. Be wise and be agnostic. You may find that the origin...the fundamental truth..will be needed some day!

​

This message has been edited by Phatboy, 01-20-2005 06:54 AM

1) Nice. The logical mind would ask you who you slipped a key to to put the presents in the house.
The spiritual mind would say that the "Spirit of Santa" is one of believing in the love of giving and, if presented correctly to a child will never be feared. Did your little girl grow up and tell her kid/s about "Santa" or did she have other parables of love to teach them at the Holidays?As an aside, how many are in favor of giving young children the materialist toys that they ask for?Also, what message do humanist/atheist parents teach their kids?
Is Santa kosher for them? How about the evil Bush who stole Christmas?What is the "fundamental" truth about Christmas?This message has been edited by Phatboy, 01-22-2005 04:53 AM

So you are saying that Christmas..religious or otherwise..is only fundamental to those who celebrate it, correct? Logical answer! I suppose that one could teach their children about the spirit of giving at any time during the year. Mass materialism is not necessarily a good example.That again also sums up the fact that there is no fundamental truth within a relativistic mindset, aside from belief in oneself.Well, it beats a theocracy! Realistically, humanity is not ready for a theocracy, nor need they be unless and until humanity is collectively convinced of a need for such a system. Having the awareness of a personal God that is a unifying relative to all would help convince many. Others would still exercise the individual right to believe in themselves more than in common union. (communion)This message has been edited by Phatboy, 01-22-2005 05:36 AM

Hey, Ohnhai! You ask "what is the truth inside you?" We can start with the discussion of what truth is. I took the liberty to copy a rather good argument on the differences between absolute truth and moral relativism, copied here: (Let me know what you all think) Science is not the only source of truth. Philosophy and theology have something to contribute in this hodgepodge question of rational thought. This message has been edited by Phatboy, 01-23-2005 00:12 AM

And I must appologize to you. I was lazy...I'll admit it. I threw the absolutist/relativist article in without really seeing the personal context of it.
I was just too lazy ( or tired from work) to formulate a decent response to your question. Ifen and you both were taken aback and I guess I see why. It has been said, however, that any absolute belief has to have been determined to be absolute by holding the belief up to a standard.
How can I prove Christianity to you?To start with, I affirm the truth of Christ as a living presence by the changes that I see within others touched by prayer or belief.
I know that the critics say that "changed lives" does not qualify as an absolute truth proof of Christ because other belief systems also change lives.Well, I don't disagree with them, nor do I wish to disprove other experiences. I have personally seen countless people who have prayed and have transformed before my eyes into a virtual different personality. This is not a dog and pony magic show.
It does not happen due to prayer being some form of magic incantation. It IS a feeling....an awareness of a warmth...a presence that is greater than the sum of us. To me, once I met Him, I knew Him. More than a presence---a character and a friend!One time in particular, shortly after becoming a believer, I and a young friend were in a Cafe and we felt compelled to pray with some young students at another table. We approached them and asked if they wanted to pray with us. (No, we were not pushy or annoying. They offered to let us..) So we did. As I finished praying, with closed eyes I felt a distinct warmth drift down upon me and cover like a blanket. To me, it was God and I felt that it was no big deal...but when I opened my eyes and saw the 4 teens in tears, humbled and in awe of the feeling, I knew that a power greater than human love had been with us and still was with us.Am I suggesting that if I prayed with you or any given person the same would happen? No...I cannot make that claim. I WILL say that
I believe that God could touch anyone of us. I am not arrogantly saying that you are missing out without Him, as if you are not somehow worthy without "my" truth. I WILL say that IF the same experience happened to you, you would be helped by it. So am I suggesting to you that YOU need Jesus? Yes. We all do.
(If we were at a party and you told me that I looked like I needed a beer, would I be insulted that you assumed I was a drinker? Not at all..you just wanted me to feel good. Now do you see why I do what I do?If you were a Buddhist, would I be insulting you by praying with you?
No...for I would not force you to do it.If you were an atheist at a football game, I would not expect you to have to pray the little blurb prayer at the start of the game, but I would expect that you would not be able to prevent it any more than I cannot prevent the displays of public sexual flaunting, fowl language, media saturation of many kinds, and all inclusive lovey dovey talk that characterizes a society wise in its own eyes yet lacking the warmth of a true and living Creator.As I have said before in another post, I do not believe that the U.S. should be a theocracy. I do not believe that everyone be forced to accept the Christian religion. Some day, there will be no religious expression allowed in public. I DO believe that everyone still have the opportunity to find it, and that it be available to all without cost. That is why I do what I do, say what I say, and chill where I chill. This message has been edited by Phatboy, 01-23-2005 07:24 AM

RiverRat wants us to look inside and we will find the truth within ... That is why the Bible is the best written standard which best describes the character of God so as to reinforce the ideas that God would say to us.Its like counterfeit money. Experts at detection get that way by not by studying counterfeit bills but by studying the original money. Then...if a counterfeit comes along, it is so obvious as to be easily spotted. If Christians had no Bible to study, God would find another way to communicate, perhaps, but the Bible was strongly and thoroughly unchanged in the 500 years of its printing.This message has been edited by Phatboy, 01-23-2005 11:20 AMThis message has been edited by Phatboy, 01-23-2005 11:20 AM