Good News Bob
Member
Each time I offer this testimony I find it all wrong. I have offered it but a few times. Each time I say false things, inadequate things. One book tells me to not keep such things private, for the time is at hand; another that it matters little what I profess, but that I read the good book everyday. First I offered my testimony to a friend, but said little but the point was made clear; another time I offered it to a preacher, and he told me to keep silent; again, I offered it to my father, and he bounced on his heals saying "There is no such thing as a personal God!"; and lastly, I typed a testimony and left it on a forum and friend's computer- no responses on the forum, but my friend eventually found the file on his computer. He said to me, Well it was not obvious that there is a God, and I asked him how would the world be different for it to be obvious?
I was born in 1985, 40 years after the death of FDR. I was raised without the Good Book, or any alternative. My parents divorced when I was 1. I was raised without any moral teaching, and, unsurprisingly, I was quite the heathen most of my life-- until quite recently.
I always wrote, though. I wrote about myself. I did it automatically. It was the only way to reflect or learn from mistakes. I read a great deal as well, but I think the continual writing was essential, for it was wordplay that gave me an out. I always got compliments from teachers about my writing, though I didn't think there was anything to it. I studied to be a journalist, but a friend got me into philosophy. He came from a similar background. He came up to me a few times to deconvert me a few times recently. Curiously, I never had much interest in arguing over religion. My parents never spoke of it, and other than being told I was going to hell by a 6th grade classmate and an all-night theological debate at a slumber party, I never really considered the truth of Christianity or other faiths.
Where was I?
But I wrote, a lot. In my teens I was quite deceptive, always lying; but in writing about myself, I came to be more honest. I even had something of a religious experience. With it, my life had a purpose. I went for my degree, registered a few hundred people to vote, joined the community college paper and even got the award for best news article (within the school, nothing huge). http://www.theaccent.org/2.1419/room-221-1.115706
I joined a philosophy forum (philosophyforums.com), since I thought I had found a beautiful thing with my experience. I wanted to ask questions and give answers. I had all these philosophers to reference since I had taken a couple philosophy classes and read some Platonic dialogs, and plenty of books. But within this context, I was turned onto a philosopher and decided to read his book, since he only published one. I breezed through it, not because it was easy but because I read it every day.
The book left something to be desired. It wasn't complete. The author himself indicated that his work was one of two parts, and that he didn't write the other. And he said the book would solve all my philosophical problems. I read some other secondhand short works of the author in the meantime and visited half-ass books periodically. One day, at the bookstore, I wandered into the Christian section and picked up the Bible. It was a really nice looking used Bible, with large print, KJV, leather bound, and unmarked. I read several chapters of genesis, saw the price and thought it a worthwhile purchase. I mean, it was an exquisite Bible, something that could last me all the years of my life.
That evening, I cracked the riddle, so to speak. it goes something like this:
1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.
1 The world is everything that is the case.
2 And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.
2 What is the case- the fact- is the existence of atomic facts.
3 And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.
3 The logical picture of the facts is the thought.
4 And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness.
4 The thought is the significant proposition
5 And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day.
5 Propositions are truth functions of elementary propositions (elementary propositions are truth functions of themselves).
6 And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters.
6 The general form of truth function is [p-bar, e-bar, n(e-bar)]
7 And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so.
7 Whereof one cannot speak, thereof one must be silent.
8 And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day.
I immediately started crying and smiling and could not stop. I pulled my clothes off and quickly found myself in the shower, baptized by a book and water. I wanted to do something, and for the past year or so I have been studying his teachings and reading the Bible everyday and ceasing sinning.
So, what is the new teaching?
http://www.kfs.org/~jonathan/witt/tlph.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tautology_%28logic%29
There are somethings that can be said and others that must be shown. Saying "Christ died for my sins" is tautological. Those who deny such speakings, ala atheists, negate a tautology. And the negation of a tautology is a contradiction. But both can be said to be the limits of language- and here the discord dissolves. Look at the following:
http://www.kfs.org/~jonathan/witt/t510en.html
Here we see the presentation of certain signs in language. At the top we have a bunch of Ts in a row. At the bottom we have a bunch of Fs. The all Ts row is the description of a tautology. There is no instance in which something tautological can be disproved. Like when I say "He lived a wonderful life" there is no fact or theory that can be brought up to make me think otherwise. So, in certain way i am saying something that is self-evident-- and so is the case with those who say "He died for my sins" or "He created the heaven and the earth". But there is also no way for tautological things to add to our knowledge, or to another's. Telling someone something tautological doesn't inform them. Just like when I was in 6th grade and someone told me I was going to hell for not believing in Christ, I was left with a completely blank face for I had never heard such language used nor did I have any conception of what it meant. I didn't see heaven or hell around me, I saw bleachers and chairs and students.
So, with proposition 5.101 we see the truth tables, which Wittgenstein created to show the limits of logic and also show that man cannot utter anything unlogical or illogical or whatever-- like what many gentiles profess. We can utter tautologies and contradictions; we must recognize the logic of our language and not let disagreements form from misunderstanding.
