Truth vs Facts

[BigVito]

Sly has posted in several threads something to the effect of "The Bible contains truth, but not necessarily fact." While a "non-believer" I find this statement to be both intriguing and true.

It has been quite a while since I've read any Joseph Campbell but this in a nutshell is what he believed most myths and religion do. They lead us to eternal truths about humanity, our world and our place in it.

I find great value in the symbolism and stories in the Bible. Looking at it from a comparative viewpoint we see similarities to older tradtion and archetypes.

In the tale of the Golden Fleece, we have a father preparing to kill his son as a sacrifice to the gods. Just as happens in the Biblical tale of Abraham and Issac, a ram appears as a replacement sacrifice.

We see other similarities in the tales of Oedipus and Moses. Both children deserted in the wilderness to save them from certain death only to be found by royalty and raised as such. Odyseus and the Cyclops echo the tale of David and Goliath.

From Jesus to Osiris and Isis, to Dionysus returning to life each spring, Resurrection and rebirth are almost a universal theme in myths and religions.

Do we sometimes get so caught up in the "facts" of our beliefs that we miss the truths?

[Village Idiot]

Do we sometimes get so caught up in the "facts" of our beliefs that we miss the truths?Yes.........Those that seek the truth will find it. Those that do not, will not. It's really very simple.

[Miss tery]

Fact is verifiable by redundant scientific experiments. Nothing else is fact.

[BigVito]

Yes.........Those that seek the truth will find it. Those that do not, will not. It's really very simple.
But can those truths only be found in one religion or one book? Are there more universal truths that we blind ourselves to because we see things too literally?

Do we truly understand the power of resurrection and rebirth on a personal level if we take the Biblical tale as literal "gospel"? If we view the battle between David and Goliath as a historical fact do we lose the abilty to see the power the story has on a archetypical level?

[BigVito]

Fact is verifiable by redundant scientific experiments. Nothing else is fact.
No argument there, but do you find any value in what religions teach us symbolically, MT?

While I do believe very similarly to you, I find there is great wisdom in the teachings of religion and don't wish to discard those truths simply because of the mythology and symbolism used to teach them.

[mathmajors]

Fact is verifiable by redundant scientific experiments. Nothing else is fact.
How do you explain axioms?

[Miss tery]

How do you explain axioms?
1 entry found for axioms.
ax·i·om ( P ) Pronunciation Key (ks-m)
n.
A self-evident or universally recognized truth; a maxim: “It is an economic axiom as old as the hills that goods and services can be paid for only with goods and services” (Albert Jay Nock).
An established rule, principle, or law.
A self-evident principle or one that is accepted as true without proof as the basis for argument; a postulate.

[mathmajors]

Yet one cannot, for example, verify scientifically that 2 parallel lines will never intersect. You know it's true, yet it doesn't conform to your definition of fact.

[Village Idiot]

But can those truths only be found in one religion or one book? Are there more universal truths that we blind ourselves to because we see things too literally?

Do we truly understand the power of resurrection and rebirth on a personal level if we take the Biblical tale as literal "gospel"? If we view the battle between David and Goliath as a historical fact do we lose the abilty to see the power the story has on a archetypical level?The choice of "which religion" is a personal one. Mine is The Father, Son and Holy Ghost as taught in the Bible.
Yes we do blind ourselves from truth in that way. We are cut off from hope. We have nothing left to fall back upon but our own ability and reasoning. When that fails us we have nothing left.
I guess you're talking about "down with the old man..up with the new", a personal rebirth of our own spirituality vs. the actual resurection of Jesus.
David and Goliath...I think I know where you're comming from and yes the lesson is bigger than the picture painted.
Good questions Vito. Somebody else may be able to answer you better than I can.

[builder]

Yet one cannot, for example, verify scientifically that 2 parallel lines will never intersect. You know it's true, yet it doesn't conform to your definition of fact.


So the idea of parallel lines is a truth rather than a fact. No?

[mathmajors]

So the idea of parallel lines is a truth rather than a fact. No?According to MT's definition. I'm not trying to slam MT or anything, just trying to help distinguish between 'truth' and 'fact'.

Then again, parallel lines do not exist in nature, and thus cannot be tested scientifically in the physical sense. In method perhaps.

