What is "Truth"?

I have no argument regarding his making a case for the existence of God.

 

Bringing this OP back to the forefront of the discussion with emphasis added at the last question.

 

My own thoughts on, 'what is your religious perspective on the word 'truth'?

Well, truth is a living thing, and it moves, and never stays in one place long enough to capture it. It cannot be grasped by the thinking process, for thought necessarily is always the response of memory, which is the past, therefore dead, and the dead can never touch that which is alive.

The closest thought can ever get, is by negation. By saying what Truth is not, and after you exhaust all of what it cannot be, what is left is Truth.

Perhaps one can't ever KNOW Truth, and all that one can do is to live in it. Whatever is there, in consciousness, when thought is completely silent, not moving, not manifesting the past, is Truth. But with consciousness being totally absent of the movement of thought, WHO is there present, to grab ahold of truth, and store it as memory? Truth cannot be stored in memory, for memory is always of the past, and Truth is only living in the present moment.

There is something, which appears afterward to be Nothingness, once one's consciousness begins to return to the consciousness of the ego, which is the movement of thought. But if one remains in a state of non thought, for say 30 minutes, and then comes out of it, with thought returning, there is no memory of that state of being that lasted for 30 minutes. If there is a memory, then thought was not still, not silent, but it moved.

SO, if there is truth, it only exists in this state of a still mind. So one can live in Truth, but thought can never touch it. When thought IS, the Truth isn't. So then what good is this Truth? Ah, it is the most valuable thing on earth, but one would have to live in it, in order to understand. And for some reason, once you can live in it, you will always return to it. It comes on its own, without effort. Without the ego beckoning it. And while thought can never touch it, it indeed can affect thought. It brings order to ego consciousness, melts away the inner contradiction that is involved in the duality of ego consciousness.

You may say rubbish. But unless you actually live in that Truth, you will always discount it, and call it rubbish. To the person that can live in it, what you say is inconsequential, but one might feel empathy and even sympathy, compassion, for those who can never enter into Truth. One cannot give it to another, and it cannot be sold, so it has little value in a world of gold and possessions. Yet for those that enter into it, it is more valuable than gold. And since it cannot ever be given to another, as this is an individual thing, it cannot be sold at the market. IF someone is trying to sell it, then that person is a con man. As all with religious authority are. From the evangelist, to the Pope.

 

Like triple WOW! That is indeed an impressive posting, and one in which I would never declare to be "rubbish". It is thought provoking and as such will keep me busy for a while existing outside of 'truth' as you have described it.... as I cannot consider the breadth of your statements without involving active 'thought' which is (according to your description) a trespasser of 'truth'.

Good post OneMind. Good post. Hope everyone can agree with you and find within themselves the ability to act upon such consequential thought.


BTW: Does "My own thoughts..." have the equivalency of "your religious perspective"?

 

Well, so far, we have one who has demonstrated in his opinion how to exist outside of 'truth'; now I wonder if there is an opposite method that can be used to exist inside of 'truth'. But before that can be determined, on still has to comprehend what 'truth' really is.

Anybody want to take a guess?

 

One more time folks:

"What is your religious perspective on the word "truth"?"

Surely others on this forum must have some idea of what their religious perspective on the word "truth" is. This thread has already witnessed the expressions from many individuals answering this question found in the OP,,, can we possibly hear from others that have not yet spoken up with their religious views on the word "truth"?

 

There is still space available on this thread for more entries. So please don't be afraid to post an answer to this question:
"What is your religious perspective on the word "truth"?"

 

Truth is what is. It isn't contingent on belief. Long before humans knew of the atom, it was there. The sun was always in the middle. Spontaneous generation never happened.
How does religious truth differ from truth?

 

To quote a famous American President (William Clinton): "that depends on what the meaning of 'is' is."

"It" does not define what the "is" might be in the first statement. Your comment above is also a positive assertion which requires proof of claim.

Another positive assertion which requires proof of claim.

Another positive assertion which requires proof of claim.

And yet another positive assertion which requires proof of claim.

I don't recall anyone mentioning 'religious truth' in the comments and questions I stated in the OP of this thread. My questions are "What is the religious meaning of 'truth" and "What is your religious perspective on the word "truth"?" So, since you are introducing yet another topic ("religious truth") within this thread, why don't you explain how that new topic is relative to the topic of this thread?

 

Wow, reading all that stimulating, substance filled manure gave me a headache.
Truth, you can't fly. If you disagree, try your luck.
Truth-humans cannot live long without water. Feel free to test any of that proclaimed facts I post.
Fact-you cannot live long without oxygen.
Fact-fire will burn skin.
I assure you, those facts and truths remain constant no matter your religion or belief. Truth is not subjective.

 

Then take some headache medicine or quit messing around with "substance" that is "filled with manure". Are you by chance employed at a sewage disposal plant which handles animal excrement?

I did. I flew all the way to and from Korea.

I never had a need to test your theory.

Now that I agree with as long as the person attempting it has that same belief and as long as you are speaking strictly about human/physical life.

There are many variables involved before that blanket statement would become true.

As pointed out above. Some of those "facts and truths" are dependent on variables outside of religion or belief. Therefore "truth" (whatever that is) can still be subjective. All of the examples you pointed to still do not define "truth" and they may or may not reflect upon your religious perspective of 'truth'.

 

What is Truth?

Get your teeth into this. http://www.philosophynews.com/post/2015/01/29/What-is-Truth.aspx

 

Excellent article. On the other side of the coin, the article still does not give a clear and distinct or unique definition of the term 'truth'. A lot of good theory but nothing absolute.

 

That's just the point. I've never yet come up with 'a clear and distinct or unique definition of 'truth'.

 

And that reason is also why I closed the OP with the question "What is your religious perspective on the word "truth"?" Realizing that the term "truth" can have such subjective meanings, I decided to make the subject directed toward a specific area of interest... as pointed out in the opening paragraph of the OP. Amazingly, after 2 1/2 years of input and discussion between the members who have participated none of the participating members (other than me) noticed that closing question... while at the same time, I have to assume that any reader who wanted to address the OP would have read that closing question..... At any rate, I want to thank GeorgiaAmy for bringing this thread back to the table of discussion. Also, I want to thank you for that excellent article, as it emphasizes the points that I could not adequately explain. "truth" is subjective.