http://www.thales1.armstrong.edu/pdg/oldstones/volume10/v10n1.pdf

The Veracity of Relative Truth

A society or individual's belief concerning the nature of truth has a tremendous influence on how they view life and live it.

If one holds truth to be relative, there is no universal moral standard for right or wrong to abide to. Who am I to tell you what to do or vice versa? I do what I feel is right. As far as belief in God is concerned, all religions are just different paths to the same destination, none more valid than the other. With no transcendent source for truth, man is the measure of everything being held accountable to no one. In regards to laws, it's only wrong if you get caught.

The foundation of absolute truth, on the other hand, gives one a Reference Point from which to live ones life. Right and wrong do not waver upon the feelings of others. There is truth and falsehoods, in religious paths and everything else. With a moral law being set in place by a moral law Author, one is accountable to more than the shifting laws of the land.

In a belief system where one person's truth is as valid as the next person's, logic is lost. If there are no absolute truths to hold reality together, a void of non-reason fills its place and any value life has withers and dies. Any search for meaning in life is a pointless and futile quest without the existence of authentic truth.

Under careful scrutiny the flaws of relative truth reveal themselves as would the flaws of blueprints for a square circle under examination. There are different misunderstandings and contradictions concerning truths nature being relative. Once they are cleared up reason is left unclouded to point to truth being intrinsically absolute.

Many proponents of relative truth mistake preference/opinion for truth. If you say so and so is a lousy hack artist, this is a matter of taste. A certain person may look very physically attractive to you and not to someone else. Beauty, not truth, is in the eye of the beholder. To illustrate this difference between truth and taste, let us use swimming for an analogy. Suppose a potential swimmer may think the pool water is too cold to swim in (relative) while others may not. Regardless of their liking of the waters temperature once the temperature drops to a certain point the water will freeze (absolute) and swimming is no longer possible despite ones personal preference.

Some would say absolute truth is the gauge by which the Western perspective perceives truth, while Eastern logic looks on reality with a relativistic point of view. Western truth by this understanding is then either/or with the Eastern being both/and. The either/or logic stands on the law of non-contradiction where if a statement is true, its opposite must therefore be false. On the contrary, the both/and logic sees no disharmony with a statement and its antithesis both being true. So from a Eastern point of view, one uses either a both/and logic or nothing else. The law of non-contradiction exposes the fallacy of this logic. In addition to this departure from reason, if the both/and way of perceiving reality is so inclusive, why not allow the use of either/or alongside with both/and logic? Because if the either/or method of seeing truth is applied next to the all inclusive both/and method, the either/or negates the both/and.

As you can see the claims of relative truth do not hold up to close scrutiny. One may pronounce, There is no such thing as relative truth. Are you sure? Absolutely sure? The claim that there is no such thing as absolute truth or the other side of the coin that all truth is relative is in itself an absolute claim. Such contradictory claims make it impossible for relative truth to be valid.

Truth is by its nature exclusive. Truth excludes what is not true, i.e. a lie. An atheist who believes in no god can not share an equal portion of the truth alongside with his Hindu friend who believes in a whole pantheon of gods. Imagine if a used car salesmen tells me the car he is showing me has 70,000 miles but he had earlier turned back the odometer 100,000 miles. The exclusiveness of truth forbids his statement to be anything but a lie. Even a prospective car buyer who believes that all truth is relative does not hold consistently enough to their world view to say, Well, 70,000 miles is true to him and 170,000 is true to the previous owner. If a skeptic denies the exclusiveness of truth he in turn confirms it by asserting he is right and I am wrong.

If one holds to the belief that all truth is relative it creates quite a moral quandary. Cannibalism is a cultural choice in cuisine and not inherently wrong. Rape is forcible propagation of the species. You have no ground to stand on to condemn the horrendous genocide of Hitlers final solution. In fact, ol Adolf is as morally neutral as Mahatma Gandhi or Mother Teresa. In relative truth, evil as well as good dissolves.

With truths nature being absolute, it needs a transcendent source. In our society where the Ten Commandments and the words under God in our pledge are under siege, the idea that God Almighty is the source of all truth will not be received with open arms by the educated and enlightened. What is truth? they say echoing the words of Pontius Pilate as he stood before Jesus, who said, "I came into this world, to testify to the truth. Everyone on the side of truth listens to Me." Truth is real and is worth finding. Within it are the answers to origin, meaning, morality, and destiny.

The empty tomb of Jesus is unique amongst those in history who have purportedly proclaimed the truth. No philosopher nor religions founder has authenticated their claim to truth as Jesus did through His prophesized resurrection. Not the Buddha, Mohammed, Confucius, Laozi, nor Krishna have this caliber of seal on their teachings. This combined with multitudes of Old Testament prophecies fulfilled by Jesus give His assertion to be the Truth a weight like none other. May all who seek truth find it and its Source.