Thursday, March 17, 2011

When Truth Becomes Relative

"But the master replied, 'You wicked and lazy servant! If you knew I harvested crops I didn't plant and gathered crops I didn't cultivate, why didn't you deposit my money in the bank? At least I could have gotten some interest on it.' "Then he ordered, 'Take the money from this servant, and give it to the one with the ten bags of silver. To those who use well what they are given, even more will be given, and they will have an abundance. But from those who do nothing, even what little they have will be taken away. Now throw this useless servant into outer darkness, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.'

(Matthew 25:26-30 NLT)



I have heard it said that the Christian life is unfair in that it seeks to condemn all other viewpoints. I know this because I myself have once spoken these very words.

There is a book that my wife and I have been trying to find when we were once on a vacation in the Philippines, but had been sold out. The book is called “I’m Okay – You’re Not”, authored by John Shore. It is a book meant to correct the idea that Christianity is nothing but pontification meant to subdue and subjugate an otherwise “free-thinking” humanity. (I have yet to read the book.)

It does not help that prior to my own awakening, I myself have met a few “Christians” who are only too eager to rebuke and proselytize “non-believers”. And while I would give some of them the benefit of the doubt, I suspect that most of them knew inwardly that they were seeking glory, not for God, but for themselves.

This of course has given rise to the impression that Christianity is NOT a legitimate religion, but a political tool meant to elevate and secure the status of those who would seek to convert others to the faith.

But then again, isn’t this true of all religions? Or for that matter, any discipline?

By necessity, does not the newcomer or disciple acquiesce to the more experienced in life?

Would it not be a perversion of nature if the newcomer would dictate to the more experienced?

It would be like a newborn child dictating to its parents the direction where its life should go.

The key difference here is that a newborn is a tabula rasa - a clean slate. It has no pre-conceived notions about anything, and thus is just begging to be nurtured and discipled in the ways of life.

The problem begins when the glass is already full.

In one of His more “infamous” pronouncements, the Messiah commented on the weak faith of a rich man by saying:

"How hard it is for the rich to enter the Kingdom of God! In fact, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich person to enter the Kingdom of God!" - (Luke 18:24-25 NLT)

While I myself have once seen it fit to dismiss this as an unrealistic call to asceticism, I have come to realize that the Messiah had an additional layer of meaning to His comment.

It means that we who are rich in the varied experiences of life, are wont to give them up for new, and perhaps more legitimate experiences. We would rather stay in the comfort zones of the familiar, rather than venture into the realm of inexperience.

But to admit inexperience is the essence of humility. And without humility, there can be no growth.

It is here that I wish to refer to the Messiah’s comments on who are the “greatest” in His Kingdom:

"I tell you the truth, unless you turn from your sins and become like little children, you will never get into the Kingdom of Heaven. So anyone who becomes as humble as this little child is the greatest in the Kingdom of Heaven.  - (Matthew 18:3-4 NLT)

So to be as humble as a child - to admit that there are things that we are inexperienced in and thus are in need of learning - is the essence of Godly living.

Here begins the danger of relativism.

Relativism holds that there is NO absolute standard for belief: that people are entitled to what they believe, regardless of what they believe, and are free to act out their lives according to those beliefs.

A relativist therefore, is a person who denies the possibility of learning new things, simply because he/she thinks that everyone is entitled to how they want to live.

A relativist will say that I am entitled to choose my own path in the wilderness of life because my path is as good as anyone else’s.

If you ask me, moral relativism is just an excuse to justify a self-indulgent – and hence ultimately destructive – way of life.

I say this because there are things which are true despite our varying beliefs.

There are paths in life that are better than others, based on what is established to be true.

But what is truth? The relativist will argue. What constitutes truth? Isn’t everything based on our own opinion?

Whatever we experience is highly subjective, because no two humans can ever experience the same thing in exactly the same way.

In other words, our perception of truth itself is relative. Therefore, truth is relative.

