“Truth Detour - Road Closed”

“Truth Detour - Road Closed”

Recently while driving there appeared a sign, “Detour Ahead.”  Soon another appeared “Detour Ahead” and then a sign that read, “Road Closed.”  Not being familiar with the area did not help matters.  As you might suppose the road was indeed closed and with such being so, a fair amount of back tracking became necessary.

In the course of seeking genuine reality/truth one travels many roads.  However, what is most disconcerting is to encounter someone who claims a willingness to travel any road necessary but soon erects “Road Closed” signs. 

How can such be so?  It seems that if one is a genuine seeker of ultimate truth, that person would be willing to take any road necessary and then follow that road wherever necessary.  Sadly such is not so!

There are those who fall within the Reverend George McDonald* observation,

“To give truth to him who loves it not is to only give him more multiplied reasons for misinterpretation.” 

How does one know if they are dealing with one who will seek truth no matter where the road leads and no matter the costs involved?  You can most often identify those who are in such honest pursuit as they exhibit certain qualities.  At this point it must be said that no one possess or is possessed of perfect integrity—all are fallible.

THE ROADBLOCKS TO REALITY

The pseudo-seekers of reality share several qualities, among them are the following.

Dismissive:  To immediately dismiss a potential threat to one’s truth paradigm is often counterproductive.  The person who would seek genuine truth is one who submits all to careful examination no matter the outcome.

Existential superiority:  In a recent interaction a significant body of information was dismissed based upon one’s experience.  The notion of personal experience trumping the veracity of a truth claim is dangerous for reasons that will be explain below.

Explicitness:  Any profitable interchange deals in specific subject matter.  To cast generalities back and forth serves little in the pursuit of truth as both the late Christopher Hitchens and Richard Dawkins amply demonstrate.

Fair exchange:  There is a great difference between argument and attack.  It is one thing to question the foundation, logic, and conclusion of an argument and it is something else to argue with innuendo, misstatement, projection, and misrepresentation.  Such interactions are nothing other than attack as opposed to sincere quest for truth.

Vulnerability:  Because at times truth is illusive there are those who will take a chance, pass a “Road Closed” sign, travel that new road, think a new thought, come to a new conclusion, be faced by a new finding, and most of all they are willing to challenge and have their conclusions challenged.

THE EXAMINATION OF GENUINE TRUTH

The genuine seekers of reality share several qualities, among them are the following.

Foundation:  Sound conclusions are built upon sound presuppositions.  When one encounters a new truth paradigm, it is well to ask, “What is necessary for such to be true?”  If the foundation is faulty then there is a very strong possibility that the structure of the argument is going to be faulty.

Logical consistency:  If truth is genuine, the pathway to that truth has a certain logical consistency.  In that vein, one is wise to carefully insure that a seeming illogical argument is not dismissed for other than logical fallacy.

The Comparative Measure:  To verify a truth claim, it must be compared to, based upon, and in sync with a known and verifiable truth.  All else is theory until proven otherwise.  This very often is where the one claiming an existential foundation for truth runs into difficulties for such is without connection to verifiable and proven realtiy.

So here is the question.  Passing all of the signs along the roadway to truth, how have your beliefs fared.  Did they stand up to the test or do they need to be re-examined?

_____________

*The Scottish Reverend George MacDonald was an accomplished author, poet, and writer of fantasy literature.  It is said that Lewis Carroll was influenced by his writings and thus wrote the wonderful, “Alice in Wonderland.”  Others fell under his influence to include C. S. Lewis and J. R. R. Tolkien.

“A Letter to a Skeptic”

“A Letter to a Skeptic”

(It is not often that I post two times in a day but as I read the following from a Facebook interchange, I thought it well to go ahead and post it.)

Again XXXX, I agree that there were excesses and reprehensible things done in the name of Christ and in that respect philosophic Christianity does not differ in large part from other movements who've impressed their will through violence, coercion, and manipulation.  However, if you give an honest reading to history, you find that these were cases of institutional Christianity far different from the born again, heart changing Christianity that Jesus taught.

