You
can use me as an excuse to meditate anytime.
By
defining truth in terms of time/history (past, present, future), you seem to be
saying that it is
events/acts rather than principles, hence
particulars rather than universals;
more like narrative, and less like
science.
Well,
Annie Dillard would agree with you! It would sure correct a
propositionalist imbalance in Western theology, even if it doesn't capture
everything. Let me test my thinking about what you've said by saying it back
like this:
I like
the way, in your account, the truth comes "backwards" to us from the
future--because the purpose/end of acts is their meaning--and yet from the
point of view of our experience in time, it comes from the past through
the present into the future.
Also,
I think I get that in the present moment, which is durationless and hence
eventless, the locus of truth must be the Person from whom the events/acts
emanate. That's what unifies them.
Jesus
is the way (future in your account), the truth (past), AND the life
(present). I get how the 'way' is predictive, but only insofar as it
incorporates the life; that is, we have to be on/in the way now in order
for it to take us anywhere.
The
way, the truth, and the life are not distinct things but different views of
the same thing...Hey, another one of these trinities [note small t, all those
waiting to pounce], another three-note chord each of whose notes occupies the
entire 'space'? Cool.
Debbie
-----Original Message-----In a message dated 1/27/2005 6:52:05 PM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, January 28, 2005 2:17 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Truth as viewed by one of the greats
It is my contention that an awareness/assurance of "truth" is not possible apart from the sharing of ideas (read "truth"). In this remark, obtaining truth and having the assurance that I possess the "truth" is the same thing. And I am NOT speaking of the "whole range of truth."
Theory:
Truth in the past is "fact" -- truth in the present is the speculative moment or a relational circumstance -- truth in the future is a mystery (to we humans) but God's reality. It has differing forms and must be revealed by others.
Application:
And with Debbie in mind [four hours after writing these opening words, I must confess I was only using Debbie as an excuse to contemplate] , I want to add a thought or two. It seems to me that community (call it counsel or fellowship ) is all the more important, even critical, when we realize that truth, i.e. the "full range of truth," is so large, that it cannot be understood by those who stand in its presence -- the "forest and the tree kind of thing. As I see it, we have time in three dimensions: the past, the present and the future (I hasten to add that I did not come up with this idea) Perhaps truth in the past is "fact." "Truth" in the present is not so very different from the speculative moment (thus dynamic to the max and as fleeting as good looks) -- how could it not be in view of the fact that the present is no larger than a pin point - a point in time, a single point in time in which nothing else exists except what is happening. If truth exists in the "present," is can only exist as something associated with life, not conceptually. There is nothing in the "present" that is fixed. Everything is in transition. When Paul claims that the truth is in Jesus Himself (Eph 4:21) - he makes the only conclusion about "truth" that is possible -- that, if it exists in the present, it is the living form of Christ Himself.
But, to move on: "truth" in the future is only a mystery (to us). On the surface, it seems to have little bearing on us except as we understand that the furture is the birth place for all that we consider as life (present) and fact (past). It is pregnant with everything that is about to happen. To combine the past with the present is to create the opportunity for prediction. At least this is how it works for the created. The Creator's circumstance is very different from the created. His existence includes the future. It (the future) is full of what is about to happen because of the Creator's decision -- it is His reality and our mystery.
Outside of me thinking outloud, what is the effect of this discussion with myself? Truth as it exists in the past, cannot be separated from the present because the present is transitional, and is a part of God's reality if we consider its existence in the furture. Truth, then, has more than one form and is larger than our own abilty to consider it because it is intimately related to itself in the past, present and future. It has a conceptual reality, a Living Circumstance and revelatory unveiling. And most importantly, there is a time when it must be revealed by another (God or God at work in ciurcumstance and community). We embrace it, a moment at a time, as it fits into our limited and physical paradigm ---------------- a thing we call the "present." This "revealing" gives the impression that "truth changes." And while we all reject this thinking as being the very antithesis of truth, it continues as a nagging consideration ------- what I "know" today may change 10 years from now, or 10 minutes from now. But, perhaps, what we see as change is only truth as a continuing revelation -- birthing from the future through our present into the conceptual possibilities of the past. And if, after years, those concepts are all we have, nothing more, we are left with a graveyard of ideas with no Life. Christ is the way, the truth and the life. Think about it -- actually I am getting a little excited here -- the "way" is always predictive, is it not? "This is the way to your friends house." "This is the way to solve this problem." It is pregnate with ideas, plans, goals - a future in the truest sense of the word. The "truth" may very well be the conceptual ideas of the Divine as embrace in the Christ. If so, we would understand history as His Story (corny, I know) and the Old Scriptures as the very specific accounting for the His incarnation. The "life" is what Christ can only be in present time.
How far off am I? Perhaps some will offer an opinion. Understand that I am nothing more than a California Okie trying, from time to time, to understand the philosophical implications of (in this case) "truth" as it relates to me and my God.
Aristotle on the Bottle,
The Smithmeister -- out !
(that thing about the way, the truth and the life, will preach -- big time. )
