What is truth?

[2timothy316]

So Pilate said to him: “Well, then, are you a king?� Jesus answered: “You yourself are saying that I am a king. For this I have been born, and for this I have come into the world, that I should bear witness to the truth. Everyone who is on the side of the truth listens to my voice.� Pilate said to him: “What is truth?� - John 18:37, 38

I can imagine Pilate snickering as he says, "What is truth?" after Jesus confirms that Jesus himself was born to bear witness to the truth. That only those who are in the side of the truth will listen to his voice.

How would you answer Pilate? Do you think you could persuade Pilate as to the truth about Jesus? If so, how and if you don't think you could why not?

[2timothy316]

[Replying to post 10 by tam]

I ignored nothing. I understood your answer. I brought out what a non-believer such as Pilate might have focused on. That being, as you said,

in accordance with the Truth (Christ) and His words.

No one can come to me unless the Father has granted it to them.

This to me seems like you're telling Pilate the truth and then if he doesn't get then it's out of your hands. It's God that doesn't let Pilate come to the truth.

Is it true that Pilate might not ever know Jesus or the Truth because Jesus father will not let him?

Also, perhaps you have come from a pretty spicy argument somewhere else because you're starting off here with lots of accusations of not being happy with my imagination and that I'm ignoring things.. Mind dialing it back a bit? I'm not trying to upset you but it seems you started out on the defensive.

[JP Cusick]

This question of truth I find interesting. More and more people are looking to themselves as to what is truth. That truth is relative to an individual.

For example: I was told a story just this morning about a patient in a mental hospital. At the end of their group session they were explaining to everyone not to talk about what others say in group. One man was eating a rice crispy treat with a foil wrapper. He said, "Don't worry I will not even let people read my thoughts." The took the wrapper and placed it on his head put his hat over it and said, "There, now no one can read my thoughts."

Does foil on our heads stop people from reading our mind? Is that true? When did opinions became the replacement for truth.

Is truth really controlled by opinion? Is that what we tell Pilate?

Truth is not controlled by opinion, but it is controlled by sincere judgments.

I would expect that man to put the foil wrapper on his head since he believes it to be right, but then I might wonder if I were to challenge his belief, as like do I read his mind anyway with the wrapper on his head to show him that he is mistaken? or more likely I would try to tell the person that it is okay to let other people read his mind because it is better to be open to other people and not to hide stuff.

The truth is that if he believes in the wrapper and he wants the protection of the wrapper then that is his own truth and I would respect that, and it would be better if every one respected that.

If he has a gun and intends to shoot people then that needs to be stopped, but wanting to murder other people can hardly be seen as some one's personal truth.

[2timothy316]

This question of truth I find interesting. More and more people are looking to themselves as to what is truth. That truth is relative to an individual.

For example: I was told a story just this morning about a patient in a mental hospital. At the end of their group session they were explaining to everyone not to talk about what others say in group. One man was eating a rice crispy treat with a foil wrapper. He said, "Don't worry I will not even let people read my thoughts." The took the wrapper and placed it on his head put his hat over it and said, "There, now no one can read my thoughts."

Does foil on our heads stop people from reading our mind? Is that true? When did opinions became the replacement for truth.

Is truth really controlled by opinion? Is that what we tell Pilate?

Truth is not controlled by opinion, but it is controlled by sincere judgments.

I would expect that man to put the foil wrapper on his head since he believes it to be right, but then I might wonder if I were to challenge his belief, as like do I read his mind anyway with the wrapper on his head to show him that he is mistaken? or more likely I would try to tell the person that it is okay to let other people read his mind because it is better to be open to other people and not to hide stuff.

The truth is that if he believes in the wrapper and he wants the protection of the wrapper then that is his own truth and I would respect that, and it would be better if every one respected that.

If he has a gun and intends to shoot people then that needs to be stopped, but wanting to murder other people can hardly be seen as some one's personal truth.

Perhaps Pilate was thinking much along the formula you lay out here.

Pilate appears to have respected Jesus' opinion of truth. After all he did go out to the Jews and say, "I find no fault with this man."

I can't help but wonder though, is it true that the formula above leads to truth?

You bring up a good point though and one that has to be addressed. In the case of the man above. When does a personal opinion of truth need to be addressed and corrected? Is it when a person is putting others in danger? How about if the person has put themselves in danger?

[tam]

[Replying to post 10 by tam]

I ignored nothing. I understood your answer. I brought out what a non-believer such as Pilate might have focused on.

Yet you did ignore my response (in your response), and then you misrepresented what I DID say. But I address that more below.

Your second question had nothing to do with how we would answer Pilate (or anyone else asking 'what is truth').

in accordance with the Truth (Christ) and His words.

No one can come to me unless the Father has granted it to them.

This to me seems like you're telling Pilate the truth and then if he doesn't get then it's out of your hands.

It is out of my hands if someone does not accept the truth. I can share only as I have been given; I can keep trying out of love of course (perhaps I had been unclear), and as my Lord directs; but what others do with that is not up to me.

Do you disagree?

