Gov. Shutdown?

[UptonSinclair]

Good point. I could have been clearer in my post. While I believe that there is absolute truth, I do not believe that all Biblical directives are absolute. Many are not, and the Bible makes this clear. In this vein, many Christians want to make the Bible seem more absolute than it is in some points. For example, the Bible never says do not lie.

The Bible does speak against lying as a a common practice (e.g. Revelation 21:8). And it forbids lying under oath to tell the truth (e.g. the ninth commandment). But at the same time, the Bible praises Rahab for lying to protect the two spies James 2:25.

Also, another point that the Bible makes very clear isn't unversal. Joel 3:10 vs. Isaiah 2:3-4. And how do those two verses make sense in context of each other? Well, read Ecclesiastes 3, and there's the answer.

In my opinion, the Bible is far from clear on which directives are absolute and which directions relative. Take for instance the lying. The verse you quote in Revelations says

8 But the cowardly, the unbelieving, the vile, the murderers, the sexually immoral, those who practice magic arts, the idolaters and all liars—they will be consigned to the fiery lake of burning sulfur. This is the second death.”

Notice how it says "all liars." Also, Jesus told those listening to let their yes be yes and their no be no in the context of not taking oaths (Math 5:37).

Again, just because a Christian isn't consistent or totally inline with Biblical teaching doesn't invalidate Christianity or the Bible. That is a common rebuttal, but it's illogical. Becoming a Christian doesn't transform you into some kind of non-human perfect being.

I was not trying to invalidate Christianity. Honestly, after a decades of following Christianity I have come to the point where I don't claim to know the truth. The more I learn about world history, the more I view the Hebrews in the context of their surroundings. This leads to questions about the "truth" of Judaism and therefore Christianity.

I was simply pointing out that while many Christians like to claim absolute truth with dealing with other people's actions, they like to cling to relative truth when viewing their own actions.

Is it ever right to kill someone out of spite, anger, (insert other selfish, negative emotion here)? Is what Cain did to Abel ever okay? I believe you'd have to answer that it is always wrong. If that is the case, then you have an absolute truth.

What if the anger is in reaction to something like genocide?

To say that you do not believe in any form of absolute truth is to deny logic. To deny logic is to deny science, language, reason, and ultimately humanity.

To say that there is an absolute truth (no matter what it is), if you say there is an absolute truth, then there must be an absolute (universal) being. In other words, there must be a deity.

Logic cannot prove that the deity is the God of the Judeo-Christian faith, but it can show that there must be a supreme being. Once you come to that point, it does become a matter of choice/faith in whichever supreme being, but history does give credence to the Judeo-Christian God (and I'm already too long in this post so that will have to be another time).

Ironically, you argue logic using definition.

Does absolute truth exist? I have no idea. I know that many will use the claim of absolute truth to control the actions of others. When they are unable to argue from a utilitarian perspective, they use the existence of God or Natural Law to prove their claims. Though I don't claim the golden rule as absolute truth, I do believe it is a good way to live one's life.