"All truth is relative" = an absolute truth: Why?

[Peter_Plato]

There can be more than one path to the summit, so there can be more than one true religion.

rossum

You realize this is a non sequitur, correct?

 

[Bahman]

You realize this is a non sequitur, correct?

You are correct, unless there are summits as number as individuals.

 

[Peter_Plato]

You are correct, unless there are summits as number as individuals.

Actually, the analogy depends upon whether reaching the “summit” is of man’s initiative or God’s. The assumption implicit within the analogy is that it is possible to climb or “get there” under one’s own initiative and climbing power. That is precisely what Christianity, for one, denies. For that reason, the truth Christianity proposes is unlike the other religions - grace being a key element. Climbing a mountain is, therefore, not an appropriate analogue as far as what “all” religions even propose to begin with.

 

[Peter_Plato]

That would require omniscience!
Nothing short of omniscience.

Well, no, actually. Revelation and supernatural grace (expressed through the supernatural virtues of faith, hope and charity) would do the trick.

 

[Bahman]

Actually, the analogy depends upon whether reaching the “summit” is of man’s initiative or God’s. The assumption implicit within the analogy is that it is possible to climb or “get there” under one’s own initiative and climbing power. That is precisely what Christianity, for one, denies. For that reason, the truth Christianity proposes is unlike the other religions - grace being a key element. Climbing a mountain is, therefore, not an appropriate analogue as far as what “all” religions even propose to begin with.

That is faulty of all religions which equate man perfection to an absolute perfection, so called God. God’s purpose would be fulfilled by creating only one man if it was so. The idea is that each man should find his own perfection.

 

[rossum]

You realize this is a non sequitur, correct?

Why is it a non-sequiutur? Do not Judaism and Christianity both lead to the same God? There is only one God of Abraham, but there are at least three different major religions pointing to that God, as well as offshoots like Mormonism and Baha’i…

rossum

 

[Peter_Plato]

Why is it a non-sequiutur? Do not Judaism and Christianity both lead to the same God? There is only one God of Abraham, but there are at least three different major religions pointing to that God, as well as offshoots like Mormonism and Baha’i…

rossum

There is no essential relationship between mountain climbing and the truth of any religion.

You said:
There can be more than one path to the summit, SO there can be more than one true religion.

The “so” functions as a kind of “If…then” connector. If “there can be more than one path to the summit,” then “there can be more than one true religion.” Since no logical relationship between mountains and religions exists, the “so” in your claim is somewhat tenuous…well, VERY tenuous, in fact. Ergo, non sequitur.

The other reason, as I have already pointed out, is that your analogy relies on the assumption that the “climb” is entirely the climber’s initiative or – leaving aside that issue – that God has put no path markers along the way, or that the “guides” leading the expeditions are all equally competent to lead; in short that God makes no effort to show human beings the way, leaving the entire endeavor up to us.

 

[rossum]

There is no essential relationship between mountain climbing and the truth of any religion.

Which is why I used the word “simile”.

The other reason, as I have already pointed out, is that your analogy relies on the assumption that the “climb” is entirely the climber’s initiative or – leaving aside that issue – that God has put no path markers along the way, or that the “guides” leading the expeditions are all equally competent to lead; in short that God makes no effort to show human beings the way, leaving the entire endeavor up to us.

I make no such assumptions. In many religions, such as Pure Land Buddhism, God/Amitabha has provided a cable-car to the summit for those who wish to take it. Similarly for God placing markers on the path. The simile is a very flexible one.

rossum

 

[Aloysium]

. . . one cannot know in advance whether a path will lead to the summit or not, so by this reasoning, one cannot know in advance which religion is true. Not all paths lead to the summit, though.

God calls us all, each in our particular fashion. When we go off track, gnashing our teeth, we pick ourselves up and try again for the Summit.
There are many temptations and false gods, ultimately seen for the transient illusions they are.
What is True is found within one’s relationship with God. In Zen this manifests itself in the quest for transcendence, the surrender to the one Mind, which is God, although not expressed in those terms. This is very hard to do for a number of reasons including the problem found in all eastern religions, that although the Holy Spirit is the ultimate Guide, it is difficlut to find a Guru/Master. That is why people travel all over the world to find what is in their own heart.
It is just that Catholicism is so much easier, available to most people, and it fits with anyone’s lifestyle.

 

[DanAl]

Ok, so one of the arguments proving absolute truth is the one I just mentioned in the title.

If I were to conclude “There is no absolute truth”, then my conclusion would be self-refuting and would be a statement of absolute truth.

I then realize this and believe absolute truth to be real.

but what if someone were to ask “Why do you believe that “there is no absolute truth” is an absolute truth?”

What is a good answer I could give that wouldn’t result in an infinite regress, circular argument, or assumption?

 

[Charlemagne_III]

But if, as Catholics believe, one’s choice of religion is due to the workings of the Holy Spirit, then one’s choice of religion clearly isn’t an indepedent choice.

It is still a free choice. We are free to cooperate or not cooperate with the Holy Spirit.

We are not Calvinists. We are CATHOLICS.

