Is truth, or the belief that truth cannot lie, the original sin ?

Question

Is truth, or the belief that truth cannot lie, the original sin ?

It is interesting to see that some people believe that religion and science do not intersect and they operate on different levels without interesection. Simple logic would suggest that if religion is true, this Gods Science, and the assumed connection to a higher being would be infallible, and operate on a much higher of reliability than mans science which is fallible. Where is this connection, if there is one ? Is there a connection between science and religion ?

Back in 1987, as part of Itlalian Week Saint Anthony's Church on Banning Street received a grant to undertake a workshop on the 'traditional family values" and the pressures being put on the family. In around the same time it was noted that that models used by the 'Childrens Aid Society' in Ontario had been corrupted. A letter to the editor, in the Chronicle Journal and the Thunder Bay Post explaining this fact was published.

What was involved

What was involved was the use of a deceptive half-truth. A truth that lies was discovered at work polarizing the family. The model in Ontario in 1987 was defined as "men who abuse, women and children victims'. The model was not only attacking men in general, it polarized the family unit, men on one side and women and children on the other, and most importantly totally ignored children as abusers, abusers of other children, abusers of their parents and of themselves. ( just recently in Thunder Bay, an elderly woman was attacked by three teenage girls, showing quite clearly the inapporpriateness of the models used by the Childrens Aid Society.)
Caesar J. B. Squitti

While I am on this topic, back in 1987 while attending a workshop I was quite shocked to hear that 'controlling children' was considered a form of child abuse, a somewhat dangerous assumption that may be contributing to some of the problems society and families are having with their children. The balance between the rights of parents and the rights of children has been greatly skewed out of balance, suggesting that most definitely will contribute to some term negative consequences because of this. The teaching profession has been reporting a greater problem with this for several decades.

In the last 19 years mentioning the deceptive nature of true truths that can lie, is met with confusion by most people as they cannot understand this concept, and rightfully so, there is no mention of this deceptive form of truth in most all books.

This research would suggest that this dark side to truth, may in fact may be "the original sin" from the Garden of Eden, when mankind, let

This research would suggest that this dark side to truth, may in fact may be "the original sin" from the Garden of Eden, when mankind, let us call them "Adam and Eve", took of the tree of knowledge, a tree of "Truths", and were deceived to believe that they would be LIKE God to know The Truth. We know many truths, but regretably we are not God to know The whole Truth about many things let alone Truth in general.

It is interesting to note that the current philosophical models of truth, half-tuth and lie, are incomplete. The best model for interpreting this new dimension of truth can be found by relating the properties of Light to those of truth. On a simple level, colorless light when refracted can be bent into the various political colors of truth, each true, each distinct, yet only part of the whole truth; what I call the Jesus Christ Code, a bridge between science and religion.

Now the next question becomes whether truth, or the belief that Truth cannot lie is in

Now the next question becomes whether truth, or the belief that Truth cannot lie is in fact the "original sin" that deceived Adam and Eve so many, many years ago, it seems truth can lie, and we have somewhat overlooked this dark deceptive dimension of truth; co-incidence or in fact a reality that many add credibility to the biblical story of Genesis, a story common to all three world relgions ?

Caesar J. B. Squitti

http://www.jesuschristcode.com

Answer 1

Original sin is the ability to resist the will of God and the failure to perceive its perfection

Answer 2

We humans entered in masses a system of faith between the years 3000BC and 300AD, at a time when logic and reason were being debated as a means to discover the truth about god. Due to the persuasions dictated by the need for moral enlightenment, logic and scientific research into the truth about god were terminated and scientific reason was never again applied to discovering this truth. The real truth may still be out there, its possible that through scientific endeavor the factual answers may be still obtained. I’m not saying god is real, what I’m saying is the science is still out and we will never know until real verifiable evidence draws a conclusion one way or the other. The idea that the bible is irrefutable evidence is ludicrous, it takes faith to believe, and that’s not how reality works. It is possible there is a scientific explanation of what we call god, but until we remove our religious prejudices it will not be possible to comply with the scientific practices necessary to come to an accurate conclusion. The original sin is a myth along with the unsubstantiated truth about god, it has no relationship with what is real.