There is surely much to more to say, but I hope this will do for now; it is late, and I must read the Bible. If we have any differences, they are but slight-- you anticipate and I do not. But our actions speak for themselves.
Bless you all,
John
I was born in 1985, 40 years after the death of FDR. I was raised without the Good Book, or any alternative. My parents divorced when I was 1. I was raised without any moral teaching, and, unsurprisingly, I was quite the heathen most of my life-- until quite recently.
I always wrote, though. I wrote about myself. I did it automatically. It was the only way to reflect or learn from mistakes. I read a great deal as well, but I think the continual writing was essential, for it was wordplay that gave me an out. I always got compliments from teachers about my writing, though I didn't think there was anything to it. I studied to be a journalist, but a friend got me into philosophy. He came from a similar background. He came up to me a few times to deconvert me a few times recently. Curiously, I never had much interest in arguing over religion. My parents never spoke of it, and other than being told I was going to hell by a 6th grade classmate and an all-night theological debate at a slumber party, I never really considered the truth of Christianity or other faiths.
Where was I?
But I wrote, a lot. In my teens I was quite deceptive, always lying; but in writing about myself, I came to be more honest. I even had something of a religious experience. With it, my life had a purpose. I went for my degree, registered a few hundred people to vote, joined the community college paper and even got the award for best news article (within the school, nothing huge). http://www.theaccent.org/2.1419/room-221-1.115706
I joined a philosophy forum (philosophyforums.com), since I thought I had found a beautiful thing with my experience. I wanted to ask questions and give answers. I had all these philosophers to reference since I had taken a couple philosophy classes and read some Platonic dialogs, and plenty of books. But within this context, I was turned onto a philosopher and decided to read his book, since he only published one. I breezed through it, not because it was easy but because I read it every day.
The book left something to be desired. It wasn't complete. The author himself indicated that his work was one of two parts, and that he didn't write the other. And he said the book would solve all my philosophical problems. I read some other secondhand short works of the author in the meantime and visited half-ass books periodically. One day, at the bookstore, I wandered into the Christian section and picked up the Bible. It was a really nice looking used Bible, with large print, KJV, leather bound, and unmarked. I read several chapters of genesis, saw the price and thought it a worthwhile purchase. I mean, it was an exquisite Bible, something that could last me all the years of my life.
That evening, I cracked the riddle, so to speak. it goes something like this:
1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.
1 The world is everything that is the case.
2 And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.
2 What is the case- the fact- is the existence of atomic facts.
3 And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.
3 The logical picture of the facts is the thought.
4 And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness.
4 The thought is the significant proposition
5 And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day.
5 Propositions are truth functions of elementary propositions (elementary propositions are truth functions of themselves).
6 And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters.
6 The general form of truth function is [p-bar, e-bar, n(e-bar)]
7 And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so.
7 Whereof one cannot speak, thereof one must be silent.
8 And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day.
I immediately started crying and smiling and could not stop. I pulled my clothes off and quickly found myself in the shower, baptized by a book and water. I wanted to do something, and for the past year or so I have been studying his teachings and reading the Bible everyday and ceasing sinning.
So, what is the new teaching?
http://www.kfs.org/~jonathan/witt/tlph.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tautology_%28logic%29
There are somethings that can be said and others that must be shown. Saying "Christ died for my sins" is tautological. Those who deny such speakings, ala atheists, negate a tautology. And the negation of a tautology is a contradiction. But both can be said to be the limits of language- and here the discord dissolves. Look at the following:
http://www.kfs.org/~jonathan/witt/t510en.html
Here we see the presentation of certain signs in language. At the top we have a bunch of Ts in a row. At the bottom we have a bunch of Fs. The all Ts row is the description of a tautology. There is no instance in which something tautological can be disproved. Like when I say "He lived a wonderful life" there is no fact or theory that can be brought up to make me think otherwise. So, in certain way i am saying something that is self-evident-- and so is the case with those who say "He died for my sins" or "He created the heaven and the earth". But there is also no way for tautological things to add to our knowledge, or to another's. Telling someone something tautological doesn't inform them. Just like when I was in 6th grade and someone told me I was going to hell for not believing in Christ, I was left with a completely blank face for I had never heard such language used nor did I have any conception of what it meant. I didn't see heaven or hell around me, I saw bleachers and chairs and students.
So, with proposition 5.101 we see the truth tables, which Wittgenstein created to show the limits of logic and also show that man cannot utter anything unlogical or illogical or whatever-- like what many gentiles profess. We can utter tautologies and contradictions; we must recognize the logic of our language and not let disagreements form from misunderstanding.
There is surely much to more to say, but I hope this will do for now; it is late, and I must read the Bible. If we have any differences, they are but slight-- you anticipate and I do not. But our actions speak for themselves.
Bless you all,
John
Thanks for sharing anyway. 