[builder]

According to MT's definition. I'm not trying to slam MT or anything, just trying to help distinguish between 'truth' and 'fact'.

Then again, parallel lines do not exist in nature, and thus cannot be tested scientifically in the physical sense. In method perhaps.

In reality, parallel lines can't exist. The curve of the Earth is proof enough. But a truth doesn't have to be a fact.

[mathmajors]

In reality, parallel lines can't exist. The curve of the Earth is proof enough. But a truth doesn't have to be a fact.
That's what I said!

[builder]

That's what I said!

I wasn't arguing.

[slydevl]

Sly has posted in several threads something to the effect of "The Bible contains truth, but not necessarily fact." While a "non-believer" I find this statement to be both intriguing and true.

It has been quite a while since I've read any Joseph Campbell but this in a nutshell is what he believed most myths and religion do. They lead us to eternal truths about humanity, our world and our place in it.

I find great value in the symbolism and stories in the Bible. Looking at it from a comparative viewpoint we see similarities to older tradtion and archetypes.

In the tale of the Golden Fleece, we have a father preparing to kill his son as a sacrifice to the gods. Just as happens in the Biblical tale of Abraham and Issac, a ram appears as a replacement sacrifice.

We see other similarities in the tales of Oedipus and Moses. Both children deserted in the wilderness to save them from certain death only to be found by royalty and raised as such. Odyseus and the Cyclops echo the tale of David and Goliath.

From Jesus to Osiris and Isis, to Dionysus returning to life each spring, Resurrection and rebirth are almost a universal theme in myths and religions.

Do we sometimes get so caught up in the "facts" of our beliefs that we miss the truths?

I agree with you up to a point. To me it is not important the origin of some of the stories in the OT. They could borrow from other stories, they could have be the inspiration for those myths. I see strong ties between the Sumerian story of Gilgamesh and Noah. The underlying truths are the important part. Writing did exist during the time of Moses and that has been scientifically proven. Not so during the time of Abraham and Noah, or epsecially Creation and those stories could have certainly been borrowed. The fact that all the stories contain similar themes to me lends credence to the fact that they were inspired. The NT is another thing altogether. That Jesus lived and was crucified is undeniable. Hundreds witnessed his death and resurrection. Enough evidence for some that knew him to give their lives rather than deny him. That is historically unarguable.

[BigVito]

I agree with you up to a point. To me it is not important the origin of some of the stories in the OT. They could borrow from other stories, they could have be the inspiration for those myths. I see strong ties between the Sumerian story of Gilgamesh and Noah. The underlying truths are the important part.
Exactly. It seems funny to me that so much energy is spent on "proving" the facts of these stories, ie. expeditions to Ararat to find the Ark, while ignoring the truths, so to speak. I find this aspect particularly troublesome with some of the Fundie movements in all three branches of the major religions.

The fact that all the stories contain similar themes to me lends credence to the fact that they were inspired. Inspired by the one true God or inspired by man's search for meaning and answers. Humans have a vast ability to find connections in the seemingly unconnected. We recognize patterns and answers that sometimes aren't even there. One current example to me is how willing people are to believe in the Psychics like John Edwards. Cold Reading skills combined with the human tendency to accept that which we want to believe and ignore what disagrees with our assumptions, to me, is very similar to what we find with many religiouns.

The NT is another thing altogether. That Jesus lived and was crucified is undeniable. Hundreds witnessed his death and resurrection. Enough evidence for some that knew him to give their lives rather than deny him. That is historically unarguable. As for Jesus' death and resurrection, I agree there is historical evidence of Jesus. I do not doubt his existence. I do have major doubts about his divinity and his resurrection. Is there any proof outside of the NT of his resurrection? I know Chrestus, etc have shown up in contemporary documents regarding his life.

As for the writings of Paul in Corinthians about Jesus appearing to hundreds, well, I leave my opinions of Paul to another thread.

[hasbeen99]

Fact is verifiable by redundant scientific experiments. Nothing else is fact.

So are you saying you believe that facts are limited to the physical realm and cannot include emotion or other non-physical ideas? For example, a parent's love for his child, or a child's love for his parents?

