Wherever truth is regulated, wherever truth is denied full uncensored access, whenever ‘the select few’ hijack truth to purport a singular ideology as “The New Truth”, you can rest assured their agenda is to limit your access to truth itself.
Todd Beal
♦
In essence, regulation is not a bad thing. After all, it provides an authentic framework for individual freedom first, and the advancement of a culture second (thus, progress of humankind) but only if the ideals it serves to protect – if the principles upon which it is justified – exist directly as offspring of truth, not relativism or any other reality-contradicting ideological bias.
When power-hungry individuals, groups, companies, nations, world-governances, implement regulation to serve their own self-serving ambitions, they will not ever completely subject themselves to that same regulation. Nor will they ever willingly subject themselves to a governing body that would hold them accountable to the ideology that drives it.
The natural response is “Why would they not?” They will not, because not one of us willingly forces our self to obey something that contradicts truth. But ironically, we each will try – passively or aggressively – to force someone else to submit to our truth-negating ideology of truth. Go figure!
Truth Behind Reality 
Regulation implies authority. Authority implies power the regulator has over the one being regulated, that power being the consequences that can be imposed by the regulator on the one being regulated if the regulation is not adhered to.
The statement “In essence, regulation is not a bad thing” is a TRUE statement (uppercase representing absolute truth, i.e. from God) the critical part of that statement being “in essence.” If “in essence” is removed from the statement, then whether the sub-statement (“regulation is not a bad thing”) is TRUE (note upper case) or not, depends on where the authority that is imposing the regulation derives its authority from.
If the authority is derived from (i.e. aligns with, is subject to) TRUTH then the regulation imposed by that authority will indeed be “good regulation” (or “not a bad thing” to use the same phraseology as above.) If however the authority imposing the regulation does not derive its authority from nor align with TRUTH, then it is aligning itself with its own self-defined, self-created relative truth (r-truth, all lower case) and will be self-serving. Self-serving, r-truth based regulations will often be defined/implemented for the benefit of the regulator (to forward their agenda) and conversely will often have a net-negative impact on the regulated.
The tendency of one in authority (i.e. the regulator) to desire/attempt to force someone else (i.e. the regulated) to submit to a truth-negating ideology of truth (to use your excellent phrase Todd) is likely due to the regulator being “TRUTH-blind.” The regulator mistakenly believes that their r-truth is TRUTH and behaves accordingly, when in reality, their r-truth by definition has nothing to do with TRUTH and as with all man-initiated (rather than God initiated) regulations will ultimately lead to ruination.
LikeLike
Bill,
I really appreciate the work you put into your excellent argument. That caliber of thought is rare these days.
The important aspect of your comment is that within that one argument, you covered all bases, all life scenarios. Whatever we have experienced, whatever we can experience, it fits into the universal laws of Truth you laid out. That too is rare these days: usually there is a hole, some logical flaw, that at some point makes an argument break down when confronted with reality – not so with yours.
Most people – even theologians, pastors, etc – fail to see where their understanding of Truth/truth leaves off and where their personal preference begins, and yet, they will still insist you call their words truth. But don’t try to point out the discrepancy to that person. You’ll have a fight on your hands because you have wounded their ego.
Proverbs 9:7-10 [NASB] says:
7 He who corrects a scoffer gets dishonor for himself, and he who reproves a wicked man gets insults for himself.
8 Do not reprove a scoffer, or he will hate you, reprove a wise man and he will love you.
9 Give instruction to a wise man and he will be still wiser, teach a righteous man and he will increase his learning.
10 The fear of the LORD is the beginning of wisdom, and the knowledge of the Holy One is understanding.
The Truth-blind person that you pointed out, is the scoffer spoken of in these verses. A scoffer does not adhere to truth because he hates truth. And yet the wise man/woman will accept reproof/rebuke from even a scoffer, if it somehow contains a kernel of truth.
Once again Bill, thanks for that excellent argument.
LikeLike
Excellent Todd! I believe that the choices you make will either add or combine our innate light between truth and semi-truth, or lies, will have a dominoe effect~ Truth is unchangeable whether we accept it or not. Truth is independent of God, he disperses it but even He keeps these universal truths/laws/principles. That’s what I’ve understood, learned thru my ancient studies. Love you my friend ~Sincerely Deb
LikeLike
Deb,
According to scripture, not only does God disperse truth, He is truth; therefore truth is not independent of God. Jesus talked about this in a conversation with his disciples Thomas and Philip, saying the following as recorded in John 14:1-10 [NASB]:
1 “Do not let your heart be troubled; believe in God, believe also in Me. 2 “In My Father’s house are many dwelling places; if it were not so, I would have told you; for I go to prepare a place for you. 3 “If I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again and receive you to Myself, that where I am, there you may be also. 4 “And you know the way where I am going.” 5 Thomas said to Him, “Lord, we do not know where You are going, how do we know the way?” 6 Jesus said to him, “I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father but through Me.”
7 “If you had known Me, you would have known My Father also; from now on you know Him, and have seen Him.” 8 Philip said to Him, “Lord, show us the Father, and it is enough for us.” 9 Jesus said to him, “Have I been so long with you, and yet you have not come to know Me, Philip? He who has seen Me has seen the Father; how can you say, ‘Show us the Father’? 10 “Do you not believe that I am in the Father, and the Father is in Me? The words that I say to you I do not speak on My own initiative, but the Father abiding in Me does His works.
Jesus said that to know him is to know the Father (God the Father). Jesus also said that he is the truth, which means that God the Father is also truth because each is in each other – Jesus, “God the Son” of the Father, and “God the Father” of God the Son.
It would seem by your statement that you are implying God is not truth but that he merely disperses truth, thus placing God on equal ground with any truth-loving human whom also disperses truth, saying that even God receives his truth from elsewhere just as we receive our truth from elsewhere, God. According to the above scripture, Jesus said that God (Jesus himself) is truth. Meaning, because Jesus is living, he is even now the Living Truth, the author of truth. God is Truth.
You said God disperses Truth, but even He keeps these universal truths/laws/principles. According to scripture, God keeps these universal truths/laws/principles because they are who he is: they are extensions of him. He must be who he is. These things exist because they sprang forth from the very selfhood of God himself. God keeps these universal truths/laws/principles because he is them; they are from within him. If he did otherwise he would not be God, and consequently these things would not exist. God is literally the living source of truth because he is truth.
We need to be careful to let scripture dictate our understanding of truth, not make our presumption of truth force an understanding of scripture.
LikeLike