Should we be willing to follow the truth where ever it leds us? Yes or No

[Atreyu]

1 Tim. 3:15

The TRUTH is the CHURCH…

of course – follow it

because the “gates of heaven will never prevail!” Mat. 16

Blessings,
Joanie

Um, the gates of hell will never prevail?!

 

[GregoryPalamas]

1 Tim. 3:15

The TRUTH is the CHURCH…

of course – follow it

because the “gates of heaven will never prevail!” Mat. 16

Blessings,
Joanie

I’ve never seen a Freudian slip that was quite so Freudian.

Dan L

 

[marty1818]

Yes I would follow the truth.

matthew

 

[Ignatius]

dennisknapp:

I posted this on another forum as well, but this forum get alot more action…

Socrates once said that he was will to follow the truth where ever it led him (BTW it led to his death).

Are we willing to do the same?

If you were wrong would you want to know it? Or would you be happy to remain in error if you were happy in that error?

On another thread I was discussing Catholic Tradition with a fellow poster (that is the “big T” tradition, not the “little t” tradition). We started to discuss the truth claims of our positions when the poster posted this:

“I will never get you to believe that Protestants have legitimate reasons for distrusting oral tradition and you will never get me to believe that traditions hold the same legitimacy as scripture.”

I responded by saying that I was open to changing my position if it were proven false, and that I, like Socrates, would follow the truth where ever it led me.

So, would you do the same? Even if it led you to believe something that was uncomfortable?

On a personal note:

I became Catholic in 2001 to the amazement and disbelief of many of my closest friend. I did this because I was convinced of the truth of the Catholic Church. It was not easy, actually it was very difficult. Former Protestants will understand what I am talking about. They will understand the response you get from your Protestant friends when you decide to become a member of the…gasp!.. Catholic Church.

Peace

We must always follow the Truth. It will always lead us to Jesus Christ who is the Way, the Truth and the Light.

 

[Holly3278]

Yes, of course.

 

[johnpaullover]

I personally think that dennisknapp has little to do with his time, but anyway!

 

[Strider]

Of course. Jesaus is the Truth; he told us so.

I was hoping a relativist would post something.

 

[BibleReader]

Oh, cool! I was the only “no” vote, so far!

OK, here’s my hypo: We are in Netherlands during the Nazi Occupation. KNOCK KNOCK KNOCK. I open the door, and there are two Nazi stormtroopers, one holding $5,000 in Deutschemarks, the other leveling a Mauser at my chest.

The one with the money says, “We are looking for Jews in this neighborhood. If you have any hidden in your house, tell us, and you will get these $5,000 in Deutschemarks! If we catch you lying, YOU WILL DIE!”

In fact, I have two Jewish families hidden behind bricks in my chimney space.

Should I LIE, and save their lives, or TELL THE TRUTH, and so indirectly murder all of them?

Sometimes, God wants us to LIE!

 

[fix]

BibleReader:

Oh, cool! I was the only “no” vote, so far!

OK, here’s my hypo: We are in Netherlands during the Nazi Occupation. KNOCK KNOCK KNOCK. I open the door, and there are two Nazi stormtroopers, one holding $5,000 in Deutschemarks, the other leveling a Mauser at my chest.

The one with the money says, “We are looking for Jews in this neighborhood. If you have any hidden in your house, tell us, and you will get these $5,000 in Deutschemarks! If we catch you lying, YOU WILL DIE!”

In fact, I have two Jewish families hidden behind bricks in my chimney space.

Should I LIE, and save their lives, or TELL THE TRUTH, and so indirectly murder all of them?

Sometimes, God wants us to LIE!

I may be wrong, but is not a lie when one intentionally witholds the truth from one who is entitled to the truth? A murder looking to murder is not entitled to such information.

 

[BibleReader]

fix:

I may be wrong, but is not a lie when one intentionally witholds the truth from one who is entitled to the truth? A murder looking to murder is not entitled to such information.

Avoid substituting “withhold the truth from” for “lying.” Let’s be clear. I believe that there is a very, very, very deep moral duty to affirmatively LIE, LIE, LIE, LIE, LIE, as effectively as possible, to save the Jewish families in the chimney.

God sometimes DEMANDS that we LIE, that we KILL, to be moral.

Morality is as complex as human thought.

For example: Was dropping the atomic bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki moral? I think so.

Was firebombing Dresden, Germany, moral? I think so.

 

[Gratias_Grace]

YES, YES!

