Relative vs Absolute Truth

[samijiben]

What separates relative from absolute truth? How do we deal with the implications of educating between the two? How do we weed out conflicts in the image of the absolute, and how do we know that in the process we're not confusing that definition for our own relative terms?

 

If there is Source, if there is the Truth or God or Whatever that they speak of, then what really is it, and what is it not? If it IS EVERYTHING, then that implies that everything is correct, and that everything is true.

 

But if that's the case, then how does a society deal with edjudicating between right and wrong? Does God provide any morality? This is the ultimate question. And the answer seems to invariably lead to no.

 

What????

 

God never actually gave us some moral compass, perhaps one akin to the "10 Commandments," to navigate the world and edjudicate conflict between humans!?

 

Then what must we do?

 

How must we deal with things? Who lies down the Ultimate Path?

 

And, you see, you can't exactly answer with "oneself," because then the same problem appears of dealing with everyone's separate definition of what's true.

 

What makes killing another man bad? What makes it wrong?

 

God?

 

I think not.

 

So then the final question becomes: "If the Absolute Truth of Being has absolutely no bearing on how we live and act in the world of things, then is it really the True Truth?"

 

[Someone here]

3 hours ago, samijiben said:

What separates relative from absolute truth?

Absolute truth is direct experience.  Relative Truth is conceptual knowledge. 

3 hours ago, samijiben said:

What makes killing another man bad? What makes it wrong?

From the absolute perspective..Obviously nothing .but only relative to society's standards.