"Ethical Truth vs. Moral Truth Revisited"

Truth claims!

• Is it possible that one can find safety and security without a validation of belief?
• How is it that one can know that their beliefs are in fact true?  
• What claims of validity can one offer as proof to themselves and to others?  
• Is there confirmation and thus confidence because of the logic in their truth claim?  

Certainly there are many who would validate one's pathway to truth.  For example those who hold a  Judeo-Christian ethical view of life believe with one another that there is such a thing as Divine revelation.

Then there are those who hold a  Modernist moral view of life who would agree that there is in fact this body of "stuff" that can be labeled as "truth."  They may disagree on what is in that collection of "stuff" and they may disagree how one arrives at what goes in that collection of "stuff" but they would agree that there is "stuff" called truth.

So then both the Judeo-Christian thinker and the Modernist thinker would agree that there is some sort of truth.  They may disagree as to pathway to, what qualifies as, the characteristics of, but not at the notion of there being  some "stuff" we call truth!

Then too the Modernist thinker would agree with his fellows about "truth" in at least one respect.  They both would postulate that truth is discovered through human effort.  That is discovered through one's rational process, scientific discovery, collective opinion,  cultural behavior norms etc.

Since such "truth" as may be discovered is relative not universal, subjective not objective, etc. there is the potential for conflict within the Modernist position.  In other words, one man's "fact" might be another man's "fallacy" or "fiction."  Even so they would agree on the validity of there being a pathways (different as they might be) to their particular set of "stuff" they call truth.

However,  the question of logic must be introduced into the discussion.  In other words, if a generality fails to be logical in content and process, then more than likely it leads to an invalid position.  Such logic would go on to say that if it can be proven that there is at least one exception, one erroneous element, or at least one inconsistency to the position held, then the table is set for two other questions.

They are these.  First, has not the basic generality been invalidated by one or more of the things just mentioned.  Second, since the door is now open to exceptions, error, and/or inconsistency, how many other problems might there be?

Are you with me so far?

Remember now the Modernist makes the claim that there are no universal truths and in fact all truth is man discovered and is relative even unique to time, culture, the individual, etc.

So here is the dilemma  Is not the proposition that there is no universal truth in and of itself a generality and thus a universal truth?  If one accepts such to be so, then the Modernist has just made a "logic" hole in his no universal truth claim.  (We might at this point ask of other problems with their "stuff" called truth?)

That then leads to another question.  How many other universal truths might be lurking about within his argument or perhaps out there just outside his consciousness?  Oh by the way, the proposition of there being no universal truth when argued by the Modernist shares characteristics with ethical truth, that is it is held to apply across time and culture etc.  It is held to apply no matter the situation or the individual.

Should not those who hold this position "fess up" and admit that in at least one instance they hold a universal objective truth!  If they do of course they open the door to there being other universal truth.

"Nice argument," one may say.  "Don't believe it but, nice argument."  Well, other posts will continue the discussion.  In the mean time maybe the following is worth thinking about.

Could it be that there not being universal objective truth leaves the individual cut loose form the very things that allow him confidence in the content and processes of this thought life which then has implications for his actions?.  Could it be that cutting the individual's moorings from universal objective truth has a debilitating effect upon the relationships that one has with himself and thus others?  Personally, I am convinced it is so!

"A Brand New Month to Give or to Get"

Today we begin a brand new, untarnished, pure month--September.  Will it be a holy month or a just another in a series--a series that we tacitly or directly assume will extend into the future?  What I mean by holy is set apart.  Of course for those of us in Judaism and Christianity we understand it to mean set apart to the Eternal, Almighty God.

The broader and more practical question for those of faith and for those who choose not to live a life of faith--the day to day practical question, becomes, "Set apart to who or what?"

Recently quite by accident I encountered one who had given much for our county, a man who not only wore the purple heart, but I assumed had been seasoned and tempered by the years of life beyond combat.  I told him of a group to which he might belong--a motorcycle club for those like him who were combat injured.  His first question was, "What is in it for me?"  I was struck by his disinterest in others who had walked in his boots, who were following along his trail, who might benefit from his experience and lessons he learned along the way.

