People 
| The Idea of Religious "Truth" and its Spiritual Merits |
| Written by Jeffrey Byrge |
| Tuesday, 27 January 2009 18:05 |
I promise to try to keep this less wordy then usual. (I can't guarantee that I won't "quote" a lot though) Its a basic idea. Why worship unless you are right? Isn't the certainty involved in being the one true religion a heady feeling? They can't all be right! Otherwise, there is no such thing as truth... Or is that the case? Can "truth" exist for all despite so many "truth kiosks" selling you their version at the exclusion of the other? Truth is defined as "That which is considered to be the supreme reality and to have the ultimate meaning and value of existence. " I am not saying that "Truth" as defined above doesn't exist. I am one who believes that it is important for all of us to find and define our own personal truth. Even if for some of us, their "spiritual" decision is that there is no such thing as "spiritual truth". But look at the key words from that definition: Reality. Meaning. Existence. ....... oh yeah. ULTIMATE. That's a heavy word. The premise of this definition of truth is to give meaning to ones life. That is the purpose. How many interviews did we all sit through at Assemblies and Conventions and listen to sincere people talk about how lost they were, how meaningless their life felt before this highly structured cult came and knocked on their door? Thats the catch. Remember the catch phrases? "This life isn't all there is! Life will be better. All you need to do is believe in Jehovah and do what we say. And knock on a lot of doors, selling our literature. Advertise Advertise Adverstise....." Ok, it basically turned into "Just advertise our current light, we'll let you know when it changes." I am reminded of Stephen Colbert's phrase. "Truthiness." It resembles truth, but isn't. Thats what most (all) organized religions offer. Not truth, but truthiness. Yeah, it even has an internet definition. (thank gawd for Wikipedia) Truthiness is a term first used in its current satirical sense by American television comedian Stephen Colbert in 2005, to describe things that a person claims to know intuitively or "from the gut" without regard to evidence, logic, intellectual examination, or facts.[1] Colbert introduced this definition[2] of the word during the pilot episode of his political satire program The Colbert Report on October 17, 2005, as the subject of a segment called "The Wørd". Truthiness was named Word of the Year for 2005 by the American Dialect Society and for 2006 by Merriam-Webster.[3][4] By using the term as part of his routine, Colbert sought to satirize the use of appeal to emotion and the "gut feeling" as a rhetorical device in contemporary socio-political discourse.[5] He particularly applied it to U.S. President George W. Bush's nomination of Harriet Miers to the Supreme Court and the decision to invade Iraq in 2003.[6] Colbert later ascribed truthiness to other institutions and organizations, including Wikipedia.[7] Colbert of course, using satire, is on to something. Truth that appeals to emotion and your gut isn't truth at all. Or at least, it shows that truth can't be institutionalized. Truthiness though, can. Thats the point. Truth is what it is, a device that hopefully helps us all to understand our own individuality and place in this world, a way to put context and meaning into our existence. That shouldn't be minimized. But is it possible to get the benefits of truth (meaning and purpose, peace in life) without the institutionalized truthiness that organized religion insists upon? I say it is. But only if you are willing to do your part. Truth starts with looking into the mirror, literally and figuratively, and seeing who you really are. That is just my opinion, and not meant to offend, but when you let your organized religion of choice tell you what truths you believe in, then you don't have truth. You have truthiness. (the kind of truthiness that Colbert was pointing to in all of his satirical splendor.) What if your religion pulls a fast one, and says that they are wrong? What if they pull a JW, and change their truth every other year? Where is the truth in that? You can only have truthiness. Vatican I? Vatican II anyone? The apology to Galileo? The point is, that institutionalized religions are at some point in their foundational core, all about the institution. It can't ultimately be about you. And if it is about them, they can never be about truth. Do you really think that god puts institutions over you? I can't bring myself to believe that. Do you think that the truthiness of organized religion (which at its core is all about them, not you) is more important then your personal truth? Would god agree that a religious institution is more important than its people? Calling organized religion "truth" may make you feel better if thats your thing. But just disagree with them. That will show off the truthiness quicker then a Britney Spears wax job. Find your truth, but make it your truth. Truth is all about your existence. God would want it that way. If God is worth anything, (and if she even exists) then she would absolutely put you, the individual, over the Savings and Loans of the truth business, organized religion. Unlike the meaning that JW's put into the phrase, you really are allowed to "make truth your own". Make it about truth, your truth, and not the organized religion behind truthiness. Hits: 760 Trackback(0)
Comments (4)
  written by Jaco , August 13, 2009 Hello, Jeff I really enjoy your articles. In the WT organization I used to be "high-flying" myself, especially considering the age at which I started to receive privileges. In this article you refer to God as a she. In other articles you refert to God as god. What is your current personal truth. Are you atheistic/agnostic? Regards report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
 written by AllTimeJeff , August 13, 2009 Jaco asked: "In this article you refer to God as a she. In other articles you refert to God as god. What is your current personal truth. Are you atheistic/agnostic? " Hi Jaco. For me that is a complicated question. For many people, it is their ultimate life's quest to understand truth "spiritually" and define themselves by this. For others, truth is what the facts show, including who "god" is, where he/she is or has been, etc..... First off, a small explanation. I sometimes refer to god as "she" to make a point. Which is simply, we don't know even the gender of god. At best, we take the word of the bible if one wants too, or perhaps, other religions. And it should be noted that in other religions, "god" is a she. I find that fascinating. It would be fascinating to watch 2 people, one a Christian theist, the other, someone who is totally devoted to Mary, (as John Paul II was) or perhaps, and adherant to a mother god from one of the other religions of the world, argue about the gender of god. Each, basing their conclusions on the faith they were raised in. Each, with the same amount of evidence to show for their beliefs. My personal beliefs are evolving. I left JW's as an angry atheist, but have worked through much of the emotions. I do highly esteem the value of spirituality. I do believe in "higher powers". Because of how the evidence speaks to me, I see no "higher power" worthy of worship as the traditional religions engage in due to god not making himself/herself manifest. I will not take the word of any group or hysterical member ever again telling me they are right solely based on their conviction. Been there, done that, got the t-shirt. One of the points of this blog was simply to say that I am free to find these things out on my own, without a group telling me what or how to think. One groups "truth" and its attached convictions are no more compelling then any other groups. I think it a poor decision to hand over responsibility of your thoughts and feelings and actions to a religion, simply because it will always be more about them and their ideology then you, no matter what you see or feel.... Ok, that was longer then I meant it... Thanks for reading! report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
written by Jaco , August 14, 2009 Ok, I see. It is humbling and sometimes fascinating to see how each person recovers from the bondage. To know that I once thought that what I believed was irrefutable truth! There were times, however, when I thought that it couldn't be that simple...a few people interpreting religious truth for me? I think the most important thing to do when leaving, is to remain in control. I have seen and heard plenty a time how some exiters mess up their marriage, become promiscuous, criminal, even oppressive in return. It is so understandable, but serves as caution to those who contemplate exiting the Watchtower. Build up a support group of decent non-Witness friends first. If possible, seek trauma counselling, and then exit. The consequences of out-of-control behaviour can be so bitter, even mortal. So, repetition for emphasis (lol) Remain in control. Regards report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
Write comment
|
TrackBack URI for this entry
Subscribe to this comment's feed
