What is truth?
The question is likely as old as the first philosopher. It is certainly as fresh as this week’s headlines. It is the question Pilate asked Jesus before consulting with the crowd and ordering his crucifixion.
And, in one form or another, it is a question that will be on the hearts and minds of commissioners who gather in Long Beach for the upcoming General Assembly.
Philosophical truth
“What is truth?” is a hardy philosophical perennial. Philosophers used to answer that truth is “conformity of thought and thing.” But recent discussions have emphasized a “postmodern” understanding, which one proponent summarizes as “the truth is that there is no truth.”
While difficult to precisely define, postmodernism broadly claims that there is no privileged position from which true and false may be universally determined, no solid rock on which to stand and declare that some beliefs and practices (for example, monotheism and monogamy) are right while others (for example, praying to multiple deities and engaging in sex outside the covenant of marriage) are wrong. Truth, in the postmodern view, is absolutely relative, eternally a matter of shifting personal preference and perspective.
Not surprisingly, some critics have pointed out that such a universal claim can only be made from the privileged position that postmodernism says does not exist. Others have noted that, far from being postmodern, this relativistic approach to truth dates back to at least the fifth century B.C., when Protagoras declared, “Man is the measure of all things.” As his younger contemporary Plato understood, this means that each individual is the ultimate judge of truth, therefore whatever anyone thinks is true is true.
Religious truth
The “everything’s relative” view of truth is not confined to postmodern philosophy. Current religious discussions of truth tend to deify the doctrine of pluralism, the belief that all religious beliefs are true. Religious pluralism teaches that despite superficial differences in terminology, Christianity and Buddhism, Islam and New Age, animism and pantheism all have the same object of worship, result in “salvation” for their followers, and therefore are equally “true.”
Obviously, religious pluralism is contradicted by the clear and consistent testimony of Scripture and historic Christian teaching. Study papers that deny Jesus’ teaching “No one comes to the Father except through me” (John 14:6) and ministers who equate evangelism with hate crimes testify to the unmistakable presence of pluralistic ideology in Presbyterian officialdom.
General Assembly Annual meetings of General Assembly weigh a variety of ‘truth’ claims.
However, a less visible, thus potentially more dangerous, attempt to make pluralism palatable to orthodox Christians is the insistence that pluralism be redefined as tolerance. In fact, by definition a pluralist cannot be tolerant.
A pluralist says, “I agree that your beliefs are true because of my belief that all beliefs are equally true.” A tolerant person says, “You and I disagree because I realize that if your beliefs are true, mine must be false. Yet I am willing to listen carefully to what you have to say, not because it is true, but because God calls and enables me to love you.” Tolerance requires genuine, substantive disagreement. By insisting that all religious beliefs are equally true, religious pluralism eliminates disagreement, thereby eliminating the possibility of tolerance.
Religious pluralism often claims that if religious truth can be determined at all it can only be reached through dialogue between those who hold opposing positions. However, pluralism’s nonnegotiable prior commitment to the truth of its own presupposition refutes the very claim it intends to support. Indeed, as Norman Geisler observes, “the call to dialogue is usually a disingenuous attempt at evan-gelism on behalf of the worldview of those calling for the dialogue.”
Although in our society (and often in our churches) the virulent enforcement of political correctness can paralyze our ability to engage in critical thinking and make valid distinctions, Christians must not allow themselves to be bullied into dialogues that equate pluralism with tolerance. Tolerance, the willingness to love and live with those who hold other opinions, is truly a virtue. Pluralism ultimately empties the word “truth” of all meaning.
Biblical truth
If we remain unsatisfied by postmodern philosophy teaching us that nothing is true, and if we find equally unsatisfying the pluralist perspective that everything is true, where can Christians look for an answer to the question “What is truth?” To the written Word of God, the Bible.
In the Old Testament, the Hebrew word most often translated “truth” comes from a root that conveys certainty and dependability. Every time this word is used it relates to God. As one author defines it, “Truth is that firm conformity to reality that proves to be wholly reliable, so that those who accept a statement may depend on it that it will not turn out to be false or deceitful.” The Old Testament authors uniformly recognize that there is no truth outside of God, that all truth comes from God, and that truth is true because it comes from God.
In the New Testament, the Greek word translated “truth” has the basic meaning of “non-concealment.” It describes what is uncovered or unveiled, that which comes to be known. Like its Hebrew equivalent, this word connotes that which has certainty. It is used to convey sincerity, honesty, and judicial righteousness and to describe the authoritative quality of Christian teaching or faith.
But throughout the New Testament, the primary emphasis is on truth as conformity to reality and as opposition to lies or errors. Moreover, truth is not simply an intellectual admission; it involves far more than mere conformity to fact. Truth is a pattern of living that conforms to the revealed will of God.
Finally, the full scope of the Biblical understanding of truth is most clearly focused in Jesus’ proclamation, “I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me” (John 14:6).
What is truth?
Standing face to face with Jesus, Pilate asked him, “What is truth?” Pilate’s problem was not that he asked the question. Indeed, he asked the right person exactly the right question. Pilate’s failing was his egotistical refusal to listen for the answer.
Similarly, the failure of postmodern philosophy and religious pluralism is not in asking “What is truth?” Rather it is in denying the possibility that universal truth does exist, that this truth can be known, and that it is determined by God, not human reason or experience.
From the Bible we learn that truth is not mere personal opinion. The Bible teaches that the answer to the church’s question, the philosopher’s question, Pilate’s question, “What is truth?” is Jesus Christ, the incarnate Son of God, who declared, “I am ... the truth.”