The reality of Jesus is that He changes the hearts and lives of those who give themselves to Him. Those people do not do the things of which you speak. You see, in the vast majority of cases those things were done out of selfishness and for political purposes. The real deal Christian lives on a much different level.

Indeed it is the real deal Christians who have sacrificed and given not taken. It is the genuine article that has gone where no one would go (to serve and care for the dying during the black plagues), give beyond one's capacity to give to the needy, provide for the betterment of children (the first education of factory children was by real deal Christians), going to primitive tribes in order to give them a written language and thus access to written information, and so much more.

However as someone observed, "The atheist is better at smelling rotten eggs than laying good ones." The reality is that all you can do is disparage Christians based upon the excesses, however, if you gave history a fair reading (not some revisionist view) you would see that it is the genuine Christian that has done far more good than any of the extreme examples of egregiousness that you cite.

However, I cannot change what you choose to believe. Those are choices you make and the sad part is that there is always a consequence to what one believes. Believe and build on a foundation of truth and one derives one kind of outcome. Believe and build on a foundation of false information and one derives another kind of outcome.

Time is the test and true Christianity has been tested and has stood the test of time. The only way that one can disparage such veracity and validity is to focus upon the exceptions and not the realities of what coming to faith in Jesus Christ has done through the centuries.

XXXX, the reason that Christians have challenged your thinking is that even though we’ve never seen you, each of us in our own way cares about you. We are not here to harass you or degrade you. We are here to as accurately as possible share Jesus Christ with you with the hope that you find the genuine real deal truth about Him.  To decide upon Jesus based upon misinformation and the view of the cynical skeptic is to make a less than informed decision about Him.

Sincerely,

Alvie

"Truth--Assumption, Presuppostion, and Frame of Reference"

Puzzle Instructions.  Without making an "X" in the following diagram, draw two perfectly strait lines, two dots per line which at some point intersect.  Can you do it?   Here is the diagram.

 

FRAME OF REFERENCE 

 

Though from the world of physics, frame of reference has become employed in other application not the least of which is in the study of truth (alethology). It most often has to do with what one presupposes or one one's assumptions.  That is to say that what one assumes to be true has great power in the life of the individual for such is necessary for in order for one to arrive at some conclusion or another.

When in a disagreement, be it major or minor, most often the difference is in the divergent assumptions.  Therefore, one might safely conclude,

"It's all in the presuppositions!"

Since such is so, it is incumbent upon each of us to make a thorough examination of one's frame of reference.  Such is necessary for one to ascertain the genuineness or we might say the legitimacy of one's reality (truth).  A failure to do so will leave one afloat in the world of theoretical speculation.

So then we might conclude that it is all in the assumptions that one takes to be true.  It is presupposed assumptions that provide the capstone that holds one's truth paradigm together and consistent within itself.  If the capstone fails or is proven faulty then like an arch with a failed capstone, the truth structure then falls apart.

There is nothing more unfortunate than one who holds a faulty truth paradigm because they are unwilling to have their assumptions tested.  An example is found in the likes of the late Christopher Hitchens and Richard Dawkins who were and are unwilling to debate the issue of evolutionary theory with other scientists some of whom are not even creationists but see form and order in nature.

Open or Closed System

For almost all of recorded history there has been an assumption of an open system in which God or gods had a part in one's truth paradigm.  Such a paradigm allows for the intervention of God or gods.  In Western thought it was most often Judeo-Christian while in other places it might be a pantheon of gods, some other notion of a deity, or even ancestor worship.

Even such practices as magic (not to be confused with slight of hand magic), shamanism, etc. were only possible because the practitioners and followers accepted open system theory.  However, man was to "progress" beyond open system, after all such gave room for there to be the divine and the divine sometimes is just inconvenient!

Then with the Enlightenment came rationalism and such discounted outside influence.  Left with a closed system then those who assumed this position sought to explain all of life's processes in a cause-effect modality.  This falls within the context of Western Modernism.  Those who still embraced some form of Deity took the position then that God created and left (Deism).

