All Beliefs are Welcome Here!
Somone brought up a good pont in one of my groups, each religion,or path has a peice of truth, whichI agree. I replied also and said reason not one path has it all is it would become a pride issue, example Christians Jesus is The truth...
What to you is truth?
What is truth to one is not to another.
I am curious what is truth to you?
Granted that reality is largely subjective, there is a point at which truth and falsehood are not in the eye of the beholder. Facts are facts. When something has been shown to be the truth or a lie, that is simply what it is, and no amount of 'spinning' is going to change that. Facts are truth to me. Hard, cold, proven facts, regardless whether I like the facts or not. I refuse to be one of those people who are called 'truthers', people who will twist the truth to fit what ever ideaology they subscribe to, be it political, religious or whatever. To me that shows a lack of maturity, in not being able to handle the truth.
Agreed and well said
There is no absolute truths
This ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^is stating an absolute.
Exactly as we all on each path of a shared piece of pie called truth, no one can say the have THE Truth the absolute
:) Thanks Ailyn
something our Government doesn't know how to tell!!!!
So agreed LOL
My personal truth is that there is a One Source from which everything sprang and to which we are all destined to return some day in our own ways. How, when, where, why, etc. that happens is beyond me. From there, it becomes a matter of unity in diversity, but respect for the diversity. (There wouldn't be so much . . . stuff in the universe if it wasn't meant to be diverse. Therefore, we ought to respect that.)
I like Hecate_Maat's response as well.
truth can be proven via testing of some systematic kind. The Bible does contain truth, or rather truths. However that is not what most fundamentalist Christians mean when they say "Jesus is the truth". Lets examine the New Testament for a minute: we have four gospels which all tell different versions of the same story, a biography of a man called Jesus of Nazareth. Then we have letters from a follower of this Jesus of Nazareth, to fellow followers. For now we shall ignore the Book of Revelations, since there is evidence that this book did not really belong with the rest of the books at all: and the reasons for it's inclusion are suspiciously political. The Gospels and Paul's Letters are suspended in a framework which is as familiar to us modern readers as it would have been to people in the 1st Century AD: for good reason,it is partially based on Herodotus' Histories, which have also formed the template for the genres of ethnography, historical fiction, and historical nonfiction (including many biographies, though some deviate from this pattern). First we get an anecdotal telling by Matthew, who is writing for a Jewish audience of people who lived in Jerusalem: but were one generation removed from the actual events. This is less historically accurate perhaps: but it is valuable because it gives us a good idea of how Jews through about Jesus and his movement. Then we get a socio-political analysis by Mark, the only gospel writer who was actually present for some of the events he writes about. His lens is wide, but he gives us a very astute analysis of the political, economic and social situation in which the story takes place: and how Jesus's actions both affect that structure and are affected by that structure. Then we get anecdote number 2 from Luke, a roman, living in Jerusalem, and again, one generation removed from the actual events. Again, the historical accuracy of Luke's account is questionable: but what it does reveal is the impact that Jesus made on the gentile population of Jerusalem, and how they viewed him. Luke's account is conflicting at best: a result of the cognitive dissonance that must surely arise from writing someone who is both your hero and also critiqued your own people. Finally we have John, the mysterious theologian. While no one is sure where John was originally from, it seems pretty clear that his audience is Alexandrian, and a mix of Jews and Gentiles. Furthermore, John was the only gospel writer who actually wrote his gospel: all the others were illiterate. He draws on obscure occult symbols, as well as geometry, egyptian theology and kabbalistic writings, as well as Athenian philosophy. The only place where all these texts were available to anyone who could read was the Library of Alexandria. John is not written for the common person, and therefore is also the most frequently misinterpreted. But he gives us a valuable theological and occult view of Jesus and his movement, as well as an extremely intimate characterization of Jesus and his disciples as well as certain events in the story (which John may very well have had insider information on, because after the movement's breakup many of it's members may have fled to Alexandria).But the Council of Nicea recognized that most of the Gospels would be nearly impossible for most people to understand: and so they very helpfully included an interpretive summary in the form of Paul's Letters. Unfortunately Paul's letters do not survive translation very well, and are nearly impossible to read in the original Greek as well. Furthermore they are often hijacked for a variety of questionable political purposes, with the result that most people skip them. Finally, tacked onto the end of the book is the Book of Revelations: the Church's interpretation of the Gospels (as reflected in Paul's Letters), taken to it's logical extreme and encoded within symbols, which are not necessarily understandable to the average person. Each of the parts tells us valuable historical, political, economic, sociological, anthropological, and psychological truths. Indeed the New Testament is extraordinarily valuable from a socio-political standpoint because it tells us a truth about Roman Judea that the Romans themselves suppressed. It also tells us the truth about the inner functioning of a fascist state and how it deals with revolts: also extraordinarily valuable. These are constant truths that hold for all times and places: because they are truths about human societies. These truths can be and have been proven time and again by the rise of similar societies throughout history, and this proof is amply documented time and again. Therefore, the next time some fundamentalist Christian says to you "Jesus is the truth" you can smile and agree, and then proceed to confuse them and disarm them with your superior knowledge of their own holy text :).
Thanks Rose and good point too:)
I believe many confuse belief with truth especially when it comes to religion, which is total belief that people accept as a personal truth. Everyone has the right to believe their belief is their truth. But they should always remember that it is actually just a belief and many don't believe as they do.
An actual truth can only be proven by hard evidence. But even then the perception can be affected by the beliefs of the person that is looking at the evidence.