In two entries last week I made a great deal about the rejection of absolute truth (and justifiably so I would argue). By showing two inevitable and detrimental consequences of dismissing objective truth, I hope you are convinced that much is at stake in these conversations.

Convinced that absolute truth is important for life, we turn to the next important question: how can we know what is true?

How can we know truth?

While the first question is important, the greatest danger related to the contemporary discussions about truth springs from this question. The rejection of a fixed reality stands in opposition to orthodox Christianity, but at least it generally comes at us from the outside. The misguided answers to this second question can come from people claiming to hold orthodox Christian views.

There are many answers to this question, but three responses are broad enough to include most and narrow enough to help us.

First, some argue that we know truth through certainty. A person can arrive at objective reality when he/she proves something is true. A person, therefore, uses reason or science to know truth. To use a popular debate as an example, a person might know whether abortion is right or wrong on the basis of scientific discovery.

Second, others contend that we know truth through community. A person can arrive at objective reality when he/she constructs it as part of a larger group of people. A person, therefore, uses a discussion among other believers (and some might say the Holy Spirit) to know truth. Again, to use a popular debate as an example, a person might know whether abortion is right or wrong on the basis of a group’s evaluation of its cost to or value for the people involved.

Third, I would argue that we know truth through revelation. A person can arrive at objective reality when God reveals it to him/her. God exists outside our reality and has knowledge of all things. Therefore, a person must rely on God’s self-revelation to know Him. This person must also rely on His general and special revelation to know all objective reality. Again, to use a popular debate as an example, a person can know whether abortion is right or wrong on the basis of what God has revealed.

So, to this question we would answer with the third option. However, much more needs to be said so next time I’ll provide the basis for this view and argue for it.

A couple of days ago I introduced a conversation about truth. In an effort to keep each entry to a reasonable size, I only began explaining why we must talk and think about ‘truth.’ So I return today to complete my explanation.

Again, please don’t lose sight of our goal with this series… “I want to challenge you to consider your beliefs regarding seven topics because they provide a foundation for your understanding of Christianity and the Church.”

Again… Why so much fuss about truth?

Remember, the redefinition of truth is a great challenge. If we embrace truth as a moveable concept that every culture or society must create, truth becomes dependent upon us. It is a product of our thoughts or ideals. Thus, no ‘truth’ is absolute or objective because all ‘truth’ is based on a circumstance or situation and is always up for interpretation. Hence, we’re left with the contention that something might be ‘true’ for me, but not ‘true’ for someone else. This worldview, however, carries radical and far-reaching consequences. I mentioned one last time and I’ll mention another today.

Relative truth creates an inconsistent worldview that leads to chaos. If ‘truth’ is up for grabs in every situation, then inevitably different people will grab it differently in remarkably similar situations. Thus, relative truth is moving target. It is here one moment and over there the next. And when ‘truth’ becomes a moving target, it won’t take long for chaos to reign.

Again thanks to Curt for reminding me of the example of downloading copyrighted music without paying for it. Many people are willing to ‘steal’ music, but try to steal from their bank account and they’ll call the police. Before you dismiss this example as proof that even thieves don’t want to be victims, understand that the issue is much larger. The real problem is that music thieves don’t think they’re stealing.

How could they miss that taking without permission is stealing? How could so many people arrive at such a widely-accepted and logically inconsistent reality?

The answer is most simple. ‘Truth’ is now a community-defined reality and not a fixed point. If the masses decided that music companies are making too much money and music should be cheaper, then it’s acceptable to steal it when you get the chance. What would ordinarily be theft is merely ‘working the system’ to level the playing field. The ‘truth’ about stealing is no longer a fixed point (i.e. taking what is not yours without permission); instead, the ‘truth’ about stealing is a moving target depending on a variety of circumstances.

And we’ve returned to the irrationality of relative truth, but we don’t stop here. Rather than ‘redefining’ theft and claiming a new ‘fixed’ reality, our culture is committed to leaving the options open. So we want our cake of protection from certain forms of thievery while we eat the cake of other forms of thievery. The dismissal of an objective reality which helps us navigate the right and wrong of theft in favor of a subjective reality that considers the circumstances produces chaos of theft as a moving target.

Before you think this issue is only important for seemingly-insignificant ideas like copyrighted music, the bounds of this ideology knows no limits. If ‘truth’ is not a fixed reality, who can say definitively that the murder of millions of Jews is wrong or evil? All we can say is that our community (or culture) would prefer it not to happen. You see, the consequences of relative truth are deadly.

Therefore, we must care about how our culture defines and determines ‘truth’ because when relative truth leads the way, irrationality and chaos are sure to follow.

