Sanctify
them by the truth; your word is truth. As you sent me into the world, I have
sent them into the world. For them I sanctify myself, that they too may be
truly sanctified (John
17:17-19)
Here
we go again. Jesus claimed to be the Way, the Truth, and the Life, and that no
one came to the Father, but by Him. Here he’s claiming that God’s Word is
Truth. In a matter of hours, He will tell Pilate that He came to testify the Truth,
Truth seems to be an important concept in Scripture.
So, with Pilate, let’s ask an important question, but let’s remove his jaded attitude: What is truth. There are three basic views. The first is the objective view, independent of the mind of the knower, and there to be discovered. The second, the moderate relativistic view, is that truth is as each person sees it, according to his/her perspective and interpretation. The third is the radically relativistic, or post-modern view, that truth is something that we create for ourselves.
Let us consider a car accident, with two people in the cars involved, and three witnesses standing nearby: a paramedic who is a mother, her 10 year old son who loves cars, and a UPS driver who is studying philosophy. The police interview each. Each driver is concerned with his/her role in the accident, understandably. The paramedic is concerned mostly with the aspects of the collision involving the physical well-being of the drivers. Her son is excited about the CRASH and the noise. But what are the police to make of the UPS driver, who declares that there was no accident and therefore no reason to make him late in reaching his destination? What do the police do with all this information?
First off, the police would reject the UPS driver’s testimony. He is not free to create his own reality. (If there was no accident, why was he stuck there, being interviewed by the police?) What of the testimony of the other witnesses and victims. Their stories may vary widely, but the police are only likely to develop an attitude with the UPS driver. They’ll accept the other witnesses’ testimonies. They might bring technical folks out, take photographs, etc. Then they’ll get to work on figuring out, based on the evidence and the truth from the perspectives of the witnesses, what they think really happened. When they’re done, they are closer to the truth of what happened than any of the individual witnesses.
Some people would conclude that because of this, we cannot dismiss as false the claims of any religion, since they are all witnesses of reality. To an extent, they’re right. Most religions are similar in that they present a way of looking at reality that usually includes some basic ideas about how man relates to the Creator and the creation (even in their possible claim that there is none,) and some guidelines on how to relate to one another. There are also ways in which those religions differ greatly.
So, with Pilate, let’s ask an important question, but let’s remove his jaded attitude: What is truth. There are three basic views. The first is the objective view, independent of the mind of the knower, and there to be discovered. The second, the moderate relativistic view, is that truth is as each person sees it, according to his/her perspective and interpretation. The third is the radically relativistic, or post-modern view, that truth is something that we create for ourselves.
Let us consider a car accident, with two people in the cars involved, and three witnesses standing nearby: a paramedic who is a mother, her 10 year old son who loves cars, and a UPS driver who is studying philosophy. The police interview each. Each driver is concerned with his/her role in the accident, understandably. The paramedic is concerned mostly with the aspects of the collision involving the physical well-being of the drivers. Her son is excited about the CRASH and the noise. But what are the police to make of the UPS driver, who declares that there was no accident and therefore no reason to make him late in reaching his destination? What do the police do with all this information?
First off, the police would reject the UPS driver’s testimony. He is not free to create his own reality. (If there was no accident, why was he stuck there, being interviewed by the police?) What of the testimony of the other witnesses and victims. Their stories may vary widely, but the police are only likely to develop an attitude with the UPS driver. They’ll accept the other witnesses’ testimonies. They might bring technical folks out, take photographs, etc. Then they’ll get to work on figuring out, based on the evidence and the truth from the perspectives of the witnesses, what they think really happened. When they’re done, they are closer to the truth of what happened than any of the individual witnesses.
Some people would conclude that because of this, we cannot dismiss as false the claims of any religion, since they are all witnesses of reality. To an extent, they’re right. Most religions are similar in that they present a way of looking at reality that usually includes some basic ideas about how man relates to the Creator and the creation (even in their possible claim that there is none,) and some guidelines on how to relate to one another. There are also ways in which those religions differ greatly.
Os
Guiness claims that truth is “alive and well and, in an important sense, undeniable.
And, it is far from inconsequential. Truth matters supremely because in the
end, without truth, there is no freedom. Truth, in fact, is not only essential
to freedom, it is freedom.”[1] That is why, as Jesus
said, “Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you
free.” (John 8:32) Only the truth can do that.
[1]
Guinness, Os. Time For Truth: Living Free in a World of Lies, Hype,
& Spin (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 2000), pp 13-14. Emphasis in the original
Comments
Post a Comment