The following is a debate that a good friend of mine and I had yesterday. Turns out the main topic of our discussion related to what truth is. It was interesting to find that what I consider to be truth, which is that truth in and of itself is a relative term in regards to faith and religion, was completely opposite of what his definition of truth is. This post will be a precursor to the first topic of study on my blog and one that I think is important to define early on. The term truth is very far reaching in it's definition and is obviously a prime candidate for debate. I would like to hear others opinions on this topic.
M: everyone's truth is different
Him: no
M: yes
Him: truth is not relative
M: yes it is
Him: truth is truth…only because it is an absolute
Him: in a relative world…we cling on to the truth …ONLY because it is an absolute
Him: the sun illuminates …is a truth
M: that's a fact
Him: the sun is present at night, only hidden from the view
M: that too is a fact
Him: then what is a truth?
M: truth is something one believes to be true; everyone's belief systems are different
M: and none of them are absolute
M: nor is a belief system provable
M: that why you have to have faith in what you believe
Him: so…having faith in what i believe makes it a truth
M: if everything that was believed could be backed up with evidence there would be no need for faith
M: a truth in your own mind, yes
M: and in your own heart
Him: if something is verified…it is TRUE
M: no a fact is indisputable
M: a truth is something that one believes as being true
Him: and THAT is why we all search for truth
M: and each person come to a different conclusion
Him: faith is the absolute OPPOSITE of truth
M: no, they fall hand in hand
Him: so you are saying that Faith is a CONFIDENT belief in the truth
Him: but I disagree with your position that truth is something that one believes as being true
Him: I think that you are talking about faith
Him: faith is something that one believes to be true
M: it requires faith to believe that something that is not verifiable is truth
Him: it does not make it the truth
Him: truth is absolute
Him: undeniable
Him: agreed upon
M: it is truth for the believer
Him: Faith!.. Again that is faith
Him: you search for truth with your faith
Him: you don’t invent your truth with faith
Him: it is a tool to find truth
Him: not truth itself
M: sure, you invent your truth with faith
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
14 comments:
too long
Perhaps before trying to debate such a subject it would be better to first define it or in the absence of that proceed on to study philosophy a bit deeper. Debates over what truth is have caused quite a number of very sharp disputes over the years. It is perhaps the basis of why Shea and Sunni can not agree or why certain sects of Christianity cannot abide other beliefs.
Thank you for you comment. I do most certainly intend to attempt to "define" the term truth. However, the very definition of truth is in and of itself fallable in terms of who is defining it. I could paste in Merriam Webster's definition of truth:
1 a archaic : FIDELITY, CONSTANCY
b : sincerity in action, character, and utterance
2 a (1) : the state of being the case : FACT (2) : the body of real things, events, and facts : ACTUALITY (3) often capitalized : a transcendent fundamental or spiritual reality b : a judgment, proposition, or idea that is true or accepted as true c : the body of true statements and propositions
3 a : the property (as of a statement) of being in accord with fact or reality b chiefly British : TRUE 2 c : fidelity to an original or to a standard
4 capitalized, Christian Science : GOD
- in truth : in accordance with fact : ACTUALLY
But these are literal definitions and cut off any further discussion on the real meaning of truth in the mind of a believer.
I agree with what you say about religion tensions in regards to truth. It is one of the reasons I decided to do this blog. By understanding that very nature of truth and what is considered to be truth by each individual is the basis for congenial human coexistence.
If you would I would invite you to offer your take on what truth is.
I think it is possible that truth is contained only in things we can see and hold; our senses can judge for themselves whether we really live in the same space and time as this object.
now it gets lofty but bear w/
So would each object have a different truth to it? Yes, because relative to the other object it has infinite possibilities. But now the hard part: human experience. This is also contained in my opinion, in divine bodies of nature which carry the whole world's truth in their carriage and in their "being."
So it starts with the painting not the paints
the painter don't even matter!
I've been asked to comment by mother herself... Truth is not relative. Truth is absolute. Facts are relative, as the latin root comes from the same word you use for factory.
What you believe and have faith in does seem truthful, as in having the essence of truth in it for you, but may not comprise the absolute truth. As you describe, constancy, or timelessness is the important aspect of truth in question. Compared with the running definition of what is true to me, what happens to yesterdays truth, or a child's truth, once they revise their world view, or adopt a new paradigm? Just as witch doctors around the world may functionally feel your pulse and prescribe some herb that will (if they know their relativism) make you feel better, they cannot accurately cure a liver tumor or even something simple as a particular food alergy Also, if our medical truth finds fault, it may be that herb will cure the cancer that ails you.
