The short answer is yes. The long answer is yes. Peter Kreeft uses a great way to describe why truth is important.
Kreeft asks his audience if anyone believes in Santa Claus; no one does. Kreeft reasons that believing in Santa Claus is a positive thing. He argues that people who believe in Santa Claus are more moral (remember as a child how well behaved you were during the month of December because you wanted to make sure that Santa came to your house) and generally they are very happy; almost bursting at the seems with excitement especially on Christmas Eve night. So if you were more moral and a happier person, why don't you believe in Santa Claus now? Simple. He isn't real. Truth trumps everything.
For the sake of this argument, two presumptions will be made. 1) Jesus Christ is divine/God 2) the Bible is the inspired (God-breathed) Word of God. It is inerrant and is does not contradict itself. Another way to describe inerrantness of the bible is to say that it is infallible; it is without error. These presumptions are being made since most Christians, believe this to be true. The infallibility of the bible and the divinity of Jesus Christ are not under scrutiny here, these topics will be the subject of many other posts.
Truth matters for all people, but for the bible believing Christian, it takes an entirely more profound meaning. Jesus Christ Himself claims to be the Truth (Jn 14:6). This claim means that for Christians who believe in the doctrine of the Trinity, they worship the Truth in a very real way. This should be argument enough for Christians to seek the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. But some will argue that this idea is a just a metaphor. They may argue that Jesus also calls Himself the door and the vine, this doesn't mean that we worship doors or vineyards.
The "just metaphor" argument falls flat when considering the immediate context of Christ's words. Immediately after describing himself as the truth, Jesus says that "no one can come to the Father except through me." By using this terminology, Christ is teaching that in order to get to Heaven, in order to be saved, in order to come to Father; we need the truth. Jesus is the way, He is the truth, and by following the way and the truth we receive life; eternal life.
The Scriptures also teach us that the "truth shall set us free." (Jn 8:32) When Jesus teaches this, those listening disagree with him. They claim not be be slaves by virtue of their being descendants of Abraham. Jesus immediately changes the context and says, "every one who commits sin is a slave to sin."(Jn 8:34) One who disagrees with Christ when He says this, should speak to someone who suffers or has suffered from alcoholism, drug abuse, pornography, or any other type of addiction. Sin is addictive. When we commit it, we become enslaved it. The first lie is always the hardest to tell. The subsequent lies which are told in defense of the original lie become much easier and even necessary to tell. Soon it spirals out of control, and finally the truth is revealed. So it is with sin. We become enslaved to it. It controls us. It becomes difficult not to partake in it.
Jesus teaches that the Truth sets us free from sin. Authentic freedom subsides in the Truth. The Truth is what we need to come to the Father, to be saved, to have eternal life. The Scriptures go so far as to say that the only reason why Jesus was even born, was not to die on the cross for our sins, but rather, to bear witness to the Truth (Jn 18:37). It was because Jesus was completely obedient to the Truth, that He was crucified. In Jesus, Truth was completely obedient to Himself. As one of His disciples the same is expected of all Christians.
From a doctrinal perspective it becomes increasingly more important to know the Truth. Simply stated doctrine is the Truth(s) of our faith. They are God Himself. When Christians disagree on doctrine, what we are essentially saying is that we disagree with what the Truth is. But we know from Scripture that the Truth is necessary for salvation (Jn 14:6) and to be set free from sin (Jn 8:32).
The conclusion is simple. Truth is not something that we Christians can bend to our own will or our own understanding. Truth is not an idea, it's a person. And His name is Jesus Christ! All Christian dialogue therefore, must center around one principal idea, What is the Truth? The concept of who is right and who is wrong has no place in Christian thought or dialogue.
But the current situation in Christianity today is that we have over 30,000+ different Christian denominations who all teach different doctrine. Said a different way, Christianity espouses 30,000+ different versions of the Truth. But there is only one Truth; Jesus. Jesus says in the Scriptures in order for the world to believe in Him, there must be perfect unity of His disciples just as He is perfectly united to the Father (Jn 17:20-23). And how are the Father and the Son united? In Truth and in love. If we need the Truth to be saved, to have eternal life, in a world that espouses so many different versions of the Truth and there can only be one Truth by the very nature of the Truth, then it begs the question...