May I say that "What is in it for me?" is the question of the short sighted.  It is the question of those who take great liberties with assuming that the life centers upon and around them.  It is the question of those who assume that life will go on and on.  It is the question of those who assume that life and all that it contains owe them something or other.

Having said that may we consider, will this month be set apart to selfish concerns or noble concerns?  Will it be set apart to live out eternal purposes or temporal desires?  Will it be set apart to the satisfaction of personal appetites and desires or to serving others?  Will it be set apart to giving and sacrifice or will it be just another month to hoard stuff?  Will it be set apart to leisure or will it be devoted to productive activity?  Will it be set apart to spending our lives for friend and family or will it be another "Whats in it for me?" month?  Just how will you set apart this brand new month?  Just how can you make this month different than all other months that God has given you?

We live in a very tentative world.  Each of the people lost ten years ago assumed that the September they began would end like every other September they had lived.  Did it end as they assumed?  Will this month end just as you assume it will?  Will this month end just like every other one you have lived?  Only God knows what the month holds.  However, be it for a day or all 30 days we can decide how we will spend it!

Therefore, may we express our care by listening to the unlovable.
May we look past someone's slight of us.
May we grant forgiveness where it is undeserved.
May we give to someone in need without hope of return.
May we be gentle with the coarse among us.
May we take time to look at a morning sunrise or an evening sunset or the stars and galaxies at night.
May we say a prayer when nothing is wrong.
May we be thankful when all other are complaining.
May we understand how small we really are and yet how important to God.
May we honest with another even when it hurts to be so.
May we face up to and own our own failings when others are speaking highly of us.
May we stoop to hear a child on his level.
May we receive the love of another.
May we stop, think of our many blessings, and be more thankful.
May we elevate the downtrodden with a word of kindness.
May we sacrifice that which we know is wrong in order to do that which is right.

Then finally, may we find our way to the place--our place, that place which belongs uniquely to each of us in a worship community.  May we find that place not so much to receive though that is important, but to give.  You see that worship community, that congregation which has been set apart to God, has been incomplete without our presence and our giving among them.

"Judeo-Christian Truth/Reality Revisited" CT2

Returning to the subject of the previous blog, consider again the external versus internal origins of truth.

Far longer than Modernism and Post-Modernism, there has existed the belief in Judeo-Christian truth.  In fact should all people of all times be polled, the great majority would be classed in the Judeo-Christian camp.

It is Judeo-Christian truth that requires no particular level of intelligence or education for understanding.  The fact is that it comes of transcendent revelation, that is revelation that contains two elements.  First, its origin is from the exterior of the universe as we know it--it finds its origins in the Divine.  Second, it is revealed to the believer on his level--that is to a child it is revealed upon the child level, to the academic on the academic level, to the simple on a simple level, and the list goes on and on.

Thus the mystery and the miracle of Divine revelation is that such revelation is made available to all people of all times on their level.  Take for example the simple statement "God is love."  From the earliest days of a child's  understanding, through the developing years, the productive years, the retirement years, all the way through to last days of one's life, that statement can be understood, the only difference is in the depth of understanding.  So it is with other elements of Judeo-Christian faith.

Too basic Judeo-Christian belief is universal in that it applies to all.  It is objective in that it does not depend upon circumstance.  It simply exists without regard to time, culture, and the individual.  It is as eternal as the God whose character and nature it reflects.  While nuances of application may vary over time, according to culture, and in the individual, the basic elements of its existence does not!  Thus love is always love, murder is always murder, deceit is always deceit, etc.

The best way to describe such truth/reality is that it is not so much a belief in God as it is a belief with God.  In other words, it is completely compatible and consistent with the nature and character of the Divine, the God who is!

More to follow as later we consider Modernism and Post Modernism and their outcomes.

"The Foundation of Reality/Truth"

Reality and thus truth is found in one of two places.  It is either external to the individual and culture or it is internal to the individual and culture.

