Truth means everything. Reality means nothing.

Let he who is without coherence cast the first post!

All One! All One!!
Let 1,000 Essene rabbis plant 10,000 cedars in Lebanon!!
All One!!

No I don’t. It is simply easiest to show what I mean by truth using the closest examples I have to me. Ghandi had truth and he was not christian. Buddha had some truth and was not christian. It is not necessarily about the christian God.

If you recognize the truth I am speaking of, then I cannot see a possible way that you would hate Christ. You could disagree with certain aspects sure. But overall the two go hand in hand.

The fact that parts of christianity has changed is not really all that important for what I am saying. The basic truths of christianity as a whole have held up. Mostly Christs teachings such as love your neighbor.

Truth does not have to be the exact same for you as it is for me. It is whatever helps you reach self-actualization. There are multiple ways to reach it.


I still feel that you’re doing your readers a disservice by using the word “Truth” in this way. For starters, truth is an attribute, rather than something that has attributes. And “love, compassion, honesty, kindness, and wisdom” are attributes that are only appropriate to a person, not to an abstract concept.

Replace “Truth” with “God” in your contributions, and you’re at least saying something meaningful (if not desperately original, but we can let that pass - the festive season, and all). I don’t disagree with your conception of God, but at least use the right word for Him.

Truth is what is;What is real must be true or it isn’t real. No one can know the whole truth about every thing.As an example: If an alien came to earth at a different seasons than another, they would all be seeing the truth about trees at that season but not all the truth about them.

Truth can not be added to, or subtracted from, what isn’t true does not exist as truth, it is either part truth, or false.


Sorry; it was an homage to the ramblings found on Dr. Bronner’s Castille soap.

This strikes me as more wet dream than witnessing.

Ahh, my friend, the posters here will never be able to understand you, but you are correct. Try posting in a more enlightening board.

I didn’t say “hate” Christ, I said “indifferent to” Christ.

I’d call “love your neighbor” a basic ideal of Christanity, which in practice has been followed somewhat irregularly.

Reality though, does. I’m not sure how you conclude “truth” is thus more significant than “reality”.

Since truth apparantly means anything you want it to mean, I’ll just point out that while it is true for me than an endorsement from lekatt on issues of coherence is of little value, you might conclude otherwise.

Two comments from me:
(1) There is some philosophical disagreement between philosophers: To many Truth = Reality, neither corresponding to perception but to what is really happening on the surface and behind everything. Some claim that “knowing something about Reality” has nothing to do with reality itself - independant of observation. Reality is the superset of things really happening on every level. Observation or interpretation of reality is what most random people posit as “truth” (it’s horrible, but it’s the human condition and the best we can do). You put far too much faith in scientists having a grasp of anything in completeness. The fundamental drive of science is that new things can always be discovered and nothing is beyond observation and re-modeling, with better data. Relativity and QM are the best functional approximations to understanding the mechanistic clock-work of the universe that we are capable right now - for whatever limited reason (instrumentation, pre-conceptions, culture, etc). Like you pointed out, I expect it all to look alot different in 100 years, and everyone will be laughing at what is published in the books right now.

You can’t learn anything more from a book than the limitations of what is contained, ie you cannot really learn about the universe from Stephen Hawking’s last book. You can, however, (after attending a few astrophysics classes and rereading it a few times) understand the models used and appreciate what it took to derive such an interpretation - maybe you’d even have valid input on what to try next. Appreciation and knowledge of the complexity of the universe increases in everybody’s minds.

(2) Your quote from John 8 is one of my few favorites, that leads me to believe JEsus was a true hippie (in a nicer connotation of the word). The people in the story want to stone the chick who was sleeping with someone out of wed-lock. And Jesus writes on the ground… in the temple and they start backing away, one by one. Though it’s unknown exactly what he writes, it seems to me he could very well be writing commandments (possibly from the 613 Commandments) on the ground, demanded by Moses and others – many things that were certainly against the mainstream popular culture of the time… Things he was well-aware that anyone in a public position had broken to get that position. How many of them would it take YOU to back away? These were supposed to be religious leaders and they were all self-proclaimed sinners.

I thought that’s what I said.
I noticed, you did not address my question regarding facts. Are you saying that facts are not included in your reality?

Truth isn’t determined by what we believe,want it to be, but was is. Truth may not be known or fully known, but it is still what is, and is the only thing that can stand alone, we can deny or except it but Truth just is.

