"Great Common Truths"

This entry is taken from an entry in my commonplace book from December 28th of last year. The quote, as I recall, was cited in the Introduction to Leo Tolstoy's War and Peace which I was preparing to read.

"Great common truths are disclosed to man only when he is alone; they are the revelations made by solitude in the thick of collective action."

- Rachel Bespaloff, On the Iliad 

Can truth really be a singular event? I'm not discounting the importance and, often, necessity of solitude - indeed, even Christ needed to withdraw from the masses and even from those closest to him in order to gain focus and perspective. Also, history is full of men whose solitary revelations (and the accompanying texts those revelations have spawned and inspired) which have moved men of varying times and places to seek the truth in something greater (and beyond) themselves:

• Siddhartha Gautama (a.k.a. the Buddha) and his Eightfold Path and Four Noble Truths
• Lao Tzu and his Tao te Ching (lit. 'The Way and Its Power')
• Mohammed and the Qu'ran
• Moses and the Judeo-Christian (i.e. Old Testament) Law (including, but hardly limited to, the Ten Commandments)

All of these men withdrew to solitude - away from the eyes of accountability - and returned with "great common truths" that have shaped the destinies of millions.

All this begs the questions: Does their lack of accountability in any way diminish the validity of their truth? If we subscribe to a view of truth as absolute, we must answer that question in the negative - because truth is true by its own nature. When those truth begin to conflict, then - as they will, as many "great common truths" tend to become influenced by time, place, and culture - how is the Christian (or, indeed, any discerning thinker) to distinguish one from the other?

Perhaps the Apostle Paul provides the best advice in the final words of his first missive to the Church at Thessalonica: "...do not despise prophetic utterances. But examine everything carefully; hold fast to that which is good; abstain from every form of evil" (1 Thess. 5:20-22; NASB).

Mankind is blessed uniquely amid Creation with the gift of reason. Why, then, would God simply ask us to ignore this fundamental part/aspect of who we are and who we are created to be. We must discern, using that ever-important faculty of reason, "that which is good" regarding those "great common truths."

I believe that truth is absolute, but I also believe that it can be "lost in translation," so to speak. One notices, when he or she take the time and effort to study, that there are many truly common truths shared by all religions - variations on the Golden Rule, the condemnation of murder, thievery, violence, etc. - but there is also divergence as well - fundamental differences which result in division.

It is at this point of divergence where the faculties of reason become so essential. It is here where the responsible and discerning thinker must begin to "test everything." Still, even the most discerning and most responsible thinkers will come to differences in opinion. Like those "lost in translation" truths, reason is often colored (though not always marred) by time, place, and culture, by circumstances like upbringing and socio-economic and political backgrounds.

Do differing reactions to these truths as a result of our reason point us to a conclusion that leads us to believe that reason is, on its own, no basis for discernment? Yes and no. No, in that reason is our God-given gift for testing the truths presented to ascertain their validity. Yes, in that human reason, by virtue of the fact that it is human, is - like humanity itself - deeply flawed. On its own, it accomplishes very little. However, reason coupled with faith - that "evidence of things not seen" (Heb. 11:1, NKJV) - becomes our true litmus test. To determine truth (and especially to determine it in our own solitude), we must consult the Author of Truth and, only then, can we truly "hold fast to that which is good."