Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
A forum for discussing matters of moment, from a curmudgeonly perspective. (The ideas posted here do not necessarily represent those of any organization with which I am a part). Rude and insulting remarks will not be published, but civil disagreement is welcome.
Blog Archive
-
▼
2006
(300)
-
▼
March
(21)
- Jesus on Hell
- Reporting on an Evening with Atheists
- Discussion after "The God Who Wasn't There"
- "The God Who Wasn't There"
- Frank Flunked: Francis Beckwith Denied Tenure at B...
- Against Personality Stereotyping
- "I am the Slime"
- TV Turn Off Week
- Letter to the White House
- A Bad Poem About a Tough Class
- Tribute to my Father, Harold Fred Groothuis
- Revised Tribute to Harold Fred Groothuis, My Father
- Dr. Ronald Nash has died
- What is Truth?
- Over 500 Scientists Who Question Darwinism
- Bitter-sweet
- Richard Lewontin, "Billions and Billions of Demons...
- Poetry Reading by Constructive Curmudgeon
- Movie review of "Whatever Happened to Kerouac?"
- Groothuis ID article translated into Finnish
- New essay on the supremacy of Jesus
-
▼
March
(21)
Links
About Me
- Douglas Groothuis, Ph.D.
- I am a Christian, philosopher, teacher. My most recent of my twenty books is Beyond the Wager. My magnum opus is Christian Apologetics: A Comprehensive Case for Biblical Faith (InterVarsity Press, 2011). I have published ten others, including Truth Decay and On Jesus.
5 comments:
I find it difficult to respond to non-persons. I like to know a little about the person who responds to me. Who is EP? I know nothing.
That is not to say that EP doesn't raise good points.
My fuller views on the CTT are found in "Truth Decay," chapter four. This short essay articates the view and commends it as commonsensical. I take the CTT to be a transcendental truth; it must be presupposed to communicate anything (like the law of noncontradiction). When it is denied, absurdities result.
Postmodernism denies the CTT; it must. If it didn't, it couldn't claim that truth is socially constructed and a matter of pragmatics: "Truth is what my colleagues let me get away with"--Richard Rorty.
Just who are the philosophers who oppose CTT and also oppose postmodern/constructivist views? Are you thinking of deflationary views? That level of complexity was beyond the level of the essay.
These are some great and big thoughts for my small mind. I think your essay hits the nail on the head in many regards. I think this reletivism is what the "emerging church" is really criticized for. But I'm afraid that they are not at all reletivists. I believe in absalute truth but i am skeptical about who gets to decide what that is. A lot of people think they know absalute truth and that they find it in the bible but it's still not that easy. It's more complex. Whose interperatation is the truth. Many people find many different "truths" in the Bible. Yes Jesus is the truth, and I am confident in this, but what if people disagree on who Jesus is? It's difficult for me. And I realize I'm still learnign a lot. I do believe in absalute truth but I'm becoming less and less a believer in certainty. I think God's truth transcends certainty.
I hope you'll have patience with me. I am interested in dialogue on this subject.
Shalom,
Wes
Ed (Perez?):
Which theories to you have in mind? I have always understood the notion of objective truth as requiring the CTT.
Hello,
How does Jesus' claim to be the truth (Jn. 14) effect your line of reasoning? Was he just claiming to be that which corresponds to reality or something more?
jt
Isaiah 55:8 hardly sets aside the whole conceptual system of the divine Logos that permeates creation, making it intelligible and revelatory of God. Carl Henry ("God, Revelation, and Authority") developed that them further and better than anyone, but Ronald Nash ("The Word of God and the Mind of Man") and Arthur Holmes ("All Truth is God's Truth" worked on it as well.
Post a Comment