Mastering Truth

Thats a good point you made about recognizing something. Perhaps a better word is just 'know', not 'recognize'. One either access objective truth in the 'server' or they access their internal limited ego stained knowledge The only way to acess the 'server of truth' is by using irreducible logic (because it is the thing God used to created all ontological physical reality) applied to knowlege. Not easy but doable. We can also experiment and use evidence to try and discover truth (they help us gain knowledge), but without the application of irreducible logic to the newly gained knowldge they wont be interpreted correctly. To any information, you can either apply logic from outside (irreducible) OR you apply your own ego driven logical understanding in order to protect your identity.

@MasteringTruths @Zenciia @Lilith_Atheist but because God decree’s it? You’ve inserted theism as an unproven axiom. Recognition. You “recognise” the sun’s hot externally but how? Senses? Evidence? That’s not 100%, could be an illusion. How does you KNOW you are not a brain in a jar or in a mental ward imagining 2/

Morning, everyone 😊

"Belief. All non-omniscient thinking is foolish?" - a strange question. Nowhere I'm saying or implying this. Are you saying thinking = belief? "Truth. ALL truth? So saying the sky is blue is not just physics" - if (keeping it respectful to you) God exists, then physics is merely the codes He wrote, like humans writing the physics in a video game. You speak as if physics were not part of Gods creation. Truth is impossible outside of something eternal that grounds it.

@MasteringTruths @Zenciia @Lilith_Atheist Too much to unpack here so I’ll keep it as brief as possible. Belief. All non-omniscient thinking is foolish? So let’s apply that to you: Do you KNOW God’s real or that you are not believing/fooling yourself? Truth. ALL truth? So saying the sky is blue is not just physics 1/

@_Ochiedike This question at this point in the conversation seem very ilogical. Elaborate if you have the capability

@MasteringTruths How?

To tell me that a man from Nazareth died for me over 2000 years ago for a sin I didn't commit is an insult to my intelligence.

@MerlinJ21192 Yes, try to make it short and simple so its easy to follow and I will provide clarification

@MasteringTruths There was no assumption there. You moved position at least 4 times. Now it appears it was only ever about the logic A needs B etc. Would you like examples of the 4 different positions you have moved about from and ALL the links to each one?

@MerlinJ21192 I already addressed those points and we kept looping. What about you paraphrase the sentence in the discussion so that I can analyse it in a new light?

@MasteringTruths You are right; however, paraphrasing without understanding the original sentence leads to the situation in which YOU now find yourself. Let’s not pretend it hasn’t been explained to you at least 8 times by Grok and me. Would you like the links for each time it was explained?

@jrstevens @Lilith_Atheist You gave me an answer to a question that wasn't made. You are blocking the conversation from moving forward

@MasteringTruths @Lilith_Atheist It's my answer

By now you should know what a belief is when you talk to me. Belief is the act of fooling oneself to think that whatever you believe in is or must be truth without knowing 100% Truth is whatever is aligned with God. In humans words, whatever is morally correct or whatever exists in ontologic reality (for things that dont need morality). Accepting seem to imply uncertainty. You accept something is true. If you knew it was true than you just recognize it as true, no need to accept the sun produces heat right?. Recognition is external. You recognize something for what it is.

@MasteringTruths @Zenciia @Lilith_Atheist You still haven’t given the definitions of “belief” and “truth” that were explicitly requested. So again, please. Define “belief.” Define “truth” (as distinct from belief). Explain how “recognition” differs from assent/acceptance without circularity.

@sathvik_06 What is the marble and what is the track in this analogy? Also, what is the push?

@MasteringTruths If I set a marble on a specific track, I dont "push" it every second, but I authored the path. If god selects a reality where you will sin, you "choose" it freely, but god necessitated that specific choice by hitting "start" A 12yr old can understand this simple thing

Open challenge to Christianity and Islam If your god is all knowing, He knew your "sins" before he created you. If he still created you to fail, he isn't a "judge" But a bored guy who likes to see people suffer in eternal hell knowingly

@Mila_Zonderling @_Ochiedike Okay. Will be waiting

@MasteringTruths @_Ochiedike ok, reading back, this is not clear in a single Twix. I wil scribble on it, keep an eye on my substack.

Sorry, we don't need religion to have morals.

@Mila_Zonderling @_Ochiedike What is the mind, What are 'we'? YOu said the mind has no free will but 'we' have to apply it. That sounds strange hence me asking for clarification

@MasteringTruths @_Ochiedike Like I said, the mind has no free will so observation is objective and epistemologically neutral. Interpretation is affected by our lifeworld and so we have no choice but to apply our free will to construct meaning.

@sathvik_06 Man, your logic is just so awfull. Its just so terrible that you cant show me how does full knowledge actively CAUSE a free being to choose something involuntarely.

@MasteringTruths Since god's knowledge cannot be wrong (Omniscience), it is impossible for the human to choose otherwise. If the human could surprise god, god would not be Omniscient.. It's u who can't understand basic stuff

@frankleehowe @PaschalMaryOko1 @_Ochiedike Whatever pleases you

2. Conscious humans are imperfect as you know, and can't perfectly know what is morally good or evil. 3. You are right. But the bigger layer of truth is that objective morals govern morality and the people who reject the laws of morality create their own version of morality and thats why most people only see subjective morality. Thats the easier and selfish path, for the weak.

@MasteringTruths @_Ochiedike 1. I do not dispute the fact that there is God 2. Cultures and/or societies are lived by people who are conscious of what is better or worse 3. Objective morals can't be universal rather it is local which makes it subjective when considering it globally

@jrstevens @Lilith_Atheist Correct, but was that my question?

@MasteringTruths @Lilith_Atheist Evidence makes a claim more likely to be true

@Bug1one @_Ochiedike Fantastic counter argument

@MasteringTruths @_Ochiedike 😂😂😂 keep dreaming.

Try not to be §tupid if you can.

It actually doesnt matter when He is coming. He will come when the time arrives. A web and a spider could be living in your house for weeks thinking, 'no one will ever wipe this away, i've been here since forever' and then all of a sudden a broom destroys everything. We are spiders, we perceive time very slowly. You either submit to the highest Authority or you make yourself your own authority and pay your own price. Doesnt matter to me

@MasteringTruths @_Ochiedike When is he really coming? Or should we just swallow the same old lie the colonizers/slave owners fed our forefathers to keep us obedient?

@_Ochiedike Infinitely beyond your understanding capabilities

@MasteringTruths Wtf 😆

@OluomoEko @_Ochiedike That is unknown. The problem is that you don’t understand that the way you perceived time is very different from all the beings. What do you consider is a long time Is a very short time for superior beings

@MasteringTruths @_Ochiedike After how many generations??

@jrstevens @Lilith_Atheist God’s existence is not extraordinary. That’s the default position. But I understand that some people are trapped in this layer of reality and unaware of the other layer. Let me ask you this, does evidence equal truth?

@MasteringTruths @Lilith_Atheist Fine. We'll start with the basics. A claim of deities is extraordinary and requires extraordinary evidence. The evidence adduced for the claim is insufficient to support belief. So I don't

@jrstevens @Lilith_Atheist Fantastic logic

@MasteringTruths @Lilith_Atheist You already did