Nice post. Thanks. I saw an old silent movie about the life of Jesus. In it they showed him writing in the sand in what I suppose was Hebrew. Then through the magic of very special effects the words became english and showed he was writing specific sins. People in the crowd would see what he wrote and walk away.

If I get it I think Trust is saying that Reality is both what we see and know, and also those things we don’t see and don’t know yet. In the realm of science radio waves and microwaves were a reality even through thousands of years of mankind not knowing about them. So, our reality changes, or our perception of reality changes, while reality itself remains constant. That is also what we might refer to in physical terms as Truth.

What might we consider to be Truth in the non physical? Are Love and Compassion positive forces and energies while hatred and resentment are negative? Jesus said the truth will set us free and then tried to teach certain principles about this. Jesus told his disciples in Mat 6:

He also said the kingdom of Heaven is within you. His teachings can be looked at as a valid philosophy even while we don’t know if this individual actually lived.

IMHO the Truth and Reality are the same but I accept the fact that we percieve only a small portion of Truth and Reality. Unless you prefer to look at the physical as reality and the more subjective part of humanity as the Truth. Is there a constant unchanging truth about who we are and how we ought to relate to each other or is that just a matter of opinion and personal preference? I believe there is a constant unchanging truth. I believe that’s the truth that **Trust ** is refering to that is more important than our physical reality.

It doesn’t matter at all. The principles of his teachings are independent from the individual.

Gandhi imposed several serious “fast unto death” during his lifetime. It was self imposed but he was indeed starving during those times.

Absolutely. Christ is simply a tool used by some. Misused by some. Ignored by others.

In science when certain strict guidelines are not followed the experiment is considered invalid and the data is considered less seriously if at all. Jesus taught certain principles because he believed them to be true and nessecary when applied to how we actaully live. It doesn’t take much of a look at the history of Christianity to see that the principles he taught , the guidelines, were not followed.

Christian tradition is not the same thing as the teachings of Christ.

Can I get a summary of the teachings of Christ, then, and why they’re necessary for application to how Christians actually live?

One can believe what one is taught, read etc. about Christ, but the truth about Christ is not really known, just believed. We, in a sense, believe in the people who wrote about Him. There is a big difference.


I’m not sure I get your point.

Summary of the teachings of JC.

He said if we follow the first two commandments.

Love God with all your heart mind and strength, and, love they neighbor as thyself, then everything else will fall into place.

More specifically,

The truth will set you free.

Don’t place too much value on the things that time can and will corrupt, but rather place value on the things time cannot corrupt.

and, Heaven is within you not in some external place.

to name a few.

I don’t understand the second part of your request. Christ offered his teaching to everybody and labels don’t matter. Those teachings can be studied, followed, interpreted, misinterpreted, revered, or ignored, or some combination of these options. Chooseing or declaring to be a follower of Christ and claiming the title Christian is only semantics.

In rereading my previous post I think I understand this request more clearly.

Christ taught what was he saw as nessecary for humanity. Basically, this is how it is and how we can live with each other to fulfill our potential as beings.
Choose love and truth. He declared more than once that those who did this were his followers as well as his brothers and sisters and other metaphors. Semantics and declarations don’t matter.

What I meant was that the “expiriment” to live to are full potenial by choosing love and truth hasn’t followed the standard Christ set. It’s not a failure of the principle but a failure of those in the expiriment to follow proper standards. Much the same as any scientific expiriment will lose validity if certain standards are not met.

Let me see if I got this right …

“Truth” = revealed truth regarding morality, per Christianity to the op, but feel free to substitute the religious axioms of your choice.

“Absolute reality” = that which is objectively true whether we percieve it or not, and which exists whether we percieve it or not. That which is behind the curtains of our perceptions.

“Reality” = Our perceptions of “Absolute reality” which vary as we modify our models based on experience, and as we develop additional tools of perception.

And the debate is as to which one matters?

Apples oranges. Moral “Truth” and “Reality” are different kinds of information. We function best when we are informed by both of them. Both are attempts to model different aspects of “Absolute reality”.

Yes, exactly. Truth does not waiver regardless of all circumstances.

Very good post. However you classify truth based on a religious bias. There are countless atheists who possess the truth I am talking about. Maybe not the “truth will set you free” aspect of the truth Christ spoke of, but still truth regardless. There are countless people who do not believe in God, who have exponentially the amount of truth as some people who refer to themselves as believers. The question is whether truth or our reality should be taken more to heart. I believe truth should be valued over our reality since truth is unchanging.