Technically speaking, truth is derived in accordance with fact or reality. Now a fact is defined as something that is indisputably the case, while reality can be confused with idealistic theories, suggestions, or ideas like in our previous examples we discussed concerning the origins, abortion, and LGBTQ+ debates. If you do not have all the facts, or a completely honest grasp of the realities of clinical science, you will never arrive at the absolute truth on any subject. Sometimes the pressure to ignore the facts and give into the sway of an angry mob protesting your opinion or worldview can be more than you’re willing to put up with, so some just remain silent. Unfortunately, this approach leaves the status quo in place, which contributes to cultural shifts that we will later see can be damaging.
Another consideration is perspective. In each of the previous articles, you were presented with evidence that pointed to a particular outcome. This conclusion may have solicited a positive or negative emotional response based on your existing perspective. Even with all of the evidence, can decisions be arrived at simply by analyzing the facts? Is there still a missing underlying component required to determine absolute truth? I believe the guidepost to changing your worldview is your personal perspective, shaped by moral and religious absolutes. But how do we arrive at a moral absolute if not through religious instruction? What’s more, how can an investigator arrive at the proper conclusion when their worldview does not hold any potential for God, or belief that absolute truth is even possible?
It's been said that all people process information presented as truth differently. A theory starts off as a hypothesis until evidence and facts are presented. This evidence must be the result of an applied scientific method or a predetermined and protocoled observation of an experiment. When factual evidence is uncovered pointing to the likelihood that the theory may be true, it then becomes a possibility until all possibilities are uncovered. When the evidence mounts overwhelmingly in support of the principal possibility, the theory moves from a possibility to a probability, and then eventually, after time, it is held as a fact or absolute truth. What’s called “settled science” often does not equate to absolute truth, but where the scientists stop exploring based upon available facts or the lens they use viewed through their own worldview, or both.
In order to know or accept the truth, I would encourage you to look at the evidence without personal bias and then draw your own conclusions based on your personal fact checking, and not on pure emotion or someone else's opinion. Your prosperity, happiness, and sense of fulfillment in life, as well as your final resting place in eternity, depend upon your success in getting this right. What did you say, Eternity? I thought that when you die, that’s it—your worm food. Well, read on and decide for yourself. Your life really does depend on knowing for sure what is absolutely true and if God really does exist.
Can truth ever be relative? Is the statement “what’s true for you isn’t necessarily true for me” ever a valid argument? We can observe moral, physical, and spiritual absolute truths or laws in the world around us, so absolute truths do exist. For example, if you jump off a building on earth without a means to counteract the physical properties controlling gravity, you will always fall to the ground. In a moral sense, everyone has been imprinted with moral absolutes that free will can violate. You know instinctively that murder is wrong, yet someone can override that feeling and kill someone. The circumstances—self-defense being one example—can change your perspective, giving you a feeling of justification for your actions, but without an acceptable justification, the universal moral law that murder is wrong hasn’t changed.
Are there spiritual absolute truths? To an Atheist or an Agnostic, the answer may be no since they only recognize the natural and disregard anything that is spiritual. If they do acknowledge any spiritual laws, often their perspective is often that they stem from the mind. There are several philosophies concerning spiritual laws that only focus on principles of hope, life, and truth.
There are several spiritual principles that are illustrated throughout scripture that have often been relabeled laws of Karma or of the universe. Isn’t it interesting how these spiritual laws or principles others espouse map directly back to laws communicated in the Bible. While there are many scriptures present that address each law, I have just cited the following examples to make the point:
Creation: Genesis 1:1 “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.”,
Humility: Matthew 23:12: “And whoever exalts himself will be humbled, and he who humbles himself will be exalted.”), and
Giving or Hospitality: Romans 12:13 “distributing to the needs of the saints, given to hospitality.”
Growth: 2 Timothy 1:6 “For this reason I remind you to fan into flame the Gift of God.”
Compensation: Psalm 115:44 “May the Lord give you increase more and more, You and your children.”
It seems that any decision made concerning your worldview on a given subject will change once you arrive at the absolute truth. That lens you perceive your worldview through will sharpen, reshape, color, and potentially distort your understanding of reality, as we’ve observed in our previous examples. Your settled worldview will shape your answers to the questions of life, all based upon the quality and validity of the raw data you use to make your decisions.