The soul's theory of everything

-
Truth, facts, principles.
You could say they're just words: truths, facts, understandings, laws, insights, principles . . .. But nothing is “just a word,” is it? I just read an interview with Abdu Murray in Bible Gateway in which he says:

"Logically, truth is inescapable. The moment someone makes a claim, they’re invoking the truth. If, for example, someone claims there’s no truth, one can simply challenge that by asking “Is it true that there’s no truth?” If it’s true, then truth does exist. If it isn’t true, then the claim is meaningless. We simply can’t live in a culture that denies objective truth or subordinates the truth to feelings and preferences."

Murray, some would argue, isn't talking about truth here, but about fact. Or maybe truth here is meant to mean (pun unintended) an indisputable, immutablei, undeniable principle. As is far from uncommon, Murray is using the truth word loosely.
He's not alone in this. Books and movies are often called true stories or based on a true story. But these claims are certainly about facts, not truth—if by truth we mean an immutable principle. Early novels were condemned because of their fictional origins, often by Christians who should obviously have known how much and how often Jesus illustrated immutable principles through fiction—parables. Writer Tim O'Brien has put it like this: “Fiction is the lie that helps us understand the truth.” (I'm sure he used “lie” for effect; he likely meant “invention.”)

I admit it. We use true to mean fact all the time, as in, "Is it true that Sadie and Xavier are getting a divorce?" or, "Sadie and Xavier are getting a divorce, and that's the truth." This is not truth, it's fact.

Why would I even bother bringing this up? Surely the meaning of a word is governed by how people use it, isn't it? But that's not the whole enchilada. That Jesus was born of a virgin and spent his first night in a manger is not a question of truth, but of fact. And when we confuse those, we end up quibbling about facts/non-facts and likely missing the truth, the immutable principles behind the Christmas story, in this case. What those truths are should be at the core of our interpretations: for me one immutable principle is suggested in the imagery of a possible kingdom of peace being ushered in through the humblest of human circumstances. Therein lies a potential truth we could all chew on, maybe even digest. Furthermore, a focus on truth invariably teaches us that facts/non-facts are peripheral to the scriptural narrative which is and has always been to teach us what are the immutable principles governing creation and us in it. The truth that "will set you free." (John 8:32)
An example: what is the truth about vengeance? Is there an immutable principle that explains the human need for getting even and the consequences of vengeful behaviour? Romans 12:19--Do not take revenge, my dear friends, but leave room for God’s wrath, for it is written: "It is mine to avenge; I will repay," says the Lord, but more importantly, scriptures taken as a whole clearly point toward a truth: cycles of retaliation arising from human folly and weakness are destructive, whereas the practices of mercy, forgiveness and restoration lead to peace and good fortune.

The above is not a fact; there can be exceptions. But it may be one immutable principle by which to live if harmony with creator and creation are to be achieved; it may be truth.

Where does truth come from? For some, there is but one source for determining truth, and that is whatever holy book is their guide . . . and the God who inspired it, of course. For others, principles discovered by science are truth, all else being suspect.  

In the final analysis, scripture, science and our experiences probably need to agree before the full truth can be discovered. It's not about facts; facts swim in a turbulent sea; yesterday's fact is today's nonsense. The advance of human knowledge has made a flat earth round, has put the sun and not the earth at the centre of the solar system, has proven that we live in a universe too immense to even imagine, has split atoms that in the time of Christ didn't factually exist. If science discovers it, then creation made it, sort of. Embedded in what would be the final, mechanical truth of the functioning of the universe and life on earth is the necessary unity of all things, what some scientists have called "the theory of everything."
But the "theory of everything" as regards the human heart, the struggle for meaning, the striving for happiness will probably not be found in the laboratory or through a giant telescope. I'm not sure, but I think today that where scripture, experience and science converge in that regard, love in action may well turn out to be the core immutable principle . . . the truth.

The soul's "theory of everything."

i Immutable: not capable of or susceptible to change

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Democracy or bust

-
Image
  Politics . You can tell how people relate to this word by the way they use it. “I’m not much interested in politics,” for instance, equates it with the day-to-day news about our current government, elections, party dynamics, etc. A narrow definition.                By whatever word we use, it’s clear that the setting and enforcing of the principles under which we form community—and function as community—existed before the word was coined. In families, in schools, in workplaces, on the roads, in the economy, the making and respecting of agreed-to behavioural expectations in a community is the necessary defense against chaos.                How behavioural expectations come to be, how they are altered, how they are enforced … and most importantly by whose authority … is fundamental. The “benevolent dictator” model has a long history: give...
Read more

Do I dare eat a peach?

-
Image
  All the talk of Joe Biden’s unfitness for the position of president of the USA must have others of his age—80 plus—wondering about their own fitness. Most of us octogenarians are well aware of our physical limitations, I think, but mentally? How can I know, for instance, if the lines I’m writing are logically sound, or if they fall somewhere between inane and gibberish? How can I know if my diminished capacity can be trusted to make such a judgment? And what if my friends are too kind to tell me when to close my laptop? Hearing an aging loved one tell the same stories to the same people every day has the able-minded nodding knowingly and cluckingly (that’s a word, isn’t it?). We’re obviously too kind and too hip not to know that people experiencing obvious dementia deserve to be “handled with care,” and we’ve devised places and strategies to preserve for them whatever dignity is still possible. But it’s not dissimilar from the pain-relieving, ointment applying, chair-exercisin...
Read more

Stories We Live By

-
Image
  David Brooks, writer, philosopher and journalist, said in a recent speech to the Aspen Ideas gathering that the current divisive, belligerent mood among the people of earth can’t be attributed to our real-life situations. We have space, food, water, shelter, healthcare enough for everyone, and more. We don’t fight because we need to, he said, but because we carry stories in our heads to which we respond. It's clear that he doesn’t mean story in the same way I meant it when I published a collection of short stories , but there’s something to be gained in connecting the two, particularly when behaviour is guided by, for instance, The Holy Bible , or the Quran , each telling a story by which adherents understand life and by which their actions are governed. Scientists, as a rule, act according to a very different story of life, their exploration guided very much by the saga of evolving nature and the incontrovertible principles that govern all things. Our stories —I think Broo...
Read more