.

Dear OzSpen,

.

Thank you for sharing your intimate convictions with me.

I note with interest your concepts of “objective” and “truth”. For the sake of clarity and mutual comprehension, here is my understanding of these terms :

Objective :

Not dependent on the mind for existence; actual (OED)

Truth :

I see truth as information which has not been voluntarily deformed at the time of emission. Or, should I say, it is whatever version of reality, thought, ideas, qualia, dreams, or imagination, a particular individual is capable of experiencing and subsequently transmitting without voluntarily deforming it.

This, of course, does not exclude the involuntary deformation of information concerning the object of truth. The information that is emitted by somebody may be totally erroneous but perfectly truthful.

There are as many truths as there are observers and each one may be completely different from all the others, though each observer may be telling the truth from his or her particular perspective. I see truth as a perfectly subjective notion.

Our initial perspective may be false. We may incorrectly interpret what we perceive. Shock or prejudice may prevent us from correctly registering what we perceive. We may suffer a lapse of memory at the time of transmitting the information. We may not employ the correct expressions or be sufficiently precise in relaying the information. Our body language may be inconsistent with our oral expression, etc. All these and many other factors may possibly result in the involuntary deformation concerning the object of truth.

The star we claim to see may have disappeared from the heavens millions of years ago. That does not alter the fact that we are telling the truth in claiming to see it. The reality is different.
.

Naturally, I respect your beliefs. I note, however, that the historicity of the bible remains a highly controversial subject – for various reasons, not the least of which is the simple fact that no ancient written autograph of the bible has ever been found. The earliest one found of a major historical figure is El Cid from 1098.

.

Banjo,

Where do you go for your interpretation of 'objective'? It means <<Not dependent on the mind for existence; actual (OED)>>, from the Oxford English Dictionary.

You left out parts of the OED definition: Objective means '(of a person or their judgement) not influenced by personal feelings or opinions in considering and representing facts' (Oxford Living Dictionaries 2019. s.v. objective).

So objective is the opposite of subjective and does not deal with 'personal feelings or opinions'.

Instead of going to the dictionary for a definition of ‘truth’, you depend on your subjective opinion: <<I see truth as information which has not been voluntarily deformed at the time of emission'.>>

Oxford Living Dictionary (online) definitions of 'truth' include:

(1) 'The quality or state of being true';

(2) 'That which is true or in accordance with fact or reality';

(3) 'A fact or belief that is accepted as true' (Oxford Living Dictionary 2019. s.v. truth).

'Truth' in the Greek NT, based on 'aletheia,' means:

(a) 'The sense of reality in contrast to falsehood or mere appearance' (Brown, 1978, 3:978)

(b) 'Truthfulness, dependability, uprightness in thought and deed.... generally, tell the truth.... especially of the content of Christianity as the absolute truth.... reality as opposed to mere appearance' (Bauer, Arndt & Gingrich Lexicon 1957:35).

(c) 'Non-concealment…. A matter or state to the extent that it is seen, indicated or expressed.... It denotes the "full or real state of affairs”.... As in judicial language, the aletheia is the actual state of affairs' (Kittel 1964. 1.238).

When applied to Jesus in John 14:6, Jesus says, “I am ultimate reality. I am the root of what was, what is, what will come, I am the foundation of all that is genuine, factual and real in the world. Everything flows from Me.”

NT Greek uses truth in two fundamental senses, (1) Truth as opposed to lies, and (2) That which conforms to reality.

<<There are as many truths as there are observers and each one may be completely different from all the others>>

That's your postmodern presupposition; it is not the actual or biblical nature of truth.

.

Dear OzSpen,

.

You ask :

« Where do you go for your interpretation of 'objective'? »

You will recall that I first explained : “For the sake of clarity and mutual comprehension, here is my understanding of these terms” before quoting the OED definition N° 1.1 for the word “objective” as follows :

« 1.1 Not dependent on the mind for existence; actual »

Here is the link :

http://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/objective

Perhaps I should add that I consider that everybody has the right to employ whatever definition suits him for any particular term within a particular context – provided he indicates clearly exactly what that definition is. If no specific definition is indicated then one should refer to whichever meaning appears most appropriate among the various conventional senses of the word as indicated by a reputable dictionary, encyclopedia or other generally accepted authority.

Dictionaries often indicate several different meanings for the same word depending on the context and on the idea which the author wishes to convey. By choosing one of the dictionary definitions, the author rests within the conventional scope of the word – which is what I have done here.
.

I trust that the forgoing explanation also clarifies my thoughts on personal definitions such as the one I provided here for the word “truth”.

