I've been pondering the concept of absolute truth in regards to religion recently and I'm curious about other people's understanding of this. Namely, whether you believe it exists or not or if its something your religious tradition teaches.
I rather think the well-known and ancient religious Traditions – Hinduism, Buddhism, the Abrahamics, etc., speak of the Absolute in the sense that the source and origin is Itself Truth-as-such – or rather It is the ultimate and ontological Reality and as such the source of Truth without error or falsehood (what is Real cannot be unreal).
The sense of an 'absolute', like that of 'objective' has been eroded over time, and is largely replaced in the modern mind today by the assertion of the 'relative' – that everything is relative and nothing is absolute – and the 'subjective', because we are fallible creatures, we cannot know objectively, or only objectively in a contingent and relative manner.
Thus there is no objective truth, only individual narrative.
So any tradition that holds to 'It' – God, Brahman, and so forth, regards it as Absolute, Real and True, even if our knowledge of 'It' is relative.
Christianity – what you say of Catholic belief is common to the Orthodox Patriarchates – believes that the Word of God is absolute in the sense that it is indisputably true, and not contingent or conditional. Likewise that what Scripture and Traditions proclaims as "teaching solidly, faithfully and without error that truth which God wanted put into sacred writings for the sake of salvation." (Dei Verbum, III, 11, 2).
For example, my past religious affiliation was traditional Catholicism, and the absolute, infallible truth of the Catholic Church was massively important.
Of course, it is it's
raison d'etre.
I'm actively looking for another religious tradition to follow and I admit I find it hard to understand religions that don't seem to have a concept of absolute truth, such as neo-paganism.
Probably modern western traditions are too imbued with philosophical relativism which has largely been the rule in anglo-american thought for the last few centuries.
To me, something is either true or false. For example, there is a God or there isn't, etc. etc. And if its true, it should be universally true (I've never understand the 'it's the right religion for me, but not for others' idea).
That latter phrase 'right for me' assumes that Revelation speaks to some people, but not all. I do not hold that view, rather I regard Revelation as speaking to the human condition as such. again, the idea that I am 'different' is the product of subjective relativism.
This might just be the way my brain is trained to think because of Catholicism though. I'm interested in hearing other opinions and thoughts on this topic!
Well whether one accepts the idea of the absolute as something tangible and credible, or merely as a philosophical category, is the key to the whole debate.
Traditional Christian Orthodoxy would say the word of God is Absolute and Infallible, and that the Church has been entrusted with its transmission – but of course the counter to that is simply 'Is it, though?" and the response to that, in the end, is a matter of personal faith.
But I would say, from my studies, the Great religions, if I may call them, that, all rest on a sense of the Absolute.