Do you think there is a difference between facts and realities?

[hasbeen99]

But can those truths only be found in one religion or one book? Are there more universal truths that we blind ourselves to because we see things too literally?

I've said from time to time that truth is truth, no matter where you find it. I've found truth in everything from movies and books to walking around my neighborhood.


Do we truly understand the power of resurrection and rebirth on a personal level if we take the Biblical tale as literal "gospel"? If we view the battle between David and Goliath as a historical fact do we lose the abilty to see the power the story has on a archetypical level?

You and I can disagree on the validity of those occurrances, Vito, but I see your point and agree with it. We can miss the purpose of the text if we focus on the wrong thing. It's an issue of not being able to see the forest because of all the trees in the way. And I also agree it's a BIG problem in Christianity at least, and perhaps other religions as well. That was sort of the point I was trying to make to Chief Tony in MT's creation thread. He was looking for a literal account of dinosaurs and there isn't one. The reason there isn't is because the Bible's purpose isn't to be a recorded history of nature.

[hasbeen99]

I agree with you up to a point. To me it is not important the origin of some of the stories in the OT. They could borrow from other stories, they could have be the inspiration for those myths. I see strong ties between the Sumerian story of Gilgamesh and Noah. The underlying truths are the important part. Writing did exist during the time of Moses and that has been scientifically proven. Not so during the time of Abraham and Noah, or epsecially Creation and those stories could have certainly been borrowed. The fact that all the stories contain similar themes to me lends credence to the fact that they were inspired.

Interesting. I didn't know that about when writing came into the picture. Agree completely with you about the underlying truths being the higher value and main purpose of those accounts.


The NT is another thing altogether. That Jesus lived and was crucified is undeniable. Hundreds witnessed his death and resurrection. Enough evidence for some that knew him to give their lives rather than deny him. That is historically unarguable.

Agreed, although I also think anything historical is arguable.

[vpkozel]

Hasbeens, did you delete my post asking Miss_tery to identify what are currently were facts - according to her definition?

[mathmajors]

Hasbeens, did you delete my post asking Miss_tery to identify what are currently were facts - according to her definition?
Looks like it.

[vpkozel]

Looks like it.

Yes, it does - and I think that is crap. She defines fact as those things that have been VERIFIABLE by repetitive experiments, which is a very bad definition. I can have a flawed experiement that gives me a result over and over - it does not make theresult true however.

So I would like to know what she considers to fall into that category - because there is very little that is considered scientific fact.

[slydevl]

Yes, it does - and I think that is crap. She defines fact as those things that have been VERIFIABLE by repetitive experiments, which is a very bad definition. I can have a flawed experiement that gives me a result over and over - it does not make theresult true however.

So I would like to know what she considers to fall into that category - because there is very little that is considered scientific fact.

I agree that his deleting that was crap. Is this going to be a place for intelligent discussion or the let Miss_Tery say whatever she wants without confrontation forum?

Edit: Just saw that he deleted her post too. I don't understand. Can posts not spawn other discussion's?

The best discussion's on religion are free flowing. You keep it too rigid you will bore and lose the audience. JMO.

[vpkozel]

Fact is verifiable by redundant scientific experiments. Nothing else is fact.


This post?

[slydevl]

This post?

Oops. Guess he did show some favoritism there.

I don't get that at all. Moderation should not be heavy handed or biased. Less is definately more in this situation.

[BigVito]

I've said from time to time that truth is truth, no matter where you find it. I've found truth in everything from movies and books to walking around my neighborhood. I've found the same to be true for me.
You and I can disagree on the validity of those occurrances, Vito, but I see your point and agree with it. We can miss the purpose of the text if we focus on the wrong thing. It's an issue of not being able to see the forest because of all the trees in the way. And I also agree it's a BIG problem in Christianity at least, and perhaps other religions as well. That was sort of the point I was trying to make to Chief Tony in MT's creation thread. He was looking for a literal account of dinosaurs and there isn't one. The reason there isn't is because the Bible's purpose isn't to be a recorded history of nature.As we've discussed before, so much of what non-Christians see of Christianity is the Falwell/Roberston version which is a very limited view of the faith but it is the public face for most. I'll use Literal Creationism as an example. When one hears that the Bible is the literal and inerrant word of God, it gives the non-believer great pause. Some guy on TV tells us that the world was created in 7 days and that the Earth is around 6000 years old flies in the face of what we "know" to be true. For the non-believer the switch is now in the off postition. The symbolism and truths of the tale of a Paradise Lost, of brother killing brother are now are lost to both sides.