 

[Charlemagne_III]

Indian religions tend to use the simile of climbing a mountain. The object is to reach the summit, however there can be more than one way to reach the summit. A description of the path up the east face of the mountain is very different to the description of the path up the west face of the mountain. The only point where the two paths coincide is at the summit itself, where description in mere words becomes very difficult: “nada, nada, nada. Y en el monte nada.”

As long as a religion provides a valid path, or paths, to the summit, then it is true. There can be more than one path to the summit, so there can be more than one true religion.

rossum

The real question is not whether there can be more than one path, but rather which path is the truest and most reliable path to the summit. There ought to be more markers than just the teachings alone. Greater signs are called for the truest path to heaven, such as miracles and prophecy. With Buddhism we get no miracles nor prophecy, sure signs of divinity at work rather than mere philosophical contemplation. Here is Chesterton’s take on the power of prophecy found in Jesus.

“Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away.” That Jesus prophesied well is proven by the following facts. “The civilization of antiquity was the whole world: and men no more dreamed of its ending than of the ending of daylight. They could not imagine another order unless it were in another world. The civilization of the world has passed away and those words have not passed away. In the long night of the Dark Ages feudalism was so familiar a thing that no man could imagine himself without a lord: and religion was so woven into that network that no man would have believed they could be torn asunder. Feudalism itself was torn to rags and rotted away in the popular life of the true Middle Ages; and the first and freshest power in that new freedom was the old religion. Feudalism had passed away, and the words did not pass away. The whole medieval order, in many ways so complete and almost cosmic a home for man, wore out gradually in its turn and here at least it was thought that the words would die. They went forth across the radiant abyss of the Renaissance and in fifty years were using all its light and learning for new religious foundations, new apologetics, new saints. It was supposed to have been withered up at last in the dry light of the Age of Reason; it was supposed to have disappeared ultimately in the earthquake of the Age of Revolution. Science explained it away; and it was still there. History disinterred it in the past; and it appeared suddenly in the future. To-day it stands once more in our path; and even as we watch it, it grows.” from Chesterton’s The Everlasting Man.

 

[Lucy107]

Actually, the analogy depends upon whether reaching the “summit” is of man’s initiative or God’s. The assumption implicit within the analogy is that it is possible to climb or “get there” under one’s own initiative and climbing power. That is precisely what Christianity, for one, denies.

No no no. It’s what traditional Catholics deny.

There’s plenty of people who claim to be Christians who take a sociological/psychological/culturological/etc. approach to religious choice.

You realize this is a non sequitur, correct?

The proposition that even people who by no fault of their own do not know Catholicism, can nevertheless attain salvation (ie. the summit of the mountain in the simile), is a Catholic one.

I agree though that the analogy with climbing a mountain is not adequate for matters of religious choice and attainment.

Well, no, actually. Revelation and supernatural grace (expressed through the supernatural virtues of faith, hope and charity) would do the trick.

Except that there’d be no trick then. Uh. (How can one even use the words “supernatural grace” and “trick” in the same sentence like that??)

Anyway, I was basing my post on the proposition, based on what you said earlier, that it is by various worldly means that it can be established that the Catholic Church is the one and only right one.

The various worldly means you’ve mentioned earlier (such as historical data, textual analysis, sociological insight etc.) are available only to one sector of the population, those with a comfortable enough worldly status and enough worldly education. Some poor illiterate peasant has no use for those erudite arguments, nor do people who have lost faith in the workings of society and science, so at least for those two groups of people, some other argument is necessary to convince them or invite them to consider that the Catholic Church is the one and only right one.

 

[oldcelt]

The real question is not whether there can be more than one path, but rather which path is the truest and most reliable path to the summit. There ought to be more markers than just the teachings alone. Greater signs are called for the truest path to heaven, such as miracles and prophecy. With Buddhism we get no miracles nor prophecy, sure signs of divinity at work rather than mere philosophical contemplation. Here is Chesterton’s take on the power of prophecy found in Jesus.

“Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away.” That Jesus prophesied well is proven by the following facts. “The civilization of antiquity was the whole world: and men no more dreamed of its ending than of the ending of daylight. They could not imagine another order unless it were in another world. The civilization of the world has passed away and those words have not passed away. In the long night of the Dark Ages feudalism was so familiar a thing that no man could imagine himself without a lord: and religion was so woven into that network that no man would have believed they could be torn asunder. Feudalism itself was torn to rags and rotted away in the popular life of the true Middle Ages; and the first and freshest power in that new freedom was the old religion. Feudalism had passed away, and the words did not pass away. The whole medieval order, in many ways so complete and almost cosmic a home for man, wore out gradually in its turn and here at least it was thought that the words would die. They went forth across the radiant abyss of the Renaissance and in fifty years were using all its light and learning for new religious foundations, new apologetics, new saints. It was supposed to have been withered up at last in the dry light of the Age of Reason; it was supposed to have disappeared ultimately in the earthquake of the Age of Revolution. Science explained it away; and it was still there. History disinterred it in the past; and it appeared suddenly in the future. To-day it stands once more in our path; and even as we watch it, it grows.” from Chesterton’s The Everlasting Man.