When truth is external it then becomes an ethical truth or a truth that is not dependent upon the individual or the social situation in which the individual finds himself.  On the other hand when truth is thought to be internal to and thus dependent upon the individual or the social situation it is a more or moral truth.

One is as fragile as the individual while the other has the durability that comes because of its demonstrated veracity over time and culture.  One is subjective and open to one's own interpretation, thus is the basis for conflict and even hostility.  The objective truth may provide for discussion in its nuances but overall tends to unite as it is not dependent upon the whims of the individual.

The outcome of subjective truth is that it is more a reflection than anything else.  It is a reflection of the mores of the culture, the moral opinion of the individual, or some combination of the two.  It results in such things as, moral truth which reflect culture; exclusive private truth, truth that belongs to a subset of the culture but not to the whole; or self truth, that which has a very egocentric focus.

All of these are fraught with problems.  For example the truth that is a reflection of the culture is a moving truth and thus the security of knowing what is right and correct is not afforded to the one who embraces such.  Exclusive and private truth can result in the notion that because of that special truth one can behave on a different level.  Then the one with self truth has a truth that is a reflection of his morality and that morality is often no higher than his personal desires.  This is the one who give himself permission to behave as he  chooses even if it is at the expense of another.

So, what then is one's choice in this matter of reality/truth?  One choice is to build on the internal which as it turns out is ever changing--ever shifting, as the tides of personal desire and opinion ebb and flow.  The other choice is to build on that which is external to the individual and the culture, that which as noted has stood the test of time and circumstance.

As upsetting as the circumstances detailed above might be, those referenced can at the very least, agree that though different and conflicted there is some form of truth.  However, there is a greater concern that should disturb all no matter one's internal/external truth position.  It is titled the Post Modern Movement which reject all of the above!

Why should this be of concern?  The concern is that without some sense of truth, there is not sense of right and wrong--the basis of conscience.  Without conscience, there is no restraint.  Without restrain there is relational and cultural danger.

As actions grow out of the notion of no restraint, there comes the idea that anything which possession organization (organization requires some form of restraint and thus truth standard), is not just expendable but a threat to be dealt with.  In the extreme of the Post Modern cause there is the Anarchist Movement.

Again without universal truth there no restraint.  Without restraint there is a rapid decline--a downward spiral into chaos.

"Collaboration"

Collaboration can accomplish much while our tendencies for competition and conflict will often bring defeat, disconnect, and distancing. As you might notice the word carries the notion of "co" (two or more in relationship) and labor (extending effort toward a desired outcome).  When you think about it, two in a collaborative effort can accomplish much, much more than two who are divided from one another.

It is a great strategy for sorting out misunderstanding and difference--for understanding and connecting with others.  Much can be accomplished with "Got a minute to visit?" or "Help me understand..." or "I have a problem and I think you have the answer."  The alternative is the typical confrontational "you" message which because it is often the result of increased emotions, is fraught with the potential for spawning greater misunderstanding and disconnect.

Of recent date there lived nearby a man who struggled with his sense of self worth.  The outcome was that when there was a neighborhood issue that involved him, he resorted to confrontation and conflict as opposed to collaboration.  His sensitivities were such that even to befriend one with whom he had conflict brought about his rejection and that at times was overt.   Thus, he had offended all in the neighborhood except for one person.  It was that neighbor who enlisted the man's help in a particularly difficult situation.  The approach was collaborative and led to a reasonable relationship.  The wisdom of the one neighbor to seek collaboration carried the day when all else was perceived as personal attack and thus failed.  That one neighbor was a lifeline for the man who rejected all others and in turn was rejected by them.

Collaboration does require wisdom and effort but has advantages without number.

Collaboration can enlist another in a cause greater than each could accomplish on his own.
Collaboration can clear up misunderstanding.
Collaboration can resolve small issues before they become major conflicts.
Collaboration can create understanding where none existed.
Collaboration can adjust one's false assumptions.
Collaboration can make friendships out of conflicted relationships.
Collaboration can cement relationships.