It's God that doesn't let Pilate come to the truth.

Is it true that Pilate might not ever know Jesus or the Truth because Jesus father will not let him?

Might it not be more likely (hypothetically) that Pilate did not WANT the truth or that he wanted to use the truth for his own ends - or whatever other reason God knows and I do not - and so the Father did not grant it to him (draw him, enable him) to come to His Son?

Might it not be something as simple as Pilate not asking to know God's Truth? Or not being willing to do what God has said we must do (listen and come to His Son) in order to come to Him?


Because Christ - the Truth - said:

"Seek and you will find."

"Knock and the door will be opened."



So how do you understand Christ's words, "No one can come to me unless the Father enables them?"

Also, perhaps you have come from a pretty spicy argument somewhere else because you're starting off here with lots of accusations of not being happy with my imagination and that I'm ignoring things.. Mind dialing it back a bit? I'm not trying to upset you but it seems you started out on the defensive.

Not at all. Perhaps you should not read more into my words than what is written. I never said I was not 'happy' with your imagination. I asked a question and said that I was curious (which I am) why you attribute certain things to Pilate, such as the snickering or the assumption that he did not believe there even was truth to be known.


I am curious also why you ignored (in your response to me) the actual words I wrote in response to the question (what is truth), and chose instead to suggest that I would say to Pilate:

3. "Pilate, I can't answer you because you are not granted to know the truth."

The above completely misrepresents what I wrote. I WOULD answer Pilate... and I clearly stated HOW I would respond to him (or anyone asking that question).

(caps are merely for emphasis, and do not represent 'yelling' or anger from me)

Peace again to you,
your servant and a slave of Christ,
tammy

[2timothy316]

[Replying to post 14 by tam]

Again, this conversation is getting way out of wack and I feel no 'peace to me'. I'm just simplifying the answers as I said I would do. I have what I need. Thanks for answering.

[tam]

[Replying to post 14 by tam]

Again, this conversation is getting way out of wack. I'm just simplifying the answers as I said I would do. I have what I need. Thanks for answering.

This simplification of yours was never an answer:

3. "Pilate, I can't answer you because you are not granted to know the truth."

Why would you fail to mention the actual answer that I gave, and instead post something that I never said?


Peace again,
your servant and a slave of Christ,
tammy

[2timothy316]

[Replying to post 16 by tam]

I am completely free to focus on what I choose. Your answer of 'Jesus is truth' was already told to Pilate by Jesus. So the first part of you answer is redundant. That is why it is not in the list. If people want to read your redundant answer they are free to read your post. I can't change or remove it. Yet again, I can focus on what I choose and I focused on why Pilate wouldn't understand. Note I didn't put names to the list. I just made a list. I never said you said anything. You're taking this all way too personally.

[JP Cusick]

Perhaps Pilate was thinking much along the formula you lay out here.

Pilate appears to have respected Jesus' opinion of truth. After all he did go out to the Jews and say, "I find no fault with this man."

Perhaps?

I can't help but wonder though, is it true that the formula above leads to truth?

My view is that everything leads to truth, and everything leads to God.

People just resist and deny at every chance, and the chances just keep coming back up.

You bring up a good point though and one that has to be addressed. In the case of the man above. When does a personal opinion of truth need to be addressed and corrected? Is it when a person is putting others in danger? How about if the person has put themselves in danger?

We are to intervene (if we can) in cases of suicide, but we must remember that Jesus put His self in danger to be crucified, and when Peter tried to intervene then Jesus called Peter as "Satan" and told him to back off.

I myself believe in self sacrifice even unto death, but it needs to be done correctly.

[tam]

Peace again to you!

[Replying to post 16 by tam]

I am completely free to focus on what I choose. Your answer of 'Jesus is truth' was already told to Pilate by Jesus. So the first part of you answer is redundant.

Are you sure? Because from what I read, my Lord said to Pilate that He is a King. He said that His Kingdom was not from this world. He confirmed that He is the Son of God. He said anyone on the side of the truth listens to Him, and He said that He came to bear witness to the truth.

But after asking the question, 'what is truth', Pilate left without waiting for or receiving a response. So how can responding as I did be redundant? How can any of His words be described as redundant to begin with? And how could I (or anyone) give a better or more truthful response to 'what is truth', than Christ, Himself?


"I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life."


If more people understood - truly understood - this truth, then perhaps more would start looking to Him to know what is true; to know God. Not to themselves or to others or to their religions, but to Christ, Himself. Then they could know the Truth (Christ) and the Truth (Christ) could set them FREE.


Peace again to you, truly, and to your loved ones,
your servant and a slave of Christ,
tammy

[Elijah John]

[Replying to post 19 by tam]

Which is it, that Christ came to bear witness to the Truth? Of that he himself IS the truth.

If both statements are true, then Christ bears witness to himself. Something that he said he didn't do, according to the Gospel of John, right?

Saying that "Christ is the truth" is meaningless, and circular.

If one was to take a true/false quiz, and wrote "Christ" as the answer to every question, would those answers, in that context have any meaning at all?