So I was up late-as usual-watching “The Law Abiding Citizen” and a particular line delivered by Nick Rice (Jamie Foxx’s character) got me thinking.
It went thus: “…it’s not about truth, but about what you can prove in court”.
I promptly opened up my tablet and looked up “Truth” in the Merriam Webster Dictionary and the results where interesting. There were four different definitions;
1: Sincerity in action, character and utterance.
2: A judgement, proposition or idea that is true or accepted as true
3: The property of being in accord with fact or reality and most interestingly,
4: Capitalized christian science: God
As you can imagine, questions began to pop into my head with abandon.
Firstly; Are truth and fact intertwined or mutually exclusive of each other? Because the fact that something can be factually proven doesn’t mean it’ll be accepted as truth.
Case in point: Evolution and the big bang theory scientifically prove man came from monkeys (I’m being crude, I admit) and the earth resulted from a gigantic cosmic explosion respectively, yet the average christian and/or creationist does not believe this to be true. You could argue that the christian stands on a basis of faith in the Bible (more on that later) but not all creationists are christians!
Another question: How do our belief systems and upbringing influence our acceptance of what is perceived as the truth? The last part of the 2nd definition raises this question.
Case in point: Christians believe Jesus Christ IS the messiah and the Son of God, but you do not say this around an orthodox jew, they have very strong negative opinions on the matter! Even amongst christians, there are those who believe the Holy Spirit is God and an EQUAL member of the God head, while certain factions or denominations believe the Holy Spirit is an “It” not a “He”, a force, a lesser quantity in the trinity.
Another example, homosexuality as a way of life is a fact, one that has been there right from the time of Abraham; does this however make it true that because it is accepted it is normal behaviour? Despite near worldwide acceptance, Africa’s refusal to accept it screams no.
The topics of God and the Bible are contentious, especially amongst the so-called free thinking peoples and advanced nations; the idea that an all powerful being watching over all of us whom we should obey or a book thousands of years old being as relevant today as it was eons ago and being the word of this same God, is impossible to stomach for many for a multitude of reasons; and atheists, scholars, philosophers have all taken turns dis proving the existence of God or the veracity of the Bible, with convincing arguments.
Does this mean He doesn’t exist or the Bible is a lie? Or does this makes those who swear He does exist liars? They all do have evidence of His and His word’s impact in their lives, whether we think them real or imagined.
In case you haven’t figured out by now, I am a Christian and I am writing from a christian point of view; personally I have always maintained that truth is all about perception, what you can convince the other person to believe to be the truth; and in a world where knowledge is open to all, truth is accepted only when it is standing rock solid on facts. But “facts” can be altered, we all know that. Conditions can be conditioned to fit a desired scenario and thus help to build a certain truth.
So I came to one conclusion, the real test of truth is time. No lie, no matter how solid the “facts” on which it’s built will stand the test of time, truth on the other hand will.
You agree or disagree with me or think I’m just plain nuts? Let me know, hit me up @arielugorji