"The truth shall set you free" (cf. John 8:32) is the kind of sentence that potentially transcends any contextual setting. As we know only too well, it has been used over and over again in religious propaganda and is very easy to return against it (i.e. "the truth about the 'truth' shall set you free" -- from it).
But when you think of it, it is a rather problematic assertion. In principle, "truth" of any kind (including true and false!) first demands recognition,submission and conformity. It is, as we use to say, compelling. In a sense, that is the very opposite of freedom. Of course a "truth" can make you free from a previously held "truth" by disproving it, i.e. by moving it from the status of "truth" to that of "lie" or "error". But if you get free from that so-called "truth" because it is not the truth, you logically remain subject to truth in general -- and, in particular, to the new religious, scientific or philosophical doctrine which you now consider to be "truth" -- no matter how broad and practically unconsequential it may be.
In the Prologue of Zarathustra, Friedrich Nietzsche likens the three "ages" of man to that of the camel, the lion and the child. First the camel kneels down to be loaded with as much burden it can carry -- especially truths of every kind, including the most disagreeable and painful ones; then, the lion rejects every burden and roars alone in the wilderness; against any compelling truth, its motto is "I will"; last, the child comes up and plays, both with "truth" and "will". This at last looks like freedom, neither obedience to truth nor sheer revolt against it.
So there may be a relationship between "truth" and "freedom" but it is probably not as simple and immediate as we can think. Truth may contribute to freedom, depending on how we relate to it.
Any thoughts?