Having established what’s at stake in the conversation about truth, next time we’ll return to begin a conversation about absolute truth and how we can know it?

A few days ago I introduced a book that deals with seven important topics promising to address each of them in turn. I return to the first of these topics – truth – to frame the discussion a bit for you. In an effort to keep each entry to a reasonable size, I will only attempt to begin explaining why we’re having this discussion in the first place today.

Also, please don’t lose sight of our goal with this series and with what will be several entries about truth… “I want to challenge you to consider your beliefs regarding seven topics (beginning with ‘truth’) because they provide a foundation for your understanding of Christianity and the Church.”

Why so much fuss about truth?

You might not be aware of it, but more than a little controversy exists in our culture concerning truth. In fact, some people today reject any sort of knowable or objective[i] truth. They claim that either there is no objective reality or if there is we cannot know it. For them nothing is ‘true’ all the time in every situation. A ‘truth’ is a commonly agreed-upon idea or concept in a particular community or circumstance, but not a fixed reality.

This redefinition of truth is a great challenge. If we embrace truth as a moveable concept that every culture or society must create, truth becomes dependent upon us. It is a product of our thoughts or ideals. Thus, no ‘truth’ is absolute or objective because all ‘truth’ is based on a circumstance or situation and is always up for interpretation. Hence, we’re left with the contention that something might be ‘true’ for me, but not ‘true’ for someone else. This worldview, however, carries radical and far-reaching consequences. I’ll mention one today and one next time.

On the one hand, relative truth leads to irrational conclusions. Consider a very practical issue to draw this view to its radical, far-reaching conclusion: the value of human life. Is human life valuable? Is it more valuable than animal life? Are some human lives more valuable than others? Are ‘healthy’ human lives more valuable than ‘sick’ human lives? Who decides which lives are more or less valuable?

If you reject the notion of a fixed reality concerning the value to human life, then the culture (or the persons who hold powerful positions in culture) must answer these questions. As my friend Curt pointed out to me this week, this situation produces all sorts of twisted, irrational decisions. For example, why can you legally destroy the life of an unborn child, but face jail time if you tamper with the eggs of a bald eagle?

The answer is most simple. Our culture values the life of an unborn bald eagle more than the life of an unborn human. How could a culture arrive at such an illogical conclusion?

Again, the answer is most simple. We have eliminated objective reality in favor of community-defined ‘truth.’ And in this example (as in countless others), community-defined ‘truth’ fails to arrive at a rational conclusion much less true truth.[ii]

---

[i] [I use the word 'objective' a number of times in this entry so it serves us to understand what I mean by it. The word 'objective' describes things that are independent and do not rely on other things like opinions or feelings to find their meaning. A properly-worded true-false question is objective because it has only one 'correct' answer and does not require interpretation. An essay question, however, is not objective because the 'correct' answer is open to interpretation that is based on the mood and opinion of a person. So when I say 'objective' truth, I refer to a reality that is fixed and not dependent on the interpretation of a person.]

[ii] The final entry about truth will outline the biblical perspective and I’ll expound on the idea of ‘true truth.’

Yet another reason to make ‘knowing God’ the pursuit of your life…

“Once you become aware that the main business that you are here for is to know God, most of life’s problems fall into place of their own accord. . . . What makes life worthwhile is having a big enough objective, something which catches our imagination and lays hold of our allegiance; and this the Christian has in a way that no other person has.”

J.I. Packer, Knowing God, 34

What “catches [y]our imagination and lays hold of [y]our allegiance”? What (or who) stars in your daydreams? What (or who) captures your thoughts as you lie awake at night? What is the big objective of your life?

A few weeks ago I introduced the topic of loving God with our minds. A few days ago I provided an illustration of this alarming trend and today I offer another. Again, what I’m describing below is a characteristic of life that reveals a deficiency in our commitment to loving God with our mental faculties.

Believers don’t think deeply about God and His truth. I’m not addressing mindless participation in corporate worship or daydreaming during a sermon (even though both are troubling to me). By ‘think’ here, I’m referring to the practice of pondering a biblical truth and its value in private. I’m referring to the act of rolling a truth over and over in the mind and considering what it means for our lives.

In terms of this issue, we might divide most people into two categories: people who try not to think at all and people who think about other things.

I have met people who can spend mass quantities of time thinking about ‘nothing.’ They can ‘zone out’ in a moment. While resting the brain can be an important activity at times, for some believers it’s time to wake the sleeping giant of the mind.

