A comment offered here about the nature of that which we call ‘truth’ and our experience of it which, I hope will add to this discussion. The terms ‘absolute truth’ and ‘relative truth’ might best be substituted with ‘objective truth’ and ’subjective truth’.

We live in a world where we accept certain things as objectively or absolutely true. For example, we all participate in the unconscious act of breathing breathable (hopefully)air. The atmosphere we breath must fulfill our physical need for oxygen. I have experienced oxygen, I assume, because I have been told by those who know how to measure its presence that it is oxygen that I am experiencing at every breath I take.

We may all agree based on ‘trust’ or ‘faith’ that we have all experienced oxygen. There are other factors which may effect the level of experience. Altitude, lung capacity, physical training, diet, etc. are all factors which have an affect on the quality of our experience of oxygen. But one’s experience of oxygen relative to others does not make its presence more or less true. We may all agree that without oxygen we will die.

The Scriptures present the propositional declaration about [spiritual]‘Truth’ as fundamentally a matter that pertains to the existence of God as an objectively true fact whether or not we have experienced Him. Then the importance of knowing God is presented as that which carries with it a self-interest. That is, we want to overcome death and God is the One who knows how to do it. The revelation of God proceeds in offering evidences to us hwich range from the simple to the profound. The first evidence is nature including man himself who is part of nature, then the personal Divine revelation delivered through various spiritual means up to and including the progressive revelation of the prophets, the appearing of Jesus Christ, and finally the outpouring of the Holy Spirit.

Our level of personal experience of God once someone is ‘born again’ is presented as a matter of spiritual maturity in accordance with the level of objective knowledge we gain through study, meditation, prayer, etc. The objectively true God who is there and can be known becomes our teacher through the written revelation [objective] and inner witness [subjective] of the Holy Spirit imparted into our being.

Now that which I experience of God is not only true for me but for all of us who have this shared experience precisely because we have first established that God is true, He is there, and can be known. One who has not experienced God yet is less able to accept that He is objectively and truly there and that He can be known. If we do not establish first that God actually exists and that the Scriptures present us with His self-revelation then we have no further shared basis for communicating much less discussing our relative experience of ‘Him’ at all.

But if we agree on the objective facts we may go forward in discussing the quality of our subjective experience.

In Christ,
Don

The problem lies in that, no matter our religious or political affiliations, we are unique individuals with unique systems of beliefs. Based on this originality, it is quite impossible for any point to be agreed upon by everyone. To some degree, there must be relativity or there wouldn’t be 4 or 5 dominant religions worldwide, there would be 6 billion. Therefore, not only will we have a tough time discerning whether the promises of politicians are true, but we can never ultimately agree on what is True, either. I recently tried to make this point on another friend’s blog (here). There may be things that you believe are absolutely True, but there are really very few things that one can proclaim are True above all others. After all, no matter how much research and soul-searching goes into the process, it still comes down to one person’s interpretation of their holy book or the meaning of life as they see it.

In my eyes, relativity is a good thing. It allows us to lose the complex details and focus on the real crux of the matter. I feel like it’s not important if one sacrifices a goat, confesses to a priest, whips themselves, or fasts for 40 days to atone for a sin, the important part is that there is a conscious effort to repent or change. It’s not important whether you pray before bed, 5 times a day, in a church or in a forest, the important aspect is that you pray. I feel like when people search for absolutes, they become trapped in the details and lose their focus. In that regard, I certainly feel that moral relativism is a much better situation than one where we’re all so convinced that we know the Truth that we put so much emphasis on the details and declare crusades upon all who disagree.