And in the morning, ‘There will be a storm today, for the sky is red and threatening.’ Do you know how to discern the appearance of the sky, but cannot discern the signs of the times? 4"An evil and adulterous generation seeks after a sign; and a sign will not be given it, except the sign of Jonah." And He left them and went away. Matthew 16:4

So far as Chesterton, he did not live to see this day and one of my favorite quotes of his is: “The traveler sees what he sees, the tourist sees what he has come to see.
Gilbert K. Chesterton”

brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/g/gilbert_k_chesterton.html#VheywLCpOIPMosKZ.99

Or Thomas Paine:
“All national institutions of churches, whether Jewish, Christian or Turkish, appear to me no other than human inventions, set up to terrify and enslave mankind, and monopolize power and profit.”
Thomas Paine

Read more at brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/t/thomas_paine.html#2RrB7DRz07CYqWkI.99

 

[Lucy107]

The real question is not whether there can be more than one path, but rather which path is the truest and most reliable path to the summit. There ought to be more markers than just the teachings alone. Greater signs are called for the truest path to heaven, such as miracles and prophecy.

I find it puzzling that someone finds miracles and prophecy relevant to notions of divinity.
To me, such things are completely irrelevant. In my opinion, any decent yogi can walk on water and prophesy things, I don’t think this is anything special. After all, for example, the Egyptian wizards could do most of the magic that Moses did.

With Buddhism we get no miracles nor prophecy, sure signs of divinity at work rather than mere philosophical contemplation.

It seems to me that you don’t know all that much about Buddhism.
“Mere philosophical contemplation”? Have you ever meditated and practiced the precepts?

It is still a free choice. We are free to cooperate or not cooperate with the Holy Spirit.

“Cooperate” being the operative term!

 

[Lucy107]

Or Thomas Paine:
“All national institutions of churches, whether Jewish, Christian or Turkish, appear to me no other than human inventions, set up to terrify and enslave mankind, and monopolize power and profit.”
Thomas Paine

So what went through Thomas Paine’s mind when he was having a toothache …
I mean, it’s easy to be all aloof and such as long as it’s not one’s own life that is on the line.

 

[Aloysium]

. . . "The traveler sees what he sees, the tourist sees what he has come to see.
Gilbert K. Chesterton . . .
Thomas Paine:
“All national institutions of churches, whether Jewish, Christian or Turkish, appear to me no other than human inventions, set up to terrify and enslave mankind, and monopolize power and profit.” . . .

How appropriate, I believe Chesterton’s quote refers to people like Paine.
He who seeks God, sees through the social facade.
Those who seek something else, will find that too, I suppose.

As to your reply to Charlie’s comment, you are either being ornery or there truly is a massive failure to communicate.
The signs he was referring to we’re obviously the revelation of the Word’s incarnation in Jesus Christ, our savior and redeemer.

 

[oldcelt]

So what went through Thomas Paine’s mind when he was having a toothache …
I mean, it’s easy to be all aloof and such as long as it’s not one’s own life that is on the line.

Paine believed in God, and even an afterlife. He rejected “revealed” religion of all kinds.

 

[oldcelt]

How appropriate, I believe Chesterton’s quote refers to people like Paine.
He who seeks God, sees through the social facade.
Those who seek something else, will find that too, I suppose.

As to your reply to Charlie’s comment, you are either being ornery or there truly is a massive failure to communicate.
The signs he was referring to we’re obviously the revelation of the Word’s incarnation in Jesus Christ, our savior and redeemer.

Not being ornery, simply replying to the notion of miracles withe the words of Jesus as recorded by Matthew. Paine’s quote means to see the world as it is, not to see it based on a preconceived notion.

 

[Peter_Plato]

Except that there’d be no trick then. Uh. (How can one even use the words “supernatural grace” and “trick” in the same sentence like that??)

I thought you’d pick up on that. I considered using scare quotes, but then decided the word trick was fluid enough to cover the stretch on its own. Perhaps not.

Anyway, I was basing my post on the proposition, based on what you said earlier, that it is by various worldly means that it **can be **established that the Catholic Church is the one and only right one.

“Can be” does not mean “must be.”

The various worldly means you’ve mentioned earlier (such as historical data, textual analysis, sociological insight etc.) are available only to one sector of the population, those with a comfortable enough worldly status and enough worldly education. Some poor illiterate peasant has no use for those erudite arguments, nor do people who have lost faith in the workings of society and science, so at least for those two groups of people, some other argument is necessary to convince them or invite them to consider that the Catholic Church is the one and only right one.

Again, merely because “historical data, textual analysis, sociological insight” are only available to one sector of the population does not mean the poor illiterate peasant requires those. If it is, indeed, “harder for a rich man to get to heaven than a camel to go through the eye of a needle,” the rich man would seem to need all the help he can get from history, sociology and available texts to overcome the handicap of being rich, no?

Of course, even with ALL of those being available does not mean they will be fully taken advantage of, nor does it mean they are even required, given all available means. “Can be” does not mean “must be,” you see.

Then again, for some, even if God hand delivered an invitation hand-written on first century vellum, that would not suffice to “prove” anything.

Note, the word “prove” is properly dressed for the occasion.