There’s always a tension between ancient precepts and new revelation. I would argue that truth is at their intersection.
Why is it that people still refer to sources that many consider to be outdated and in some cases cryptic (ie. The Bible, works by ancient philosophers such as Aristotle or Plato, ancient works such as The Iliad or The Odyssey, and more recently even The Constitution)? Why is it that every generation seems to question traditional knowledge and why is it that ancient principles have tended to prevail over those generations, despite what seasonal changes might have been made over various periods of history?
There have always been discussions about the existence of God, of personal and collective purpose, freedom and slavery, about property ownership, possession of arms, about homosexuality, abortion, gender roles, morality, mortality. Why are they always in contention?
Why is it that people and generations cling to the folly of running to the shelter of old understandings and refuse to listen to new revelation? Why is it that others run into the opposite and perhaps equal folly of forsaking time-tested wisdom and believe (wrongly in my opinion if we study history) that they can eliminate old principles and replace them with a more “modern” agenda seemingly more suitable to the times?
Why is it that so many people are only able to see the surface while others are capable of seeing the depths? How is it that people see and hear but don’t perceive? Why does the Truth — which is always attacked from both sides of the coin — seem to be so elusive?
There are many answers (certainly I don’t have them all), but I explore to answer in this way: the truth — fiercely debated, always unchanging — is given to some and not to others, is open to all but possessed by few. It is not something one is taught but awakened into.
Truth is a road. The road is narrow. Few find it.