Relativism and truth
[?] There have always been people who use their minds differently. Some argue that there is no objective and cognitive reality outside of us. It is said that our thinking does not produce a reliable knowledge of God or anything else outside of us. On the contrary, our observations and thoughts give rise only to expressions of personal preferences and perspectives, so thought does not lead us to universally valid truth, beauty, or goodness defined by God’s nature and will. what we feel and perceive, but these expressions do not correspond to the universally valid truth, apart from ourselves.
- Relativism is one of the names of this way of seeing the world.
- From this point of view.
- Truth.
- When the word is used one way or another.
- It does not refer to universally true affirmations about God.
- Man.
- And life.
- About the intimate integrity of yourself?act according to the world as you see it.
So what is the relative way of thinking that we commonly call relativism? We are dealing with relativism if a person says one of four things:
[?] Consider the statement: “Sexual intercourse between two men is bad. “Two people may disagree with this and not be relativistic. Both can say: “There is an external and objective standard for evaluating this statement, that is, God’s will in the inspired Christian Bible. “It can be said that the Bible teaches that this is not true; and the other can say that the Bible allows it. It wouldn’t be relativism.
Relativism comes into play when someone says, “There is no objective, external and cognitive standard that determines good and evil and is valid for all. So, your claim that sex between two men is false is related to your measurement standard, but can you not say that others should undergo this evaluation standard?This is the essence of relativism: no model of true and false, true and false, good and bad, beautiful and ugly can prevail over any other model. Everybody.
What does this suggest about the truth? Relativists can deduce that there is no truth. Truth is just a simple, harmful and confusing categorization, because there are no external standards and objectives that are valid for everyone. Or they can continue to use the word truth, but they do so only in a meaning consistent with their subjective preferences. You may prefer Mao Zedong’s Bible, Qur’an, Book of Mormon, or Little Red Book, or the words of Confucius, or Ayn Rand’s philosophy, or his own immediate desires, or any other models. In this case, we will hear the language of “truth for you, but not for me”. Therefore, we are faced with relativism.
Why did I admit that this is a bad way to see the world?Let us begin our assessment of relativism with an interaction between Jesus and some classical relativists, not self-aware and experienced relativists, but only practical relativists, which is the most common type. prevailing at all times, and not just at that time. It is beneficial to look Jesus in the face of relativists. Consider Matthew 21:23-27:
When Jesus came to the temple and was already teaching, the chief priests and elders of the people approached him and asked him, What authority do you do these things with?And who gave you this authority? And Jesus said unto them, I will also ask you a question; If you answer me, I’ll also tell you with what authority I do these things. Where did the baptism of John, heaven, or men come from?And they said unto themselves, If we say, from heaven, he shall say unto us, Then why did ye not believe him?And if we say: of men, it is to fear the people, for they all regard John as a prophet. Then they answered Jesus: We do not know. And he, in turn: I also do not tell you with what authority I do these things.
[?] Matthew 21:23-27 is an image of what has become the human spirit enslaved by sin. Elders and chief priests did not use their minds to formulate a true answer to Jesus’ question. Oh, they used it very carefully!In this Bible passage, what we see are not men who must use their spirit to serve the truth, but have not used it in any way. They used the spirit in a shrewd way. And Matthew makes us see the inner workings of their minds. We all think. The difference is whether we think of the service of truth or if we think in the manner of the chief priests and elders.
They reason carefully: if we say that, it will happen to us, if we say that other thing, will that other thing happen to us?Why was the truth at stake? No, because their egos and lives were at stake. They didn’t want to be ashamed. They didn’t want to be attacked.
So what happened to the mind and its help, the language, in this passage from Matthew 21:23-27?The spirit became the insightful and evasive slave to the passions of priests and elders; and language has done the skillful work of concealing In his case, the truth was not relevant to guiding what they said, no matter whether John’s baptism came from heaven or man, what mattered was that they were not embarrassed or attacked, so we used our language to hide our indifference to truth and our fidelity to the gods of pride and comfort. And we say, “We don’t know. “
Jesus’ response is categorically relevant to the way we handle this duplication. He said, “I’m not telling you how authoritarian I do these things either. “In other words, “This conversation is over, do I have serious conversations with people?Jesus abhors this kind of arrogant prostitution and unleashes the glorious gifts of human thought and speech.
I said earlier that this passage reveals the seeds of relativism, what I meant is this: a seed of relativism is the deep sinful desire of men not to be governed by God or by a standard affirming God’s authority. This rebellion was established in the depths The being of man can be expressed in many ways. One of them simply says, “God, don’t submit to your standards. Do I create my own model?” Another subtle and more common way to rebel is to say, “God’s standards do not exist. “Or: “God’s standards cannot be known. In other words, there is no universally valid standard for judging my behavior. Therefore, I am free from any authority outside of me. Can I do what I want?” These are the seeds of relativism, they are the source of relativism.
Relativism is not a coherent philosophical system. Both logical and experimental. College students know that something is suspicious when someone claims that the truth is that all truths are relative. They can’t cite the law of non-contradiction, but they can. they are involved in it and can feel it in the air. Affirming the truth with a statement that nullifies the truth is contradictory. But if you’re not pretending that your defense of relativism is true, why do you expect me to listen to you?
Every businessman knows that philosophical relativists leave their relativism at the door when they go to the bank and read the language of the contract they are about to sign. People don’t embrace relativism because it’s philosophically satisfying. They hug him because he’s physically and physically, emotionally satisfying. It gives them the coverage they need at crucial moments in their lives, to do whatever they want without the interference of the absolutes.
This is what we see in the chief priests and elders: they didn’t care about the truth. They were worried about their lives. So have you used the thought and language servants of the truth God gave you and prostituted you as servants of self-protection?They rationalized a way to escape and used language to avoid shame and wounds. is the deepest root of relativism.
By: John Piper; Text of chapter 7 of the book “Think”, by Fiel Editor.
Authorizations: You are authorized and encouraged to reproduce and distribute this material in any format, provided that the author, his ministry and translator are no longer no longer modified and not used for commercial purposes.