The difference in the two systems (there are others) was in the assumptions about outside influences.  On the one side were the open system assumptions and on the other the closed system assumptions.  Of course when pushed out to their logical ends the outcomes were truth systems that were ever diverging.

Then to the mix add the assumptions of the Post-modernist who rejects all assumptions that lead to a notion of a consistent truth paradigm.  While the Judeo-Christian position and the Modernist position at least hold that there is truth of some sort, the Post-modernist mantra goes something like, "Who says so and what do they know?"

 

Contributions to Assumptions 

 

As surely as one makes a contribution to a savings account, there are less material goods that contribute to one's assumptions.  What might contribute to such a system of assumptions?  One has noted that contained within one's assumed frame of reference are "...a structure of concepts, values, customs, views, etc...."*  Of course there is a healthy dose of life's experience, upbringing, formal education, informal education, etc. that contribute to one's frame of reference.  

As well one cannot over estimate the power of what the word pondering.  Found in the writings of Moses and others it is a Hebrew word which contains the idea of mentally comparing and contrasting ideas and notions. 

The point of all of this is that in order for us to come to know the truth, that is genuine reality one must enlarge his frame of reference.  Certainly there are limits to such but overall most people struggle with weak or faulty truth paradigms because they are not willing to enlarge their frame of reference.  

Want to have a look at the puzzle again?  When you saw the first rendition of the puzzle what did you assume?  Did it have anything to do with the box around the dots?  If you are like most people you made the assumption that the lines had to stay within the box which was never in the instructions.  So then what effect did adding a larger box have on your view of the puzzle?

Assumption's Contribution

 

Think then about the contribution which comes of one's assumptions.  Perhaps the greatest contribution is that of leading and guiding one to genuine reality (truth).  Truth, genuine truth is durable and so any testing thereof, inquiry into, challenge, dissecting, etc.of the genuine will leave it unscathed and perfectly intact.

As well valid assumptions provide safety.  It is as one's life experience undergoes scrutiny, that those things then contribute to one's assumptions which then provide a frame of reference for the identification and avoidance of danger.  Such is not always in a physical sense.

Continuing, it is the assumed frame of reference that allow "...an individual or group perceives or evaluates data, communicates ideas, and regulates behavior."**  So it is as Judeo-Christian Scripture teaches, that which is inside is connected to that which is outside.  So if the inside is filled with faulty assumption that which ends up on the outside (words, attitudes, and actions) will be faulty.

 

Enlarge Your Frame of Reference

 

 The point of all of this is quite simple.  We do well to examine quite carefully what we believe, compare it to other things we know, seek to enlarge our frame of reference, and keep the process going.  Remember this, "Genuine truth is durable and eternal.  It will stand any and all tests." 

However, keep in mind that man in his design and construction was never, ever intended to superintend such processes alone and without regard for the Divine.
____________________
*quoted in part from http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/frame+of+reference
**Ibid.

"Is Incomplete Truth, Really Truth--Freeing Truth?"

In the current political discourse here in the USA, there is an attack upon truth.  Oh, I suppose one could out and out lie but that is not the real danger.  It goes back to the matter of having a superior truth paradigm that gives permission to toy with the truth to support your particular position.

In particular one political party seems to think that their superior position means that they can engage in nefarious activities.  What activities?  Of the many strategies, there are four that bear directly on truth and come to mind.  

1. For example over-shading the genuine truth. 
2. Another is giving an answer with only a portion of the genuine truth. 
3. Then there is diverting attention away from the genuine truth.
4. The final one to consider is to approach a genuine truth from an angle (a back door) that supports a particular agenda.

All of these and others like them are giving "incomplete truth."  Thus the question, "Is incomplete or shaded truth really truth?"

If you have studied or been involved in the situational ethics movement you've probably been involved in an exercise which played off some genuine truth with a conflicted situation.  You will recall that very quickly one can get caught up in the periphery of the basic question and soon transcendent, objection, universal truth is overshadowed by circumstance.