I read with interest all those definitions for “truth” you indicated but there was one I was hoping to find that was not there. I’m sure you will recall John 14:6 “Jesus answered, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me”.

That's double Dutch to me. No special definition is provided. Nor does that particular usage of the words “way”, “truth” and “life” appear to be in any of the reputable dictionaries I have consulted.

I can understand Jesus’ deception on the cross when he finally woke up to reality and realised that he whom, all his life, he had been led to believe was his “father”, had forsaken him. What a terrible tragedy that must have been :

http://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=10&v=v0nmHymgM7Y

.

Banjo,

You missed what I wrote about the biblical definition of truth - aletheia - when I applied it to John 14:6, “I am ultimate reality. I am the root of what was, what is, what will come, I am the foundation of all that is genuine, factual and real in the world. Everything flows from Me.”

<<No special definition is provided [in John 14:6]. Nor does that particular usage of the words “way”, “truth” and “life” appear to be in any of the reputable dictionaries I have consulted.>>

You won’t find theological understandings of Jesus as the way, truth and life in secular dictionaries. You need exegetical word studies.

John's Gospel shows Jesus as the way to eternal life, the truth to the reality of what exists, and living with hope in the present.

<<all his life, he had been led to believe was his “father”, had forsaken him. What a terrible tragedy that must have been . >>

‘My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?’ (Matt 27:45-47) is not the cry of one who experiences ‘terrible tragedy’. You don’t seem to understand the darkness during this time of crucifixion ‘from noon until three’ (v. 45) Jesus suffered indescribable agonies.

It cannot mean that God the Father stopped loving the Son, nor that Jesus rejected his Father. During the darkness, Jesus suffered excruciating pain because he was ‘made sin’ for humanity (2 Cor 5:21), became ‘a curse for us’ (Gal 3:13); ‘the iniquity of us all’ was laid on Him (Isa 53:6), and ‘he was despised and rejected—a man of sorrows, acquainted with deepest grief. We turned our backs on him and looked the other way. He was despised, and we did not care’ (Isa 53:3.

We put him through that pain.

That’s the cost Jesus paid for atonement that covers all our sins — intentional, unintentional, atrocious, or trivial.

Until you get a handle on the enormity of our sins and the need for forgiveness, you won’t understand Jesus’ cry from the cross, ‘My God, My God, why have you forsaken me?’

.

Dear OzSpen,

.

Yes. Sorry about that. I was a bit pressed for time and missed your reference to the ancient Greek notion of aletheia understood as “truth” or “disclosure”. Thank you for your exegesis of John 14:6. It certainly makes more sense.

As for the significance of Matt 27:45-47, your interpretation is obviously dictated by the a priori belief in the existence of a deity and the assumed filial relation of Jesus to that entity.

While I consider that the Jesus of the bible probably did exist, that he was baptized by John the Baptist and crucified on the order of the Roman Prefect Pontius Pilate, and that he had been led to believe all his life that he was “the son of God”, I see no evidence to prove the existence of anything that corresponds to the concept of a deity.

Hence my deep-felt compassion for Jesus of Nazareth whose sacrifice was a terrible tragedy, not just physically but, above all, morally. Alone and abandoned on the cross, he was finally confronted with the aletheia of his existence.

That said, it may, perhaps, be considered that, at least, he had the unique “privilege” of learning the truth just before he finally succumbed to his agony. Though it is no consolation, it is, nevertheless, more than the Church allows its most fervent zealots who die with the firm conviction that they are about to accede to eternal life.

They are denied the aletheia that Jesus earned so dearly on the cross.

.

Banjo,

Concerning Jesus Christ, you said: << I see no evidence to prove the existence of anything that corresponds to the concept of a deity.>>

That's because of your a priori view that the Scriptures are not accurate or God-breathed (2 Tim 3:16-17). The God-breathes Scriptures state:

+ 'In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was with God in the beginning. Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made' (John 1:1-3).

+ '“And when they climbed into the boat, the wind died down. Then those who were in the boat worshiped him, saying, ‘Truly you are the Son of God.’” (Matthew 14:32-33). In Jewish culture, the only one to be worshipped is the one true God.

+ "Very truly I tell you,’ Jesus answered, ‘before Abraham was born, I am!’ At this, they picked up stones to stone him, but Jesus hid himself, slipping away from the temple grounds" (John 8:58-59). In John 10:33 it explained why Jews wanted to stone Jesus: "We are not stoning you for any good work,’ they replied, ‘but for blasphemy, because you, a mere man, claim to be God'".

You are myopic if you read the NT and do not see that Jesus was God, the deity. You have your anti-deity filtering device running full throttle.