By qualification, whatsoever is more . . . as in the realm of "embellishment," or less . . . as in the realm of "brevity," constitutes a perversion of truth. In fact, in a court of law in following the "law of witnesses," the oath is taken to "tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth . . . ." This being the case, there is an inherent problem which deserves some consideration.Doctrine and Covenants 93:
24 And truth is knowledge of things as they are, and as they were, and as they are to come;
25 And whatsoever is more or less than this is the spirit of that wicked one who was a liar from the beginning.
In this life all we will truly know is our own consciousness. That being said, truth; therefore, becomes "relative." It is what we perceive it to be. Following the definition of truth, our "relative" reality consists of our senses to ascertain a knowledge of things as they are, memory to retain a knowledge of things as they were and imagination; inductive logic to project things as they are to come. Hence, we have the ability to pull onto the stage of our consciousness, the past, present and future. These "conscious" events are of two types: thoughts and feelings; of the mind and of the heart; intellect and emotion. Generally the subject matter will be "ourselves, others, things, or ideas."
I am unable to speak about "truth" without using the term "reality." To me, they are synonyms. "Perception is reality." How many times have we heard this? It has been shown that through "brainwashing, hypnotism, and other means," our perceptions - be they memories, senses, creativity / imaginings can be altered. In fact, there have been many excursions into altered conscious states for various reasons, for example: Timothy Leery, Jose Castenada, channeling, The Urantia Book, etc. Which things I, personally, do not recommend. All of this illustrates that we are all subject to deception, fallibility, and delusion.
We can comprehend that truth is "relative," but it is important, just a well, to realize that truth is, also, "absolute." It is "absolute" in the sense that we all live in a "shared reality." It is for this reason that we are able to communicate using "symbolic" constructs and "uttered" phonemes. However, this, too, is subject to "evolution" over time. What was "hot," yesterday, is now, "cool." Language is being altered over time, as illustrated, with the introduction of new technologies, slang, and culture. It is a wonder that we are able to comprehend one another, at all. It borders on "miraculous" to say the least.
"Relative Truth" is what happens on the "inside." "Absolute Truth" is what happens on the "outside." Because of our "differences," two people can witness an "Absolute Truth" and come away with different "Relative Truths" without entirely agreeing about what transpired. Hence, we have "cutesy" stories about the different perspectives of people who experience different parts of an elephant without realizing that it is the same entity, not being able to come to an agreement or consensus on what reality is.
This constitutes an introduction to a dilemma that we all face in discerning truth from error. There are some things that need to be addressed, even in our most basic understanding of the past. Things may not be as they seem . . . some things we have by way of "tradition" that are more "relative" than "absolute;" that have been altered over time. In our "mutual" examination, lets look at some "scriptural" evidence to warrant a tenable change of perspective.