I highly recommend Campbell's works to any on this board. When I read him first over 20 years ago, he opened me up to things that I'd never considered before. While most of his work is heavily influenced by Jungian ideas, it still opens up a new way of viewing the stories we learned in Sunday School for believers and non-believers alike.

[Village Idiot]

I've found the same to be true for me.
As we've discussed before, so much of what non-Christians see of Christianity is the Falwell/Roberston version which is a very limited view of the faith but it is the public face for most. I'll use Literal Creationism as an example. When one hears that the Bible is the literal and inerrant word of God, it gives the non-believer great pause. Some guy on TV tells us that the world was created in 7 days and that the Earth is around 6000 years old flies in the face of what we "know" to be true. For the non-believer the switch is now in the off postition. The symbolism and truths of the tale of a Paradise Lost, of brother killing brother are now are lost to both sides.

I highly recommend Campbell's works to any on this board. When I read him first over 20 years ago, he opened me up to things that I'd never considered before. While most of his work is heavily influenced by Jungian ideas, it still opens up a new way of viewing the stories we learned in Sunday School for believers and non-believers alike.You know what? I was 35 when I got saved. I had the same feelings about TV preachers, the Bible and church folk in general. I was completely turned off by all of it. But one day I had a change of heart. I asked my wife what it took to be saved. She said all that I had to do was to pray the sinners prayer. I cant explain it in words, it was a feeling in my heart that I could not deny. I had lived my life up to that point by my own rules. I was successful, had a great wife and family, well liked at work and by my friends. But something was missing. I drank every day. I smoked dope all day long. I had a foul mouth and was a hothead when I got really drunk, heck I did'nt even have to be that drunk. Deep down inside I knew that I was running from God. Finally I gave in to his call. I repented of my sins and let HIM run my life. I have never looked back or wished for the things that I used to do, although sometimes I do relay old stories for humorous purposes. No man taught me what I have faith in. It comes directly from God and his Holy Spirit. I know this in my heart. I cant show you a scientific survey with charts and references. I can show you my life and the man that I am today as a result of my walk with God. I wanted to know what this was that I was getting into when I chose to follow Jesus Christ. People would tell me all kinds of stuff about church and the way that I should live but I wanted to know for myself. I sat down and read the Bible and Gods Spirit filled me with understanding. Dont ask me to explain creationism or to explain as fact whats in the Bible, I cant do that. One of these days when and if I make it to Heaven there will be an eternity to learn all that stuff. I dont dwell on the small details, I'm looking forward to the reward that lays ahead.

[hasbeen99]

Hasbeens, did you delete my post asking Miss_tery to identify what are currently were facts - according to her definition?

No, I deleted your post calling her definition hilarious.

[hasbeen99]

She defines fact as those things that have been VERIFIABLE by repetitive experiments, which is a very bad definition. I can have a flawed experiement that gives me a result over and over - it does not make theresult true however.

So I would like to know what she considers to fall into that category - because there is very little that is considered scientific fact.

If you would've posted this to begin with, it would've been fine.

[vpkozel]

No, I deleted your post calling her definition hilarious.

It was "about hilarious." :) And I stand by that. Her definition was not only incomplete, it was incorrect.

Anyway, no biggie. I did not mean to come across - to either you or miss tery - as accusative. I did not know what had happened to it and figured the logical first place to start was to ask you.

I fully support your no sniping policy - so if you think that I break it, then delete away.