Other people fit into this category because they constantly distract their minds. Like perhaps no other generation in history, we find entertainment for every second of the day with our televisions and radios and ipods and cell phones.

Still others think about all kinds of things all the time. They wonder and fret and ponder, but they fail to consider God’s Word beyond an initial reading. They think the relatively meaningless concerns of life yet never ‘think’ about it. They never think about the ramifications of a biblical promise. They rarely ever allow a difficult passage to seep in and through their minds in any disciplined way. God’s Word barely makes a dent in our lives because it rarely blazes a trail in our minds.

Regardless of your particular brand of mental laziness (and don’t worry I have mine as well), I urge you to…

• Consider your commute to work, for example, – whether it’s 5 minutes or 50 minutes – and how you might use these moments to love God with your mind.
• Consider memorizing 1 verse of Scripture per month and thinking about it every morning for at least 15 minutes. (You’ll also be surprised how quickly you’ll memorize the Bible when you think on it daily.)
• Consider, when you encounter a promise in the Bible, committing to think about that promise for seven days while you do a mindless task (like brush your teeth).

A few days ago I introduced the topic of loving God with our minds. A few days later I described a primary cause of this growing problem. Today, I return to the issue providing an illustration this alarming trend.

Believers are poor readers. Again, our low reading level illustrates what we love (or don’t love) with our minds. This area of weakness stems from a number of decisions and habits that reveal a lack of commitment to loving God with our minds.

First, many believers do not read enough. A large number of believers do not read a single nonfiction book each year. While many will claim that busyness with work and children and commitments prevent more devotion to reading, almost all of us invest hours each week digesting television programming or enjoying our favorite hobby.

Second, believers who do read often select books poorly. Many of the believers who do read nonfiction books scarcely ever read anything more than how-to ‘Christian living’ books that resemble self-help pamphlets. In fact, a quick scan of the Christian Booksellers Associations Top 50 Best Sellers provides more than sufficient data to support this claim.

Third, not only do most of us read too infrequently, we also rarely read carefully. According to adult literacy research, most Americans struggle to comprehend what they read. In fact, the recent National Assessment of Adult Literacy (NAAL) revealed that 14% of adult Americans are functionally illiterate and only 13% can perform complex and challenging literacy activities. Still more troubling is the fact that among literate Christians, few are unable to detect when ‘Christian’ literature is either poorly-written or biblically-inaccurate. (I won’t mention specific authors by name here, but I’m really tempted.)

Thus, this lack of reading skill is due more to insufficient discipline in reading than intellectual ability. Consider, when was the last time you read a book in complete silence with a pen in hand to mark significant insights so you could review them later? Our struggle to digest the written word is directly related to our commitment to reading carefully. To quote J.P Moreland again, “The mind is like to a muscle. If it is not exercised regularly and strenuously, it loses some if it’s capacities and strengths.”[1]

The lack of commitment to sharpen our minds through reading reveals that we do not love God with our minds.

---

[1] J.P. Moreland, Love Your God with All Your Mind (NavPress: Colorado Springs, CO, 1997), 87.

Parents and children have experienced something of a role reversal during the last 50 years. Albert Mohler posted a thought-provoking article on his blog this week that provides an illustration of this change.

He writes, “Parents, who have been drinking deeply from the wells of contemporary secular parenting advice, have largely become passive facilitators in the lives of their children.”

From atop J.I. Packer’s shoulders once again, I submit that not many of us who know plenty about God actually know God very well. For the people who know God intimately “losses and ‘crosses’ cease to matter; what they have gained simply banishes these things from their minds.”[1]

Packer summarizes four characteristics of people who know God.[2]

1. “Those who know God have great energy for God.” When lethargy and apathy rule our spiritual lives and our churches, there can be little doubt that God is certainly not known. Where are the men and women who will stand and pray with undying zeal for the things that matter most to God?
2. “Those who know God have great thoughts of God.” When our thoughts about Him revolve around wondering if He will improve our lives, there can be little doubt that God is certainly not known. Where are the men and women who will daydream about God’s “high majesty and moral perfection and gracious faithfulness”?
3. “Those who know God show great boldness for God.” When fear and doubt shape our expressions of faith, there can be little doubt that God is certainly not known. Where are the men and women who will live fearlessly because they realize they’ve already died?
4. “Those who know God have great contentment in God.” When consumerism and materialism run rampant in the church, there can be little doubt that God is not known. Where are the men and women who will find their satisfaction in fellowship with God and stop searching for it at the mall or the office or the classroom or the athletic fields?

Like perhaps no other culture in history, we know plenty about God. We listen to songs about Him. We read books about Him (well, most of them are actually about us, but they talk about Him, too). We watch television shows about Him.