But we must remember that The Thruth isn’t relative. Many find up their own “thruths” like New Age (that pups up like weeds in the field these days), - the admirerer of the non-inspired scriptures like the evangelium of Thomas, - the cafeteria-catholics/christians, - the relativists etc, etc.

For me the thruth is The Catholic Thruth in the **Bible ** (CE) and in Tradition (pope and magisterium). :getholy:

However, I accept that there are christians (protestants) that not know the whole Catholic Thruth. With them we have in common that we shall not appreciate abortions, homosexual practice or intercourse before marriage. They must follow the thruth as far as they understand it.

I would have liked the poll better if the question had been this: "Should we be willing to follow the truth even if it costs?

My answer to that question is YES, YES, too!

It isn’t easy to follow the thruth when it costs us the loss of friends, jobs or whatever …

Then Satan tempts us and tries to show us “a better way”. It is then we must try to be stromg and say NO, NO! We must believe that with God on our side we are strong enough to resist temptation! And we must pray for it!

In **Envoy Magazine ** we can read this:

“THE HIGHEST ASPIRATION OF MAN is to pray: to converse with our God: Creator, Redeemer, and Sanctifier, Three Persons in one. To know that He is listening always and that He also responds in this life prepares us for the eternal life of prayer that is the possession of God in heaven”.

The rest of the article is here:
envoymagazine.com/PlanetEnvoy/020604-FrMcCloskey-Full.htm



A good article in **This Rock ** cover these topics about following the thruth:

True Laws Lead to True Freedom
By Frank Sheed

Man’s primary right is to be treated as what he is. But we cannot study man in a vacuum. He exists in a universe. The universe, not being a chaos, has laws, and man is subject to them. …

Real Freedom?

Freedom and law

Moral laws are not optional

They can’t be broken

Two ways of knowing

Conscience

Harder to discover, more essential to know

The article is here:
catholic.com/thisrock/2005/0502clas.asp

 

[fix]

BibleReader:

Avoid substituting “withhold the truth from” for “lying.” Let’s be clear. I believe that there is a very, very, very deep moral duty to affirmatively LIE, LIE, LIE, LIE, LIE, as effectively as possible, to save the Jewish families in the chimney.

God sometimes DEMANDS that we LIE, that we KILL, to be moral.

Morality is as complex as human thought.

For example: Was dropping the atomic bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki moral? I think so.

Was firebombing Dresden, Germany, moral? I think so.

Lying is always wrong. The CC does permit such a thing as a mental reservation.

 

[BibleReader]

fix:

Lying is always wrong. The CC does permit such a thing as a mental reservation.

How about killing, fix? Is *killing humans *ALWAYS wrong? Or, is that sometimes right, while lying is always wrong?

Here’s my killing hypo…

Russian President Putin telephones President Bush one day and reveals that Russian security forces have discovered, to their shock, that Chechnyan Moslem zealots have successfully pirated and delivered to al-Queda an incredibly powerful 50 megaton device, which is on its way to New York City harbor in a freighter manned by 10 Moslem suicide killers, one of them gripping a very high speed spring loaded dead man switch in his palm as the bomb trigger.

The CIA confirms that the vessel is already anchored in the East River, and that a study done 20 years before on file in its library reveals that conventional explosives probably can’t win the race from the dead man switch to the bomb’s atomic bomb primary trigger. I.e., if you try to, say, land Marines on the vessel, even if they manage to blow-up only the device and the terrorist sitting next to it gripping the spring loaded dead man switch, the dead man switch, as it is being incinerated by conventional high explosives, will close, and send an impulse to the nuclear trigger inside the thermonuclear device which bounces gamma rays off styrofoam at the speed of light and shower the tritium and deuterium in the secondary with a gamma ray wave which sufficiently compresses the secondary to release 50 megatons of blast.

A special secret nuclear terrorism task force within the CIA confirms that there is only one solution to the problem – launch an extremely-low-yield neutron bomb to explode about 100 feet above the freighter in the East River. The half-kiloton device – 1/100,000 as powerful as the terrorist weapon, will “poison” the primary and secondary with a shower of enough neutrons to disable the device.

The CIA estimates that if the neutron bomb is successfully detonated above the freighter before the 50 megaton device in the freighter goes off, about 20,000 New Yorkers will die over the next 20 years.

The CIA estimates that if the 50 megaton device goes off, about 10 million New Yorkers will die instantly, and another 10 million will die over the next 20 years.

