"We can't judge which religion is superior than the others. None of us can judge that."
I cannot and I do not agree with the statement above because for us who practice religion we do have a certain degree of biasness towards the religion of our choice. And for most of us, this bias comes from the fact that we believe that our religion is superior compared to others, otherwise we would not be in ANY religion as a matter-of-fact. With all due respect, clearly the person who made the statement above subscribe to the idea of philosophical relativism which is the position that believes there is no such thing as absolute truth.
The fact is there IS absolute truth (i.e. truth that can be applied to anyone regardless whether they believe in it) and a very good analogy of it is:
To some St. Peter (the one quoted saying Acts 4:12) might sound like a bigot and their immediate response might be:
The fact is there IS absolute truth (i.e. truth that can be applied to anyone regardless whether they believe in it) and a very good analogy of it is:
Gravity
The pull of gravity affects EVERYONE regardless of their belief in its existence.
Christianity subscribes to the idea of absolute truth; as Christians believe that Jesus is our only hope for our salvation for "[s]alvation is found in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given to men by which we must be saved." (Acts 4:12) and this applies to everyone not only Christians.
To some St. Peter (the one quoted saying Acts 4:12) might sound like a bigot and their immediate response might be:
"Hey, there is no such truth that can be applied to everyone regardless of what they believe in it! (i.e. there is no such thing as absolute truth)"
Well here comes the irony. If what was said in the response was true, then there must be at least one absolute truth, which means the what was said in the response is false!
Therefore to take the stand as to belief there is no such thing as absolute truth is a self-defeating position. The conclusion? It is better to have an absolute truth stand than to have none at all. ;)
7 comments:
Wrong again. Gravity is such a weak force that sometimes, it doesn't affect everyone.
Let me quote : In the quantum world, every single damn thing is a probability.
OKay.. that quote was from my movie. So, gravity does not ABSOLUTELY affect everyone.
I could explain to you why your logic on absolute truth is false, but heck, 56K modems ain't fun to twirl with, and it's getting to 2am. I got blood all over my hands (fake blood, dammit!)...ARGH!
Chewxy: Nice to have you back. ;) By the way, just a thought: for a person who does not believe in absolute truth, how can you say that I am wrong or what I said was false?
Philosophical relativism = self-defeating position
Error again.
I beleive you've not read my arguments on the orange orange or the green orange.
You can be wrong, even when there is no absolute truth.
Ah well... I think I may be posting an article on that again in my blog
celestine, then again, Matt 7:15 says this 'Judge not, lest ye be judged.'
Which in fact, means that very first line above, is true.
Even Jesus said he did not come to judge, but to save those who are lost.
Now remember?
Hey, Celestine.. you might want to check this out : http://blog.chewxy.com/?p=296
It deals with how Absolute Truths are not Absolute and Relativism takes over...
MUAHHAHHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAH! Remember... they're procreative shades of color
Chewxy: Thanks. Posted my comment. ;)
minishorts:
Actually it's Matthew 7:1 ("Do not judge, or you too will be judged")
Clearly Jesus meant Matt 7:1 in context (i.e. in a "do not judge a book by it's cover" sense) not a blanket do-not-judge policy.
Besides Jesus himself said in Luke 12:51: "Do you think I came to bring peace on earth? No, I tell you, but division."
There would be no "division" if none chose sides. There would be no choosing of sides if there no judgment (or discernment) by individuals of what is good or evil.
You are right, Jesus came to save the lost but "[w]hen the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, he will sit on his throne in heavenly glory. All the nations will be gathered before him, and he will separate the people one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats. He will put the sheep on his right and the goats on his left." (Matt 25:31-33)
Isn't that judgment?
LOL. quite fun all these arguments about relativism.
Yes, I do agree that its contradictory for 'relativism' to claim that everything is relative and yet remain true. It's circular, this argument.
However, it's bad form to turn 'relativism' into a logically derivative statement: "no p is true", which only derives a semantic paradox. This is precisely the.. I think it's called the 'Liar's paradox', i.e. A Cretan claims that all Cretans are liars.
I believe relativism's claim is that no system of believe or statement can pretend to have the status of absolute truth. In some circles, this is described as there not being any big "T's", just little "t's".
In other words, if I remember my material right, relativism's claim is a negative one rather than a substantive, positive one.
Post a Comment