Thank you for your reflection. You ask: "How do listening to others’ perspectives—whether from a different faith, philosophy, or walk of life—enrich your own understanding of truth?"
I love that you end your article by bringing everything down to 'humility'. I enjoy the fact that you recognise how, faced with all these 'truths', the traditions people around the world have 'grown' and, more importantly, the mysterious nature of the world and life itself, you call for 'openness', 'enlightenment'. You say: "In the end, truth isn’t about winning arguments or proving others wrong—it’s about remaining open— seeking, learning, and growing."
However (you knew this was coming 😀), there are a couple of things you say that do not personally 'enrich my understanding of truth' as you put it. In fact, they would confuse me if I had not investigated them, lived through them, and thought deeply about them beforehand within the context of other cultures and religions. Here are a couple of things that come to mind:
Your conclusion is this: "As we piece together glimpses of the divine from our own faith and others, we move closer to understanding this mystery that we share." Yet, in your article, you've just quoted 7 different authorities saying not only that such understanding of the divine is impossible, but that stating or thinking we have achieved it reveals our arrogance, our haughtiness, in fact, our ignorance of the truth.
Based on this, I'd say there is a problem with the logical intent of the argument, which, as I see it, originates essentially in trying to equate that which is not, and can never be equal. Equating personal expression with truth is unreliable at best, trying to equate all individual expression under the banner of truth is even more implausible.
Additionally, the statements from these authorities concentrate directly or obliquely on our inability and/or the impossibility of knowing the truth; they tell us what we cannot do. They are negative argumentations (admitedly read out of context), which, in my book, can rarely if ever be used in supporting a positive, actionable concept such as 'truth'.
Which brings me to my next point of reflection. I bear in mind and agree with you also when you say: "In the end, truth isn’t about winning arguments or proving others wrong".
Truth is, and I quote the dictionary: "Conformity to fact or actuality, Reality; actuality., The reality of a situation." If truth has no direct and effective connection to reality, in fact, if truth does not show, embody, or complely fill our reality, it cannot be called truth.
As such, truth is an experience, and the truth of the divine is the experience of the divine. It is tangible and personal, it effects change because it is true or, as your pastor says, "It was used by theologians and philosophers alike, and points to a universal, underlying principle that is eternally valid."
John 1:1-5 is the revelation to humanity of the divine experience, the truth. And truth is unique and universal, not comparable or equivalent to any other so-called 'truth' because it is "a universal, underlying principle that is eternally valid."
John 1:1-5 says God's Word (Logos) is Life, Life is itself Light, and Light maybe comprehended or understood in the Light and not in darkness.
John 1.6-14 explains how Light (Life, the Word and God) are understood by humans, how humans become witnesses to the Light, to God, and how humans, by receiving (by believing in, by having faith in, by witnessing to the truth) the Word made flesh (God with us Immanuel), by witnessing Him (the Lord Jesus), are born (again) as children to God.
So, there are those who recognise the Light - the truth - and those who don't. And these children born again ("born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God." John 1:13), are in truth with God through Jesus (Light of the world).
Now, there are many ways, as many as there are individual people, to express truth, and Jesus tells us clearly: "And I say unto you, That many shall come from the east and west, and shall sit down with Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, in the kingdom of heaven." (Matthew 8.11).
These are those who see the Light in Jesus through His Word (the universal Logos), whose heart have turned away from personal conceptions, philosophies, and the varied expressions (guesses at the mysteriousness of what we experience) of humanity and look into the Light, the Life, into God while on the Way in Jesus Himself. The Logos has said: "I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me." (John 14:6)
True humility lives in witnessing God's Word, God's Life, God's Light, receiving the Holy Spirit, and making the 1st and 2nd commandments efforts (Mark 12:29-31) to remain dependent and subject to Him in truth throughout our lives.
"In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters. And God said, Let there be light: and there was light. And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness." Genesis 1:1-4
Thank you for your thoughtful and detailed response—I appreciate the time and care you put into engaging with my piece. While I recognize the deep significance the Bible holds for many, I don’t view it as unassailable. Having spent years studying the spiritual texts of various traditions, I see the Bible as one among many—valuable, historically fascinating, and often instructive, but not Truth in an absolute sense. That said, I always find it interesting to hear how others interpret and experience it. Thanks again for sharing your perspective!
You asked, "What new concepts have you added to your worldview?"
I have just decided that I am an apatheist, I don't care about the question of whether there is, or is not, a God (or gods). I am secular, and care about civic values of equality and opportunity. I also respect believers who are charitable and care about the community and the world.
Belief in God is an artificial barrier between secular humanists and believers who respect all neighbours.
Anyone who likes this should read the book The Perennial Philosophy. We all can benefit from seeing how all religions are pointing to the same truth, the universal consciousness that is the scaffold of reality that binds all things together.
Thank you for your reflection. You ask: "How do listening to others’ perspectives—whether from a different faith, philosophy, or walk of life—enrich your own understanding of truth?"