In my opinion, the President would have a deep moral duty, under those circumstances, to kill 20,000 people with a neutron bomb, and will be blessed by God for killing 20,000 innocent people.

 

[fix]

2482 "A *lie *consists in speaking a falsehood with the intention of deceiving."281 The Lord denounces lying as the work of the devil: "You are of your father the devil, . . . there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks according to his own nature, for he is a liar and the father of lies."282

2483 Lying is the most direct offense against the truth. To lie is to speak or act against the truth in order to lead someone into error. By injuring man’s relation to truth and to his neighbor, a lie offends against the fundamental relation of man and of his word to the Lord.

2488 The right to the communication of the truth is not unconditional. Everyone must conform his life to the Gospel precept of fraternal love. This requires us in concrete situations to judge whether or not it is appropriate to reveal the truth to someone who asks for it.

2489 Charity and respect for the truth should dictate the response to every request for information or communication. The good and safety of others, respect for privacy, and the common good are sufficient reasons for being silent about what ought not be known or for making use of a discreet language. The duty to avoid scandal often commands strict discretion. No one is bound to reveal the truth to someone who does not have the right to know it.283

2321 The prohibition of murder does not abrogate the right to render an unjust aggressor unable to inflict harm. Legitimate defense is a grave duty for whoever is responsible for the lives of others or the common good.

Not all killing is murder. Murder is always wrong, but not all killing is wrong.

All lying is wrong, but in some cases a mental reservation may be used.

Such expressions as “He is not at home” were called equivocations, or amphibologies, and when there was good reason for using them their lawfulness was admitted by all. If the person inquired for was really at home, but did not wish to see the visitor, the meaning of the phrase “He is not at home” was restricted by the mind of the speaker to this sense, “He is not at home for you, or to see you.” Hence equivocations and amphibologies came to be called mental restrictions or reservations. It was commonly admitted that an equivocal expression need not necessarily be used when the words of the speaker receive a special meaning from the circumstances in which he is placed, or from the position which he holds. Thus, if a confessor is asked about sins made known to him in confession, he should answer “I do not know,” and such words as those when used by a priest mean “I do not know apart from confession,” or “I do not know as man,” or “I have no knowledge of the matter which I can communicate.” All Catholic writers were, and are, agreed that when there is good reason, such expressions as the above may be made use of, and that they are not lies. Those who hear them may understand them in a sense which is not true, but their self-deception may be permitted by the speaker for a good reason. If there is no good reason to the contrary, veracity requires all to speak frankly and openly in such a way as to be understood by those who are addressed. A sin is committed if mental reservations are used without just cause, or in cases when the questioner has a right to the naked truth.

newadvent.org/cathen/10195b.htm

 

[Gratias_Grace]

**BibleReader! **

BibleReader:

Avoid substituting “withhold the truth from” for “lying.” Let’s be clear. I believe that there is a very, very, very deep moral duty to affirmatively LIE, LIE, LIE, LIE, LIE, as effectively as possible, to save the Jewish families in the chimney.

God sometimes DEMANDS that we LIE, that we KILL, to be moral.

Morality is as complex as human thought.

For example: Was dropping the atomic bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki moral? I think so.

Was firebombing Dresden, Germany, moral? I think so.

**WHAT IS CHRISTIAN/CATHOLIC THRUTH? **

THRUTH IS LOVE , BIBLERIDER!

There are complex problems to be solved and that of course demands complex thinking.

To hide innocent people from persecution is charity. Of course you can’t reveal the secret that you are hiding them when the killers come to fetch them.

The bombing of Nagaski and Hiroshima was moraly wromg! The people in those towns were innocent people used as animals for research purposes. It was not necessary to use A- and H-weapons to win the war. But some felt an urge to try it on real peope. It was a big sin, Americas, then distorted, pride!!! What a shame! There are still old people who suffers after the damages of that evil.

U.S. intelligence had broken the Japanese diplomatic code even before the attack on Pearl Harbor. Therefore, before the bombs were dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, U.S. government officials were well aware that the Japanese government, knowing that the war could not be won, was putting out peace feelers through the Soviet Union. An important condition to a Japanese surrender would have been that no harm would befall their emperor, not exactly an unreasonable request, especially since U.S. forces inflicted no harm on him anyway.

But Truman chose to stick with the horribly destructive “unconditional surrender” demand that Roosevelt had announced at the 1943 Casablanca conference.

