Michael Knudsen recently submitted the following challenge on the Truth Behind Reality post, “Freedom – Receiving Truth Well-Spoken”.
I’m grateful for the capacity each of us has to understand and discern truth for ourselves. A good question is, with all the lies surrounding us, what’s the best way to know what is true and what is not? How do we know when we are being deceived when the adversary can appear as an angel of light? Do we accept things just because they are long-standing traditions or because they are written? If we were confronted with something new, claiming to be truth, what is our process for testing it?
The answer to this question is critical.
Wholeheartedly believing or rejecting the validity of any particular something does not and cannot change the nature of that something; it is either valid or invalid, true or untrue. Ironically, our belief or disbelief consequently changes us, but reality, seen or unseen – ideals (religious or otherwise), physicality, facts, the nature of God, truth – does not rely on our permission for it to be valid or invalid, true or untrue; it is what it is whether we like it or not, whether we believe it or not. It is for this reason that I chose to resubmit Michael’s comment as a separate post. Only truth stands the test of time, but we won’t unless we recognize and accept truth for what it is, as it is, whether it feels good or burns us to our core.
So how do we test for truth; what process can we rely on for discerning truth from untruth, both universally (individual uniqueness aside) and personally (according to our unique personality).
You may judiciously use scripture and/or philosophically employ logic and reason to back up your stance. Throughout this brainstorming session we must remember the point to Michael Knudsen’s challenge: What process do we use for testing against truth. I add to this challenge; what process do we use for testing against truth, whatever the area? We are looking for an irrefutable, testable, and repeatable real answer.