This is a fallacious argument because it is self-contradicting.

If relativism holds true, then the position of a relativist itself cannot be true, because it is itself a position relative to others.

If relativism is true, then nothing can be true, for everything, including relativism becomes relative.

Is there not a great danger inherent in this?

If we accept the idea that there is no truth, then we have condemned ourselves to a life that is without direction: without purpose, because nothing really matters.

It doesn’t matter what I do with my life because anything I do is okay.

It doesn’t matter if I strive to be excellent, because excellence is relative. So why bother being excellent?

Relativism dooms us therefore, to a life of mediocrity.

There is a book in Scripture which perfectly captures the hopelessness and meaninglessness of the relative life: the Book of Ecclesiastes.

The first verses of the first chapter sums it all:

"Everything is meaningless," says the Teacher, "completely meaningless!" What do people get for all their hard work under the sun?
(Ecclesiastes 1:2-3 NLT)

The greatest danger of relativism is that it denies the existence of God.

In a relativist’s world, there can be no God; because admitting that God exists means that there is a standard to which we must all strive for.

This would completely destroy the relativist’s position that anything anyone does is okay. The relativist would find the idea of God repugnant because it would mean that there is someone whose ways are better, and would therefore be superior to others.

If there is no God, then there is no one qualified to tell us what and what not to do with our lives.

This I believe, is at the heart of the relativist’s argument.

A relativist cannot accept God, because he/she cannot accept that there is someone who is better than him/her.

Because that in turn would mean that the relativist has to make an effort to become better him/herself. It would mean that he/she has to initiate the long and arduous task of correcting his/her own behavior, of discarding long held-beliefs, of letting go of pre-conceived notions about life, in order to learn new ways that will make him/her a better person.

It would mean that he/she would have to discipline him/herself.

And discipline requires a lot of work.

It would make the relativist come face to face with his/her own laziness.

For relativism is the argument of a lazy person.

It is the argument of a person lazy to search for and confront the truth.

-------

Truth by nature is exclusive. And being exclusive, it is the ultimate standard for anything.

There is nothing greater than truth. It is the bedrock upon which all our meaningful decisions in life are based, whether we are aware of it or not.

The truth emancipates us from a mediocre and meaningless life.

The truth sets us free.

If this be the case, then should we not devote ourselves completely and utterly to the pursuit of truth?

Unless of course, it serves one’s purpose to suppress the truth.

Now what meaningful reason could one have to suppress that which gives freedom?

For that, you need simply ask those who live under the yoke of tyranny and oppression.

Some of them are giving up their lives to be free as we speak.

And they will be counted among the exalted in God’s Kingdom.

-------

Is it so difficult to search for truth?

Don’t we have guidelines and criteria to follow in our search for truth?

As far as I’ve discovered, Scripture has given us two:

1)    Every fact may be established by the testimony of two or more reliable witnesses. (Deuteronomy 17:6, 19:15; Numbers 35:30; Matthew 18:16; John 8:17-18; 2 Corinthians 13:1; 1Timothy 5:19; Hebrews 10:28)

2)    Truth is known by its fruit. (Matthew 7:20, 11:19, 12:33, Luke 6:43-44, 7:35, John 15:2)

If I were an opponent of truth, I would make it my utmost priority to keep these two from being known.

Conversely, this means that the champions of truth must make it their priority to reveal them to everyone else.

So are you for truth or against it?

Let those who are wise understand these things. Let those with discernment listen carefully. The paths of the LORD are true and right, and righteous people live by walking in them. But in those paths sinners stumble and fall.
(Hosea 14:9 NLT)

God blesses those who hunger and thirst for justice, for they will be satisfied.
(Matthew 5:6 NLT)

Jesus came and told His disciples, "I have been given all authority in heaven and on earth. Therefore, go and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit. Teach these new disciples to obey all the commands I have given you. And be sure of this: I am with you always, even to the end of the age."
(Matthew 28:18-20 NLT)






No comments:

Post a Comment