Where do we find the Truth?
Tuesday, April 8, 2008
Sunday, April 6, 2008
Do Christians Care About Truth?
The purpose of this blog is very simple. People everywhere are willing to argue that their opinions are correct. This is true in all walks of life. But for Christians, who is right and who is wrong has very little to do with what is the truth and what is not.
Jesus said that He was the Truth (John 14:6). Doctrines (Baptism, Trinity, etc) are nothing less than the Truth of Jesus Christ revealed to humankind. This is very troubling for the current state of Christianity today. Whenever Christians disagree on doctrine, there can be only two possibilities regarding their positions as they relate to the Truth.
1) Among Christians who disagree on doctrine, only one of their doctrines can be the complete Truth at any given time. Something which is "A" cannot be "not A" at the same time. Something which is the "Truth", cannot be "not Truth" at the same time. The opposite of the Truth is a lie. Therefore, when Christians disagree on doctrine, all but one of the positions, by its very dissenting position, must be error.
2) Unfortunately for Christians who disagree on doctrine, it is plausible that neither of them has the complete Truth. With over 30,000+ different denominations in Christianity just in the United States alone, and the possibility of complete Truth to exist in only one of those denominations, it is in fact highly probable that in disagreements among Christians on doctrine that both/all of them are in error at some point in the discussion.
We as Christians should be very humbled by this understanding that so many of us, at least some of the time, are in error in our beliefs. This should frame the discussion that occurs on this blog in a very simplistic way. Disagreements among Christians are profitable if the discussion is framed around the question, "What is the Truth?" as opposed to "Who is right and who is wrong?" The current state of Christianity today presupposes that many of us, if not all of us, divided as we are, do not believe the complete Truth on any particular doctrine.
This understanding necessarily begs the question, is half or partial Truth a problem? Is it not better for us as Christians to have partial Truth than to be in complete error? While this statement may be reassuring to those who would rather not seek out the fullness of Truth, this position assumes that the complete Truth, again which is Jesus Christ Himself, is an unattainable destination, therefore we shouldn't attempt to travel there. To be disciples of Christ, we need to follow the complete Truth. In order to understand the serious consequences of half/partial truths, a quick reflection on Genesis would be in order.
In order for a lie to be accepted by someone, it must be presented as the Truth. No one of sound mind and reason knows a lie to be a lie and still believes the lie with his whole hearth, mind, body, and soul. Let's look at the serpent's words in Genesis 3. "Did God say, 'you shall not eat of any tree in the garden?'" (Gen 3:1) The serpent immediately challenges God's rule to not eat of the tree, all the while framing the question in context to not make it assume that he is challenging it in the least. When Eve informs the serpent that God says they can't eat from or even touch the tree in the middle of the garden lest they die, the serpent responds, "You will not die. God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil."
Two questions need to be asked here. Does the serpent tell any lies in these passages? Is what the serpent said the Truth? The serpent here does not lie. He frames his position clearly and cleverly by presenting half-truths. When he says by eating the tree, they will not die, a meteor or bolt of lightning will not come down and kill them instantly. He is correct. And he does not lie by saying that if they eat of the tree they will have the knowledge of good and evil. After all, by eating of the tree, they would be inventing evil themselves. Before eating of the tree, there is no evil in the world to have knowledge about.
If the serpent doesn't lie, does that mean he necessarily is telling the Truth? Absolutely not! The genius of the serpent is to present a lie in a way in which it could presented as the Truth. Adam and Eve would have lived forever on this earth, if they had never eaten of the tree in the first place. When sin entered the world, their bodies were condemned to die. But they didn't "die" at the moment they ate of the tree, just as the serpent said. One could call what the serpent proposed to Eve as a half or partial truth. To Adam and Eve, the truth was they would not be killed and would increase their knowledge. This was "true" in a sense. But objectively it was far from the Truth. Their bodies did die, and sin (the knowledge of evil) fractured their relationship with God, each other, and nature.
Partial or half truths can lead us to one of two possibilities, as demonstrated by the Genesis account. Either they can help lead us to the fullness of Truth which is Jesus Christ, or they can lead us to draw false conclusions which obscure us from God (the Truth).
