Quote:
Originally Posted by Maxel
I didn't coin the phrase- I took it from Neil A. Maxwell. He explains it better than I can here: |
Hey Maxel—
Appreciate the clarification. I was unacquainted with the expression “correct hierarchy of truth” and thought perhaps you were its originator (though I was nowise sure of it). That long out-of-print book must have made quite an impression on you in your youth! But before you continue endorsing it, you might take a closer look at what the late Neil A. Maxwell was actually saying: “‘What is truth?’—has been answered only once…”
This isn’t right. The reader of John’s Gospel knows the answer
in advance of Pilate’s asking the question (18:38). Not just answered—answered definitively. The answer is Jesus (14:6). He is the Truth, the full revelation of God. Yet Pilate, with the Truth directly before him, can’t see (as his question makes plain). But John’s reader isn’t surprised, because all this too has been explained in advance—
6:37-39 All that the Father gives me will come to me… I shall lose none of all that he has given me
8:43-44 Why is my language not clear to you? Because you are unable to hear what I say. You belong to your father, the devil...
10:26 but you do not believe because you are not my sheep
12:40 He has blinded their eyes and deadened their hearts, so they can neither see with their eyes, nor understand with their hearts, nor turn—and I would heal them
As a side note— Nietzsche, in his book,
The Antichrist, claimed Pilate’s question was the high-point (and the undoing) of the whole New Testament. He too imagined it had gone unanswered, a hole left waiting to be filled. I wouldn’t recommend it to everyone, but it’s certainly a powerful illustration of how someone can read God’s Word and see nothing at all. (“Godless”—if you’re reading this and contemplating a trip to the bookstore, you’ll want to get H.L. Mencken’s translation to maximize the Nietzsche experience, at least in English. My only ask is that afterwards you open up a thread and give us a report.)
;0)
Back to the thread—AnthonyB makes an interesting observation in his reply to you (post 22), his “impression.” Do you think his observation is accurate?
--Erik