This comes from a evangelical christian who knows that by incidence in his own live found that ownership of the universe to belong to Jehova God and Kingship to his son, Christ Jesus. However, I appreciate and understand many of my limited understandings of the true causes and effects of the universe's creation to be vastly un true or ultimately worthless, but I have faith that the bible is truth and verifiable history. For such an endeavor, www.e-sword.net and the Anylitical-literal bible offers such a literal and alternative (both) translation of the bible that verses that fall under the truth clause, (go to hell if you're wrong) become moot. Principally, if you believe that Jesus Christ was the son of God, and in his essence and actions God-like, and that he has the power and faithfulness to take and destroy your record of imperfection (Greek Amartia, missing the bulls-eye) i.e. sin, then the holy spirit will enter you, and truth will become your guide. Each and every time that you pray to God sincerely, and that's the key, and accept that Jesus Christ died for your sins, and you do love Jesus for his sacrifice for your benefit, and begin to the best of your ability to obey the commands of your loving king, then the spirit of love will every time enter you, revitalize you, renew you, and become your guide. This is the holy spirit. Every christian has the holy spirit in them active. Many christians do not, yet claim that they are christian by some loose association or heredity. Some groups claim the holy spirit does not work anymore, it was biblical times only. However, ask any christian and ask them if at one time suddenly did the holy spirit enter them as a catalytic event in their faith, or if it was a gradual acceptance. Any christian who said it was gradual you know if a farce. Now, just because someone has had a catalytic event of the holy spirit enjoining them to peace and health forever in the kingdom of god, does not mean that currently they have faith or exude christianity, only that they have had the opportunity in the past, and know that the opportunity currently exists for their salvation. This is the joy of salvation, that you have peace and joy, produce good actions and love, and follow the law of God, that you would love. If someone loves, they love truth. If you love truth, you should look into the bible. And again, if you want to look into the bible, the best tool I've used is www.e-sword.net and the analytical literal bible.
Aryeh.
So that would mean that you are able to parse between ideas that "look truthful" and those that are "truthful."
I am TRUTHFULLY dubious.
So once a Christian really starts to see some truth in his religion (beyond the fantastic literary value of the Bible) he is a prophet?
I am enlightened and I am having extreme difficulty grasping your "vision," which is in fact a web of evil.
Thank you for your comments Clay, they are truly profound and thought provoking. I assume your comments are in regards to Aryeh's comments. While I don't necessarily agree with his beliefs and ideals, I respect his opinion and what he considers to be true. Remember it is not the belief that is important, but rather what faith in that belief achieves. Aryeh's belief system provides answers to profound life questions, outlines a system of rules to live by, and provides hope for the future. This is the basic function of any religion or belief system.
While I welcome your comments and opinions I would prefer that posters not lash out or degrade other's opinions and beliefs. Please keep in mind that the purpose of this blog is to foster appreciation and respect for others' worldviews and cultures.
Sorry, I guess I got stuck in my own web.
Anon, when I came back to this post it spoke to me a little differently.
In my opinion, you build around a stable foundation of resonant but traditional beliefs to forge your own vision of sin and salvation.
I couldn't ask for a wiser approach.
Clay,
I respect and appreciate your comments. Your sardony is appreciated because I understand the desire for right things and your position on the subject. Definitions are constantly changing and the classic versus the modern definitions of words reflects accurately the propaganda in use and pushed on folks during the epoch.
Parsing the bible isn't a realistic way to agree, but the issue comes to core core central and main ideas in the bible about the nature of Jesus, and if you believe in him do you recieve the holy spirit, ruach, or as mother mejia says, the part of God within all of us, except holy spirit connoted ruach (hebrew for breath - as in God breathed our essence originally in the nose of Adam in Genesis) connected and thus awakened and vibrantly alive.
Truth is aligning yourself with the natural order of the universe, and coming closer to the design ideal. Many religions come to this conclusion while radically altering the facts in question. Now, chasing alignment with nature is good. This is the reason that most religions have laws, to set reasonable boundaries distance enough to identify you're running in the wrong direction.
The central truth of the bible most folks get distracted away from is that in order to be aligned to nature, you must love God. And if you love God, you will naturally have the breath, the holy spirit in you, and will be provided heavenly love to love everyone else. And as long as you faithfully persue the mission to best love the people you can, and send them on their way with the best good for others. This is love, that you love a stranger. So if you seek truth, give Jesus a chance. You will love him once you trust in him, because once you trust in Him, you will recieve love and know because of the result.
Love,
Aryeh
An aside on "truth" this tidbit is interesting:
Fox News anchor, John Gibson, recently stated that the second presidential debate got a little “spicy” after “Paul suggested that the US actually had a hand in the terrorist attacks.” He even went so far as to attempt to link Paul to the 911 Truth crowd and Rosie O’Donnell—whose picture they flashed, twice, during the five-minute segment, along with the tagline, “ROSIE O’DONNELL STRONGLY BELIEVES IN 9/11 CONSPIRACY THEORIES.”
Gibson said that the 911 Truth movement has “infected people like Rosie O’Donnell, and one in three Democrats, and many other Americans—evidently, including Congressman Ron Paul.”
Post a Comment