However, the basic truth is still a basic truth no matter the circumstance in which it is situated and not matter how that situation might challenge the basic truth or how that situation treats the truth.  No amount of over-shading, partial truth, diversion of attention, or back door approaching, genuine truth remains genuine truth!

The next time you hear the principles in the current national debate expound their positions be on guard and listen carefully to what they say and what they do not say and then ask yourself two very basic questions.

First, is this person taking liberties with the truth, making it say what his or her agenda wants it to say or are they presenting genuine truth?


Second, is this person seeking to divert attention away from genuine truth?

A GREATER DANGER

However, there is a greater danger--that of doing these same things with the Bible--God's Word!  There are those who explain away the Scriptures, read them with bias, look only for those Scriptures that offer some promise or another, those who proof text some doctrine or another, and/or fail to consider the Scripture in the context in which it is set.  These are but a few of the ways in which the Bible is distorted to fits one's agenda(s).

An example is found in this statement which was often quoted by an American personality who for many years appeared on mid-day television.  Though that person rose from poverty to great wealth, it seems that there was a certain poverty when it came to a greater understanding of truth.

As much as she quoted the following, I doubt that person ever took the time to read in context the quote that she were so fond of quoting.  Here is the statement.

"The truth will set you free."

Accepted on face value, that is a warm and comforting statement, however for a greater understanding one must consider more than these few words.  Consider the context in which it was originally given.

"So Jesus was saying to those Jews who had believed Him, 'If you continue in My word, then you are truly disciples of Mine; and you will know the truth,and the truth will make you free.'" (John 8:31-32, NASU)

Notice if you will the four parts of the statement.  Breaking it down then we arrive at these parts that make up the promise(s).

The context: "So Jesus was saying to those Jews who had believed Him..." Key:  Believe 

The condition (in an if-then statement):  'If you continue in My words, then you are truly disciples of Mine;...'  Key: Continue in Jesus words, being disciples of Jesus

Intermediary promise: "...and you will know the truth..."  Key: Know the truth

Concluding promise: "...and the truth will make you free."Key:  Freedom

However, may we notice that "Freedom is not free!" and that there is a cost involved to the whole business of continuing in Jesus' words and being a disciple of Jesus.  However, consider the following.

The writer of the Proverbs gives this advise.  "Buy Truth..." (Proverbs 23:23, NASU).  Know this, truth at any cost or inconvenience is a bargain because genuine truth brings about freedom where it cannot be taken away--within the heart which is then lived out through the life!

Now the obvious conclusion is that when the heart is not completely committed to truth you find the condition which was described at the beginning of this post.  The reality is that such is true.  More to follow.

"Disquieting Truth"

C.S. Lewis in Mere Christianity observes,

“If you look for truth, you may find comfort in the end:  if you look for comfort you will not get either comfort or truth—only soft soap and wishful thinking to begin with and, in the end, despair.”

If you were to sum it up, then I suppose you would have to call genuine Christian truth, disquieting.  How can it be other when one seriously and honestly considers one’s life and then compares it to the genuine truths of the Divine?  Indeed, one cannot help but be disquieted.  For one to be otherwise is to be naïve or deluded.

Even to the one who thinks it possible to explain away much of the Scriptures, there still will remain much which challenges one’s life and thinking.  Two current examples will testify to and illustrate the point.

I know of a person who often refers to Jesus words, “Neither do I condemn you, go and sin no more.”  My suspicion is that the focus is upon the former part of the statement and not the second part, the command portion. 

How could one possibly “soft soap” a command not to sin anymore?  In that day and time the weight of the Old Testament Law rested upon the shoulders of all who would follow God.  Jesus’ words that He came to fulfill, not to abolish the Law apply here.  How impossible the task to not sin.  Of course then as now there were those who either redefined sin or look past the inconvenient truths of the Bible.  In doing those things they presume to make it possible to conform one’s life to the same.