Yet, how many of us exhibit the characteristics of a person who knows God?

---

[1] J.I. Packer, Knowing God, 27.

[2] Ibid, 27-31.

John Huss was a preacher and scholar who became the rector (or leading administrator) at the University of Prague in 1402. From this esteemed position in what is now the Czech Republic, Huss called for reform in the church. Specifically, he advocated for a return to the biblical truth that forgiveness cannot be bought from the church but must be granted by God.

Even though his view was solidly biblical, the king and the pope (John XXIII) saw his teaching as a heretical threat on the established church. Thus, he was excommunicated and he withdrew to the country to continue writing about the need for change.

The church later called a meeting to discuss matters of theological importance. Emperor Sigismud invited Huss to attend the council to defend himself and offered him safety through royal protection.

Upon his arrival, Huss was taken before the pope and ordered to recant his heresy. When he refused, he was treated like a prisoner. The emperor, realizing what was happening, ordered his release. However, upon noticing that Huss’ cause was not popular and any help to him would look like support for a heretic, the emperor refused to provide the safety he had promised.

On June 5, 1415, Huss was brought before the council in chains and ordered to submit to the assembly by recanting his heresy. Knowing that any admission of guilt would involve denying biblical truth and convinced that he would not receive a fair trial, Huss declared….

“I appeal to Jesus Christ, the only judge who is almighty and completely just. In his hands I place my cause, since he will judge each, not on the basis of false witnesses and erring councils, but of truth and justice.”

Huss was taken back to prison and many people pled with him to recant. He would not.

On July 6, he was taken to the cathedral and dressed in priestly garments. In acts of humiliation they stripped him, shaved his head, and placed a paper crown decorated with demons on him. Then, they led him away, tied him to a stake, and gave him one final chance to recant. When he would not, they burned him.

Before they lit the fire he prayed aloud, “Lord Jesus, it is for thee that I patiently endure this cruel death. I pray thee to have mercy on my enemies.” As the flames engulfed him he was heard reciting the Psalms.

In societies where biblical truth is not valued, those men and women who cling to it have always faced persecution. We live in such a society. So don’t be surprised when our commitment to the Truth requires us to a pay an earthly price.

__________________________________________________________________________________________

*Again, I’m in debt to Justo L. Gonzalez’s fine work in The Story of Christianity, vol. 1, pp. 348-351.

A few days ago I introduced this topic and I return today to describe a primary cause of this growing problem.

This lack of love for God is evident in the fact that we don’t use our minds to glorify God. Furthermore, disobedience to this command appears mostly in the form of inactivity. It’s not so much that we are thinking about the wrongs things or in ways that fail to honor God; it’s that we are not thinking at all!

“The mind is like to a muscle. If it is not exercised regularly and strenuously, it loses some if it’s capacities and strengths.”[1] In other words, our mental laziness is the primary indicator that we don’t love God with our minds.

In Moreland’s book, he describes a growing worldview (or “set of values, motives, and habits”) that is perverting and eliminating the role of the mind in modern American culture. This “empty self” drives people to think, feel, and act in ways that lead inevitably to intellectual shallowness.

The empty self exhibits 7 characteristics.[2]

1. “The empty self is inordinately individualistic.” This person lives isolated from others with little need or responsibility to live for the concerns of the broader community.
2. “The empty self is infantile.” This person is controlled by childish cravings and seeks fulfillment through food, entertainment, and consumer goods.
3. “The empty self is narcissistic.” This person has an inordinate and exclusive sense of self-infatuation.
4. “The empty self is passive.” This person can be described as a couch potato who lets other people do his living and thinking for him.
5. “The empty self is sensate.” This person believes only in the reality of the physical universe and decisions are no longer based on abstract reasoning. If something can’t be seen, felt, heard, tasted, or smelled, it must not be real.
6. “The empty self has lost the art of developing an interior life.” While a person used to be described by internal traits of virtue and morality, he is now defined in terms of external factors.
7. “The empty self is hurried and busy.” This person uses the distraction of busy-ness to mask his emptiness and pain.

“The empty self is the enemy of the Christian mind.”[3] Clearly the individualistic, infantile, narcissistic, passive, sensate, external, and busy person will not cultivate his mind in any meaningful way that will glorify God.

Do you exhibit the characteristics of the ‘empty self?’

---

[1] J.P. Moreland, Love Your God with All Your Mind (NavPress: Colorado Springs, CO, 1997), 87.

[2] This list and the descriptions are taken exclusively from Moreland, 88-92.

[3] Moreland, 93.