[Rob]

You know what? I was 35 when I got saved. I had the same feelings about TV preachers, the Bible and church folk in general. I was completely turned off by all of it. But one day I had a change of heart. I asked my wife what it took to be saved. She said all that I had to do was to pray the sinners prayer. I cant explain it in words, it was a feeling in my heart that I could not deny. I had lived my life up to that point by my own rules. I was successful, had a great wife and family, well liked at work and by my friends. But something was missing. I drank every day. I smoked dope all day long. I had a foul mouth and was a hothead when I got really drunk, heck I did'nt even have to be that drunk. Deep down inside I knew that I was running from God. Finally I gave in to his call. I repented of my sins and let HIM run my life. I have never looked back or wished for the things that I used to do, although sometimes I do relay old stories for humorous purposes. No man taught me what I have faith in. It comes directly from God and his Holy Spirit. I know this in my heart. I cant show you a scientific survey with charts and references. I can show you my life and the man that I am today as a result of my walk with God. I wanted to know what this was that I was getting into when I chose to follow Jesus Christ. People would tell me all kinds of stuff about church and the way that I should live but I wanted to know for myself. I sat down and read the Bible and Gods Spirit filled me with understanding. Dont ask me to explain creationism or to explain as fact whats in the Bible, I cant do that. One of these days when and if I make it to Heaven there will be an eternity to learn all that stuff. I dont dwell on the small details, I'm looking forward to the reward that lays ahead.

I could have posted this myself. I would have only had to change a couple of small details. You are smarter than me VI. I waited until I was about 43. I sure wish I could have about 20 of those wasted years back.

[Village Idiot]

I could have posted this myself. I would have only had to change a couple of small details. You are smarter than me VI. I waited until I was about 43. I sure wish I could have about 20 of those wasted years back.Isnt it a shame that youth is wasted on the young? :)

[Rob]

Isnt it a shame that youth is wasted on the young? :)

Yes. This really spoke to me.

excerpted from John Ortberg's book If You want to walk on water you have to get out of the boat

The Common Cold of the Soul

To sinful patterns of behavior that never get confronted and changed,
Abilities and gifts that never get cultivated and deployed--
Until weeks become months
And months turn into years,
And one day you're looking back on a life of
Deep intimate gut-wrenching honest conversations you never had;
Great bold prayers you never prayed,
Exhilarating risks you never took,
Sacrificial gifts you never offered
Lives you never touched,
And you're sitting in a recliner with a shriveled soul,
And forgotten dreams,
And you realize there there was a world of desperate need,
And a great God calling you to be part of something bigger than yourself---
You see a person you could have become but did not;
You never followed your calling.
You never got out of the boat.

There is no tragedy like the tragedy of the unopened gift.

[Village Idiot]

Thats good stuff Rob.

[VOR]

Yes, it does - and I think that is crap. She defines fact as those things that have been VERIFIABLE by repetitive experiments, which is a very bad definition. I can have a flawed experiement that gives me a result over and over - it does not make theresult true however.

So I would like to know what she considers to fall into that category - because there is very little that is considered scientific fact.

she said redundant experiments. If the experiment is flawed then contrary results will emerge or results other than those predicted by the theory but supported by the experiment will emerge. then you will know either the experiment or the theory is flawed. The problem with truth is that it is usually formed by concensus and has nothing to do with experimentation. Facts are determined by experimentation, truth is the result of analytical discourse regarding the facts.

[hasbeen99]

she said redundant experiments. If the experiment is flawed then contrary results will emerge or results other than those predicted by the theory but supported by the experiment will emerge. then you will know either the experiment or the theory is flawed. The problem with truth is that it is usually formed by concensus and has nothing to do with experimentation. Facts are determined by experimentation, truth is the result of analytical discourse regarding the facts.

Good post, VOR. :xyzthumbs

[vpkozel]

she said redundant experiments. If the experiment is flawed then contrary results will emerge or results other than those predicted by the theory but supported by the experiment will emerge. then you will know either the experiment or the theory is flawed. The problem with truth is that it is usually formed by concensus and has nothing to do with experimentation. Facts are determined by experimentation, truth is the result of analytical discourse regarding the facts.

I disagree on the first part. If everyone builds in the same assumptions - which later turn out to be untrue - into their experiaments, then they would all be wrong.

I agree with you on the second part though.

[hasbeen99]

I disagree on the first part. If everyone builds in the same assumptions - which later turn out to be untrue - into their experiaments, then they would all be wrong.

That's true. There's always a danger that something could be consistently wrong.

[BigVito]

Bump because I feel this ties into Mark's thread about the Bible a bit.