The other example to consider is the use of the word “love.”  Over and over one hears that we must love one another.  To be sure one can find comfort in the notion of being loved.  Yet, if one takes time to read and ponder the Scripture’s description of love, and then put that description into practice it become quite another matter.

Thus I go back to say that true and genuine Christianity is disquieting as it should be for in the spiritual disciplines of life we are brought into contact with the One who is described as Truth and genuine truth is always disquieting to our fleshly nature and its insatiable demands. 

Those things that we read in the Scriptures, what we discover as we ponder the words of Scripture, what the Holy Spirit reveals to us in prayer, and what we hear from the pulpit should be disquieting.  Why?  C.S. Lewis points out that unless we believe we are sick we do not receive the advice of the physician.  If we do not see ourselves as not measuring up to Great Physician, we simply do not see ourselves as spiritually diseased and disquieted and thus heed the commands of the One who became flesh and who lived among us.  This is the great lie which has deceived man in general and many who claim Christ in particular.

The truth of the matter when compared to the eternal and immutable truths of the Bible, is that I am not okay, You are not okay!  The beauty of it all is that when the Christian knows this he is afforded the opportunity to take action but not just any action.  It is the action in which Christ's provision of strength to live according to His Words--Words of Truth is afforded to the believer.  And in those areas of which one is not aware?  This is where God's grace enters into the life of the beliver.

"The Truth That Leads To Contrition"

There is a truth that leads to contrition.  There also is a truth that does not.

Imagine that a person is driving and without paying attention drives over the speed limit.  Maybe this has happened to you.  Then it happens, a quick look in the rear view mirror reveals that a police officer is following and he initiates a traffic stop.   He approaches your window and says something like the speed limit is 35 miles per hour and you were observed going 45 miles per hour.

When he tells you that you were breaking the law by speeding you have a choice to make.  The choice is in how you react.  Generally and with most people such an experience will bring forth a sense of contrition.  Another way to put it is that such an experience softens the heart.

The other choice is to respond with a hard heart.  The first kind of reaction is that of receiving the words of the officer.  The second is to reject the words of the officer,  put forth some kind of an excuse, or even argument with the police officer.

Now change the story to the person who while reading the Scriptures, listening to a sermon or a sermon in song, or simply pondering the things of God comes face to face with his failure to live by God's standards--God's truth.

Faced with genuine truth will either bring about conviction which then results in a broken and contrite heart or a heart that hardens against the truth.  The humble and contrite heart receives God's truth and remains soft before it.  On the other hand the hard hearted--the stony hearted person will on some level reject it.

Rejection takes several forms to include seeking to not be responsible with an excuse or two, seeking to rationalize one's way out of responsibility, shifting blame, denying the truth, and so on.  It does nothing more than deceive the hard hearted and such deception further hardens the heart.  There comes a point when the heart becomes so hardened that it neither hears, is convicted, nor cares that it does not conform to genuine truth.

Said again, facing truth will either soften our hearts or harden them.  That is the serious state in which we find many people today, they have traded away the genuine eternal truths of God for those things that are comfortable, acceptable, and temporal.  The consciousness they have of God is not a consciousness of God for it is only of a god that they have created.  Such temporal values masquerade as truth and it is with great danger that some have constructed a whole reality based upon a foundation that at best is subject to failure.

Truth, that is genuine truth can, if allowed soften the human heart.

If allowed it can call us to account, to realize our own failings and sinfulness, call us to conviction, and challenge us to a higher level of behavior that is the living out of our faith.  

If our hearts are soften, we are more likely to hear the voice of the Heavenly Father, more likely to take to heart the written Word of God, more likely to have a God consciousness, to feel the conviction of and communion with the Holy Spirit, and more likely to be in a position to have our hearts further softened, etc. 

If our hearts are soften by genuine truth, it adds a God dimension to life and such a view of life if allowed to germinate and grow, day by day and in greater measure give spiritual understandings to physical realities.  

Such an humble and contrite heart is key and essential for Christian growth.

There is much to be said for the one who seeks genuine and Godly truth in order to be brought to a place of contrition that results in a soft and humble heart.