Confrontation on the other hand has the opposite effect and it does not travel alone but brings with it defensiveness, distancing, defeat, and even a "win at any cost" attitude.

“Open Confession is Good for the Soul”

Confess is from a Latin word for "together."  It simply means, “com” or together and “fateri” to speak.  In common usage it has come to mean admission to another as in "confess to a priest." 

The commonly misquoted Scottish proverb says in its original form, “Open confession is good for the soul.”  We might say, “Openly exposing your heart is good for the spirit.”  Some would argue, God already knows all things why should this be so.  Simply, it is not for the Creator's benefit but for the benefit of the created.

On another level and without a doubt, a return to an attitude of confession would bring health to our oft troubled souls. Therefore the following is offered for edification, and the spiritual enlightenment made available to the soul that seeks connection with its Creator.  The following will have greater meaning if verbalized, even if no one (e.g. a priest) is present to hear our confessions—the eternal God does.

I confess that I am not all that I should be—may I know wholeness in You

I confess my own pridefulness—may I know humility in You

I confess my own ungratefulness—may I know gratitude in You

I confess my own selfishness—may I know love in You

I confess my own insensitivity—may I know kindness in You

I confess my own malice—may I know goodness in You

I confess my own distrustfulness—may I know faithfulness in You

I confess my own coarseness—may I know gentleness in You

I confess my own self gratification—may I know self-control in You

I confess my own chaotic life—may I know peace in You

I confess my own impertinence—may I know reverence in You

I confess my own insecurity—may I know sanctuary in You

I confess my own fretting—may I know trust in You

I confess that I have pursued the temporary—may I seek the Eternal

I confess that I am a sinner and that I have sinned—may I know and experience Your forgiveness

Now once knowing and confessing these things may I live them out, not as an act of my will but as an expression of Your purpose.

  May I selflessly live them out in my relationship with You, my Creator.

  May I selflessly live them out, not just with those who are comfortable and affirming but with all who You steer into the pathways of my life.

  May I selflessly live them out in my relationship with myself.

“Looking In All The Wrong Places”

The question in the subject line of the email caught my eye, “Looking for answers, hope, and encouragement?”  A moment before I had been reading an observation that the medical model of illness and the legal model of sin were inadequate to respond to man’s needs. 

Despite all of man’s accomplishments, still the questions are vastly greater in number than the answers, hopeless often out-darkens hope, and courage has been dissected out of encouragement.  The specifics might change but the difficulties remain.  It is as another (H.G Wells) noted, man is played out.  A prudent look at man and mankind will suggest that there is an end, a limit, a point of the exhaustion of man and mankind’s time, talent, and treasure. Such is the plight of one who lives in a closed system!

However, there is another view that though discredited by many has withstood time and thus demonstrates its veracity.  Unlike much science, sociology, psychology, religion, anthropology, etc., it has time after time demonstrated its authenticity. 

It is this.  Man and mankind do not live in a closed system but a system in which, as one termed it there is a Divine gas station attendant who is always at work putting energy into the system!  Now ask, who or what is it that answers the unanswerable questions of science?

Curious isn’t it when the non-religious skeptic is asked those questions his answer often introduces time into the question.  When true science stressed the unsustainability of evolutionary theory, time was introduced.  When man, possessed of the notion of a closed system, does not have an answer he add the time element—given enough time man will find and provide the answers.

Now for the simple question.  Would it not be easier to leave God in the picture rather than doing the secular dance around all that points to His existence and involvement in the affairs of man and the affairs of life in general? 

Indeed when I open the system to an all powerful, all knowing, all loving, ever present God I open the possibilities for answers in the confusion of life.  Hope in the darkness is now possible.  The courage of encouragement may be mine when all that is around me is failing. 

When I accept that God is trustworthy then life becomes a matter of building my belief upon and my confidence in His care—even when such is beyond my capacity to understand and explain.  Such is completely possible in the midst of a very confusing world but only as I completely abandon myself to Him.  It is then that I find that which we all desire in the deeper place, peace, contentment, and fulfillment.