You can read the rest here: :crying:
fff.org/comment/ed0701d.asp

More for you to read and to sharpen your complex moral (?) on:

If it fifty years ago since the atomic bomb was
dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. A lot of people
were killed and a lot are still suffering. On August 6
and 9, 1945 many peoples lives were destroyed, the
people who did survive aren’t lucky as they are still
surffering. I believe that all people are created
equal, so I can’t understand why others have who prove
they are better.

mbhs.bergtraum.k12.ny.us/cybereng/japan/japan.txt

**About the Dresden bombing: It caused much evil! ** :crying:

Out of 28,410 houses in the inner city of Dresden, 24,866 were destroyed. An area of 15 square kilometers was totally destroyed, among that: 14,000 homes, 72 schools, 22 hospitals, 19 churches, 5 theaters, 50 bank and insurance companies, 31 department stores, 31 large hotels, 62 administration buildings as well as factories such as the Ihagee camera works. In total there were 222,000 apartments in the city. 75,000 of them were totally destroyed, 11,000 severely damaged, 7,000 damaged, 81,000 slightly damaged. The city was around 300 square kilometres in area in those days …

The precise number of dead is difficult to ascertain and is not known. …

… but historians now view around 25,000-35,000 as the likely range with the latest (1994) research by the Dresden historian Friedrich Reichert …

Read about it:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bombing_of_Dresden_in_World_War_II

The Fire-bombing of Dresden, An eye-witness account:timewitnesses.org/english/~lothar.html

**Perhaps you need a Biblestudy to learn more about moral and catholic sosial charity and agenda, Biblereader?/B]

Dwight Longenecker, a convert to Catholicism and a popular writer and retreat giver, gives some tips on how to set up and run an effective bible study group.
myweb.tiscali.co.uk/renewaluk/gn0307/g06.htm

Biblestudy at Net:catholicmom.com/brmanhardt.htm

crossroadsinitiative.com/library_author/1/pics/library_article.13.doc/ignorance.pdf

catholicdoors.com/study/

The social agenda of the Catholic Church:

thesocialagenda.org/

:bible1: :bible1:**

 

[Gratias_Grace]

THRUTH IS LOVE , BIBLERIDER!

I didn’t see the wrong spelling of your nickname before after I had posted it, Biblereader. I have plenty of time to correct it, but I will not! I think the spellingmistake was a message from my unconscious on how I perceived your post. :yawn:

It was so unreflected! As if you had driven across the Bible on a motorbike and missed the aim of the Bible. Hope my links have given you something to think about!

 

[Gratias_Grace]

I have checked better one og the referances (the link to ”The Future of Freedom Foundation) I used to underline my opinion that the use of A- and H-bombs at end og WWII were evil. I AM NOT ON MY WAY TO CONTINUE THE DISCUSSION ABOUT THE BOMBS.

(That the bombing was not right according to catholic moralprinciple is decribed here in Karl Keatings e-letter of August 3, 2004. I could have used that as a referance instead of the one I used:

catholic.com/newsletters/kke_040803.asp)

The one I used (The FoFF) pupped up under a search. I only noticed that the article I found was against the bombing and posted it. To day I picked that referance up again to see if it had more historical articles. Then I noticed the ideologi of the organisation. It’s an anarchist-like organisation that has on its program to repeal the government.

I cannot embrace such an organisation! So I have to say that **I am sorry ** that I didn’t check the ideology of the organisation that presented the article I wanted to show.

It’s one of life’s ironies that I have to admit that I am sorry for something on a thread wich has the heading: **Should we be willing to follow the truth where ever it leds us? Yes or No **

My opinion is, in general, that we are to follow catholic moral principle when we talk about thruth. Together with pope Benedict I say that moral relativism is of no good!

 

[weddy]

the TRUTH IS THE TRUTH, it speaks to your spirit & it cannot be denied.

even if one was living in error & finds out the TRUTH, he will no longer be happy @ that error because there is something more REAL than can be understood:nerd:
yes I understand @ those protestants that…gasp:bigyikes: …don’t understand

 

[DavidFilmer]

How can anyone reject or run from Truth? But, alas, it happens…

I remember reading about the ancient Greeks who figured out (by an elegant proof) that the square-root of two was an irrational number (*ie, *a number that cannot be represented by a fraction). They were afraid to make their findings known because people would think them insane! Even though nobody could *possibly *refute their proof!

 

[Michael_Francis]

Thanks to all who have contributed to this discussion.
This thread is now closed.