This leads us to the following question which is the primary question in all of Christian Theology, especially as it pertains to ecumenism. Is Truth Important?
Jesus said that He was the Truth (John 14:6). Doctrines (Baptism, Trinity, etc) are nothing less than the Truth of Jesus Christ revealed to humankind. This is very troubling for the current state of Christianity today. Whenever Christians disagree on doctrine, there can be only two possibilities regarding their positions as they relate to the Truth.
1) Among Christians who disagree on doctrine, only one of their doctrines can be the complete Truth at any given time. Something which is "A" cannot be "not A" at the same time. Something which is the "Truth", cannot be "not Truth" at the same time. The opposite of the Truth is a lie. Therefore, when Christians disagree on doctrine, all but one of the positions, by its very dissenting position, must be error.
2) Unfortunately for Christians who disagree on doctrine, it is plausible that neither of them has the complete Truth. With over 30,000+ different denominations in Christianity just in the United States alone, and the possibility of complete Truth to exist in only one of those denominations, it is in fact highly probable that in disagreements among Christians on doctrine that both/all of them are in error at some point in the discussion.
We as Christians should be very humbled by this understanding that so many of us, at least some of the time, are in error in our beliefs. This should frame the discussion that occurs on this blog in a very simplistic way. Disagreements among Christians are profitable if the discussion is framed around the question, "What is the Truth?" as opposed to "Who is right and who is wrong?" The current state of Christianity today presupposes that many of us, if not all of us, divided as we are, do not believe the complete Truth on any particular doctrine.
This understanding necessarily begs the question, is half or partial Truth a problem? Is it not better for us as Christians to have partial Truth than to be in complete error? While this statement may be reassuring to those who would rather not seek out the fullness of Truth, this position assumes that the complete Truth, again which is Jesus Christ Himself, is an unattainable destination, therefore we shouldn't attempt to travel there. To be disciples of Christ, we need to follow the complete Truth. In order to understand the serious consequences of half/partial truths, a quick reflection on Genesis would be in order.
In order for a lie to be accepted by someone, it must be presented as the Truth. No one of sound mind and reason knows a lie to be a lie and still believes the lie with his whole hearth, mind, body, and soul. Let's look at the serpent's words in Genesis 3. "Did God say, 'you shall not eat of any tree in the garden?'" (Gen 3:1) The serpent immediately challenges God's rule to not eat of the tree, all the while framing the question in context to not make it assume that he is challenging it in the least. When Eve informs the serpent that God says they can't eat from or even touch the tree in the middle of the garden lest they die, the serpent responds, "You will not die. God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil."
Two questions need to be asked here. Does the serpent tell any lies in these passages? Is what the serpent said the Truth? The serpent here does not lie. He frames his position clearly and cleverly by presenting half-truths. When he says by eating the tree, they will not die, a meteor or bolt of lightning will not come down and kill them instantly. He is correct. And he does not lie by saying that if they eat of the tree they will have the knowledge of good and evil. After all, by eating of the tree, they would be inventing evil themselves. Before eating of the tree, there is no evil in the world to have knowledge about.
If the serpent doesn't lie, does that mean he necessarily is telling the Truth? Absolutely not! The genius of the serpent is to present a lie in a way in which it could presented as the Truth. Adam and Eve would have lived forever on this earth, if they had never eaten of the tree in the first place. When sin entered the world, their bodies were condemned to die. But they didn't "die" at the moment they ate of the tree, just as the serpent said. One could call what the serpent proposed to Eve as a half or partial truth. To Adam and Eve, the truth was they would not be killed and would increase their knowledge. This was "true" in a sense. But objectively it was far from the Truth. Their bodies did die, and sin (the knowledge of evil) fractured their relationship with God, each other, and nature.
Partial or half truths can lead us to one of two possibilities, as demonstrated by the Genesis account. Either they can help lead us to the fullness of Truth which is Jesus Christ, or they can lead us to draw false conclusions which obscure us from God (the Truth).
This leads us to the following question which is the primary question in all of Christian Theology, especially as it pertains to ecumenism. Is Truth Important?
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)