But with such sentiments of alternativeness being co-opted by oppressive forces, «Half - Truths» asks: is it possible to collectively create and
agree upon truth?
Not exact matches
Each side sends out as many gullible followers as they can find or buy and they send them to an
agreed upon place where they bash eachothers heads in and stab at eachother with spears and arrows and eventually only a few survivors will wander back to their masters covered in blood and wounds and claim
Truth for their side, since whichever side won was obviously God's chosen ones...
I
agree if he understands eternal
truths in the sense that there are confessions of
truth eschatologically valid once for all time, never out of fashion but always worthy to be remembered, confessed, and more deeply reflected
upon by the people of God in order to discover always anew their eternal newness (as Pope Francis says in Evangelii Gaudium, 11).
Decorously contained on a half - page with regular rhyme and punctuation, it seems at first glance to be the sort of poem a pious 17th - century country parson might be expected to write — a courteous reiteration of theological
truths upon which the Sunday faithful may happily
agree.
In addition their is a great book called the 7
Truths of the Bible that have nothing to do with proving religion but the historical facts as
agreed upon by archaelogist / historians / anthropologists, many of whom are nonbelievers / skeptics / atheists
We do not all
agree in the Christian Church about the proper forms of authority in the ministry; but whatever they may be, we can not escape the
truth that God in his decisive word to us has left us no ultimate reliance
upon institution or tradition save that which arises from personal trust in him.
Yes, I
agree, an objective needs to be
agreed upon for two people to test many notions of «
truth».
Fact — That which all sides
agree upon Belief — That which there is no agreement between the parties
Truth — That which the facts point toward
I
agree — I would even go one step further — it contains
truth only in as much as it is lived, tested, and elaborated
upon for our personal and communal lives.
(This should be
agreed upon) Yet
Truth is perceived extreme instead as the corrupt world is what all have accepted as a given only because that is the world they have been socialized into and socially conditioned to.
In
truth, this entire transfer merry - go - round seems pretty ambitious and unrealistic on paper as there is a lot that will have to be
agreed upon.
Historical and even scientific
truth can be merely the consensus
agreed upon by those who presently have the power and influence to determine public opinion, or it can be based on evidence that has been tested in the laboratory, in debate, or in a court of law.
Where does anyone nowadays look to find pure objective
truth — i.e.,
truth according to the time - honored and duty - worn universally
agreed upon rules of logic that have been argued by humanity's greatest minds during hard times over the ages?