Talk:D&C 93:21-40

Truth as knowledge that acts on us? (v. 24)

I (mis?-)appropriated some of Joe's thoughts from the Talk:Moses 6:6-10 page and tried to apply them to understanding how truth might act on us (per v. 30). I don't think I was very successful, but posted my effort in hopes of tempting someone to come along and help me read these passages better.... --RobertC 00:09, 18 Nov 2006 (UTC)

Truth acting (v. 30)

Verse 30 seems a radical take on truth as we normally think of it. It could make sense to talk in terms of how truth affects us, and in that sense acts on us. Also, the use of the term independent makes me think of more relativistic takes on truth (where truth is argued to be "in the eye of the beholder")--does this verse mean such notions of truth are misguided, at least in the scriptural sense of truth? --RobertC 06:50, 23 Sep 2005 (CEST)

More dynamic than relativistic, I think. Verse 24 strictly defines truth as "knowledge", and the reality that knowledge refers to is constantly changing. We live in a dynamic universe. There is no such thing as static truth, and that is the point of that verse.

-------------------------

"Now if Being is to be any sort of viable concept, we perforce must also have Truth--which is to say, a potential for acquiring an accurate notion of What Is. But "truth" is not a solid concept. In its etymology it is related to the words "truce," "trust" and "trow." This implies that it originally referred to human reliability, acts of veracity, and a willingness to rely on the assertions of others--keeping one's word, not betraying comrades, staying bought. The notion of "truth" as a proper way of understanding reality--a statement of what is--is a fairly recent application of the word. But then Anglo-Saxons have been fairly recent arrivals to the realms of civilization, and it has been in civic organizations that the notion of truth has had its important applications. Whether it has relevance to any other context remains to be seen.

But if what is is not what we instinctually affirm and respond to, what is it that induces us to act? To address this, it might be useful to return to the notion of rapport. In the first section I defined it as the mental state that allows us to accept as real the information coded in a text. At this point I'd like to expand it to include the acceptance of information from any alien source. What we enter rapport with determines our realities, and so defines our consciousness in any particular instance."

- Stephen Mace, Seizing Power: Reclaiming Our Liberty Through Magick

-------------------------

"Mormonism does not think of truth as an end in itself. Its leaders have emphasized truth and knowledge in a dynamic relationship to living and being. Truth and knowledge have been considered by them to be tools in an ongoing mastery of the relationships of the universe."

- Wendell O. Rich, Distinctive Teachings of the Restoration

-------------------------

--Tsuzuki 03:03, 14 Nov 2006 (UTC)

Tsuzuki, thanks for these thoughts/quotes, very timely for me. I've been wondering a lot about the OT view of faith, and it seems the same word is used for truth and faith. This accords with this blurb on truth (by T. Warner in the Encyclopedia of Mormonism) that got me thinking about the issue many years back. I plan to work on this a bit more in the next few weeks, esp. as it relates to Abraham.... --RobertC 21:58, 14 Nov 2006 (UTC)

God seems to be discussing truth as a free agent. It is free to act and not to be acted upon. We cannot change truth by our wills and we cannot use it independent of what it is and what it does on its own. Truth is what it is and will do what it will do. It is not different from one perspective to another. As a free agent, a truth is like you or me. I cannot cease to exist and I always did exist. You can reinterpret any statement of my existence that you like. You can steal my social security number and say that I am a thing that I am not, but nonetheless, you have not changed me or what my existence really is.

That's my first impression at least, and I thought that much worth suggesting. It seems like a thing that would need to be carefully thought through to grasp the full meaning of it, though, so I'm hesitant to comment much more than that.

--Seanmcox 23:24, 10 Jan 2007 (UTC)

I agree that the importance of the word independent seems to be the idea that we cannot control truth (an interesting idea in light of D&C 121:41ff). I think it's hard to think of truth acting in anything but in relation to intelligences. So I tend to think that this is all tied up with agency: when Christ says "I am the way, the truth and the life" (John 14:6, since John is quoted here I think his writings are very important to consider in all this) and "the truth shall make you free" (John 8:32), I think truth is referring to God and his plan of salvation which makes it possible for each of us intelligences to be free from hell, though we are still "free to chose" to accept this plan or to reject it. But God has created us and given each of us a part of his spirit, so it is in this sense that (as I hinted at below) I think we can each be referred to as both intelligence and truth. But as we drive away God's spirit (or, better, the light of Christ) out of our lives, we lose the truth that we were endowed with and we become imprisoned by darkness....

I know I'm not making much sense, I'm strill searching for a way to approach these passages that feels like it makes sense. Thanks, Sean, for you helpful thoughts, and anyone else who can help me with this perplexing section. --RobertC 21:46, 11 Jan 2007 (UTC)

Are each of us our own truth?

I keep wondering about this verse, most recently about the phrase "in that sphere." This reminds me of the "become a law unto yourself" phrase, or whatever it is (cf. D&C 88:35). Well, you can't become a law unto yourself without a certain amount of independence and the ability to act. So I'm thinking the paraellelism with intelligence is crucial in this verse. Scriptures often talk about Christ as the Truth, and often about saints as children of Christ, so that makes each of us truth also. But then if we are to make a link with the way truth is used in v. 24, that truth is knowledge of things as they have been, are, and will be--and without lies--then we, as truths ourselves, accept the truths of others also (I'm thinking esp. of others in Levinasian terms here). I'm also thinking of C. S. Lewis's The Great Divorce where people in hell become smaller and people in heaven become larger. So the "existence" at the end of v. 30 seems similar: we, as intelligences, are endowed with agency/independence. As we are honest with ourselves and see others honestly (without deceiving ourselves about others), we will grow in light and truth. If not, we basically lose the truth we started with (I have many other passages in mind here, growing light somewhere in D&C 88 and losing that which we have in Alma 12 or so I think...). --RobertC 13:46, 10 Jan 2007 (UTC)