I love that you end your article by bringing everything down to 'humility'. I enjoy the fact that you recognise how, faced with all these 'truths', the traditions people around the world have 'grown' and, more importantly, the mysterious nature of the world and life itself, you call for 'openness', 'enlightenment'. You say: "In the end, truth isn’t about winning arguments or proving others wrong—it’s about remaining open— seeking, learning, and growing."
However (you knew this was coming 😀), there are a couple of things you say that do not personally 'enrich my understanding of truth' as you put it. In fact, they would confuse me if I had not investigated them, lived through them, and thought deeply about them beforehand within the context of other cultures and religions. Here are a couple of things that come to mind:
Your conclusion is this: "As we piece together glimpses of the divine from our own faith and others, we move closer to understanding this mystery that we share." Yet, in your article, you've just quoted 7 different authorities saying not only that such understanding of the divine is impossible, but that stating or thinking we have achieved it reveals our arrogance, our haughtiness, in fact, our ignorance of the truth.
Based on this, I'd say there is a problem with the logical intent of the argument, which, as I see it, originates essentially in trying to equate that which is not, and can never be equal. Equating personal expression with truth is unreliable at best, trying to equate all individual expression under the banner of truth is even more implausible.
Additionally, the statements from these authorities concentrate directly or obliquely on our inability and/or the impossibility of knowing the truth; they tell us what we cannot do. They are negative argumentations (admitedly read out of context), which, in my book, can rarely if ever be used in supporting a positive, actionable concept such as 'truth'.
Which brings me to my next point of reflection. I bear in mind and agree with you also when you say: "In the end, truth isn’t about winning arguments or proving others wrong".
Truth is, and I quote the dictionary: "Conformity to fact or actuality, Reality; actuality., The reality of a situation." If truth has no direct and effective connection to reality, in fact, if truth does not show, embody, or complely fill our reality, it cannot be called truth.
As such, truth is an experience, and the truth of the divine is the experience of the divine. It is tangible and personal, it effects change because it is true or, as your pastor says, "It was used by theologians and philosophers alike, and points to a universal, underlying principle that is eternally valid."
John 1:1-5 is the revelation to humanity of the divine experience, the truth. And truth is unique and universal, not comparable or equivalent to any other so-called 'truth' because it is "a universal, underlying principle that is eternally valid."
John 1:1-5 says God's Word (Logos) is Life, Life is itself Light, and Light maybe comprehended or understood in the Light and not in darkness.
John 1.6-14 explains how Light (Life, the Word and God) are understood by humans, how humans become witnesses to the Light, to God, and how humans, by receiving (by believing in, by having faith in, by witnessing to the truth) the Word made flesh (God with us Immanuel), by witnessing Him (the Lord Jesus), are born (again) as children to God.
So, there are those who recognise the Light - the truth - and those who don't. And these children born again ("born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God." John 1:13), are in truth with God through Jesus (Light of the world).
Now, there are many ways, as many as there are individual people, to express truth, and Jesus tells us clearly: "And I say unto you, That many shall come from the east and west, and shall sit down with Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, in the kingdom of heaven." (Matthew 8.11).
These are those who see the Light in Jesus through His Word (the universal Logos), whose heart have turned away from personal conceptions, philosophies, and the varied expressions (guesses at the mysteriousness of what we experience) of humanity and look into the Light, the Life, into God while on the Way in Jesus Himself. The Logos has said: "I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me." (John 14:6)
True humility lives in witnessing God's Word, God's Life, God's Light, receiving the Holy Spirit, and making the 1st and 2nd commandments efforts (Mark 12:29-31) to remain dependent and subject to Him in truth throughout our lives.
"In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters. And God said, Let there be light: and there was light. And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness." Genesis 1:1-4
Apologies for my lengthy comment.
Thank you for your thoughtful and detailed response—I appreciate the time and care you put into engaging with my piece. While I recognize the deep significance the Bible holds for many, I don’t view it as unassailable. Having spent years studying the spiritual texts of various traditions, I see the Bible as one among many—valuable, historically fascinating, and often instructive, but not Truth in an absolute sense. That said, I always find it interesting to hear how others interpret and experience it. Thanks again for sharing your perspective!
Thanks for getting back to me!
You asked, "What new concepts have you added to your worldview?"
I have just decided that I am an apatheist, I don't care about the question of whether there is, or is not, a God (or gods). I am secular, and care about civic values of equality and opportunity. I also respect believers who are charitable and care about the community and the world.
Belief in God is an artificial barrier between secular humanists and believers who respect all neighbours.
You asked.
Ha, thanks Paul. I can relate on a lot of days. :)
Anyone who likes this should read the book The Perennial Philosophy. We all can benefit from seeing how all religions are pointing to the same truth, the universal consciousness that is the scaffold of reality that binds all things together.
Always learn from your posts