Answer 3

Science is about using logic and reason. Religion is based on belief and superstition. They do intersect when each strays out of its boundaries such as when a religious person tries to defend their beliefs in a logical manner or when a scientist operates on unrecognized personal myths.

The test: The next time you are in a religious conversation and the "believer" is making a reasonable point, ask this person if they would agree to leave their religious beliefs, if you could prove to them that this point and others were not logical.

If they say, "No, of course not," they are only presenting reasonable points in a sham discussion that probably wants to lead you into their belief based system. It's not really a logic based discussion. If they say, "Yes, they would leave it," they are in an honest philosophical discussion wanting to use reason and logic, ie. science, and do not have a "belief" on this topic, yet.

About Original Sin: It seems to have been culturally developed to get people of a young age to feel guilty for something they never did and therefore to get them to conform to the religious solutions taught by their elders, who they naturally believe are interested in their well being. Young people naturally follow their guardians and also lack reasoning experience, so therefore are ripe for accepting the cultural myths presented to them. That's why people universally and overwhelmingly belong to the religion they were raised in. Odds are that you have the myths your guardians poured into your young mind.

Now, your question. How can I know the difference between a true God based religious belief and when a group of people espouse having a "true God based religious belief," but it is shown to be infallible later. Well, the Pope would probably like to know that answer also.

Consider this. If your real search is for how to guide your life into a good direction, an easy way would be to copy someone belief's you feel comfortable with. A more difficult way is to research and contemplate your own path by reading other people's words to get ideas. The most diffficult might be to realize that there is no right path, that there seems to be no god who is willing to give you clear answers and that what you are experiencing is what exists for you and it is the same for everyone else.

In other words, this is it and there are no rules to live by, just thought provoking stories.

Good luck and thanx for asking.

Cj

Answer 4

the original sin was worldly knowledege. that is also to say, knowledge of right and wrong, sexual consciousness, and disobedience to God. it should be noted that it doesn't predate language; Adam named all the things in the garden and that had nothing to do with sin. it is not a shortcoming of our ability to communicate and call.
the gnostics believed that the creator was evil, because he separated us from the light, divided us, leaving all creatures ignorant and alone. the serpent was good because he introduced knowledge, which helps us begin to bridge those distances. Jesus was also good because he brought knowledge into the world.
it is true that truth cannot lie, but it can be twisted by ignorance. it is true to say that no two things in this universe are exactly alike. many idealists and others who apply models of the truth are convinced that they are applying the correct model when really it is not properly analogous to the problems they are trying to solve; many North Americans will say that socialism is a bad societal model. that is more or less true in mass societies like we have in Canada, the USA, and Mexico. But in countries with small populations like Sweden, the socialist model has many positive benefits. If you were to take your North American understanding of the evil of socialism and apply it to Sweden you would be doing so out of ignorance. Failing to realize the innappropriateness of the application of that truth is to fail to realize that all things are not subject to the same criteria for evaluation.
many scientists have been searching for years for a "Grand Theory of Everything", that will be applicable across the board and can be used and applied to solve whatever problems we might encounter. I feel that this is a dangerous attitude to take. if such a theory is even possible we are about 300 quadrillion years from being able to find it. More realistically, we must realize that the nature of the universe as we experience it lies in plurality. we must negotiate individual solutions to our problems, and we must be attentive to how we separate our problems and create categories. something that is a truth in one place can be a bald faced lie in any other time or place.
Science is a very useful tool, but it certainly has limits. Certain kinds of things we want to know simply do not fall under its purview. Religion, on the other hand, has the capacity to recognise and respect each and every individual way there is of existing and praising existence. But nobody who dedicated his or her life to religion to the exclusion of science ever discovered radon or invented flame-retardant clothing.
I guess what I'm trying to say is that science and religion are different, not subject to the same rules of value. they certainly do have some regions of intersection. nothing is really as isolated as we fear it might be. but it's important to try not to confuse them.

Answer 5

No. I think your logic is wrong and oxymoronic. You are expounding on and on to trying support your postion when all you do is repeat the same bs several times.
I think the original sin (if there was one) was disobedience to God's will not the belief that truth cannot lie.

Answer 6

too long, didnt read, dont care.

Answer 7

no