Return to the M.B.Herald Vol. 36, No. 4 Home Page
Students are not alone in rejecting the idea of truth. Almost everyone today thinks of truth as subjective and relative; in other words, truth is thought to reside in a person or in society, and to vary between individuals or societies. The idea of "absolute truth" which is the same for all and which is independent of what you or I or a society believes, is thought to be absurd. It is all a matter of opinion--and "my opinion is as good as yours"! How many arguments or debates conclude with the words, "Well, it's true for me"? And there is nothing more to be said after that.
Just recently, a student of mine proclaimed that she didn't have a right to tell anyone what to believe. What she also meant to say was that I as a teacher didn't have a right to tell her what to believe. Another student wrote, "What is truth to one person may not be truth to another." These are typical expressions of today's attitudes towards truth.
We live in what is often referred to as the postmodern era. Postmodernism is a reaction against the Enlightenment belief that objective science and universal reason would lead to truth and the even older idea that truth should be the same for everyone. Today even science is under attack. It is now generally acknowledged that no person can be as objective as was assumed when modern science first emerged. Postmodernists also maintain that reason is not the same for everyone; all thinking is shaped by the history, the social and economic background and even the psychology of the thinker. Walter Anderson has written a book with the colourful title, Reality Isn't What it Used to Be. He suggests that we construct our own realities, and that we live in our own unique worlds which each of us describes in our own unique language (see sidebar). In other words, he is saying that there is no objective reality and no such a thing as common, absolute truth.
In this postmodern climate, any claims to religious truth are met with skepticism--and any suggestion that Christianity might have a corner on the truth is thought of as sheer nonsense.
My neighbour and I simply are not living in two completely different worlds--that is why we can talk to each other. Even cross-cultural communication is possible. For example, a few years ago, I taught for a year in Lithuania, and my students were quite capable of understanding the philosophical ideas I was trying to convey.
Human constructions of reality also seem to be subject to certain constraints. I simply can't create a reality in which I don't get a bump on my forehead when I run into a concrete wall. It seems that the notion of an objective reality is inescapable. The "real" world has an amazing way of humiliating postmodernist artificial constructions of reality.
We also seem to find it difficult not to talk about objective, universal truth in some sense. If all truth is relative, there really is no point in arguing with someone. We should simply listen to each other and, at most, be amused at the variety of positions that we hold. But we find it hard to do so. The reason for this is that we care about truth--and about error. Deep down inside, all of us are a little afraid that what we believe to be true just might not really be true, and thus the search for "real" truth continues.
There is a famous Persian story of some blind men, each describing an elephant from his limited perspective. One man feels the tail and thinks that the elephant is long and thin like a rope. Another grabs hold of a leg and concludes the elephant is round and thick like a tree trunk. This story is often used to illustrate the subjectivity and relativity of truth. But we forget that the story is told from the point of view of the king and his courtiers who are not blind and who can therefore see that the blind men are unable to grasp the full reality of the elephant. The story only makes sense if there is a real elephant which someone can see and describe more fully. Partial truth only makes sense in the light of some notion of full truth. The recognition of error presupposes Truth with a capital "T".
Many years ago, I was teaching an evening philosophy course which a number of adults from the community were auditing for interest's sake. One of my students was a physician, an agnostic with whom I had already enjoyed many arguments. In this particular class, I was once again defending the notion of Truth with a capital "T". This physician spoke up: "Your notion of Truth sounds suspiciously like your notion of God." He was right, of course, though I hadn't made any reference to God in the discussion thus far.
In order to make sense of the passionate search for truth that characterizes us as human beings, it seems that we are driven to talk about God's all-encompassing view of truth which will ultimately judge our limited and partial understandings of truth. Indeed, this is one of the reasons why I believe in God. It is only in God's light that I am able to begin truly to see and to know. The discovery of truth makes me want to thank the Creator of reality and the source of all truth for His gracious gifts.
Clearly, differences of opinion with regard to religious matters seem to be more difficult to resolve. This is because religious questions have to do with the heart of our belief systems and are more complex than scientific questions. So much is at stake with religious questions that we have difficulty approaching these questions in an open manner.
Yet, despite the difficulties in coming to agreement on religious questions, there is still a correct answer to these questions, an answer which exists independently of what anyone believes. We may, in fact, only be able to settle the questions in a conclusive manner at the end of time. Christians maintain that there will come a time when every person will acknowledge that Jesus Christ is Lord (Philippians 2:11, the Bible). Until then, we all have to live with a bit of ambiguity and try to get as close to the right answer as we can.
I quite agree that it seems rather arrogant for Jesus to say, "I am the way, the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father (God) except through Me" (John 14:6, the Bible). But what if what He says is true? Surely it is equally presumptuous to arbitrarily deny this possibility. But you might argue that it is not arbitrary. Other religions make similar claims to exclusive truth, and they can't all be right. Again, I agree that if several religions each claim to be the only truth, they can't all be right. But one of them might just be right.
Making exclusive claims is inescapable. The nature of truth is such that we cannot help but make exclusive truth claims. If I think that I have got it right, then, if you disagree with me, I must think that you have got it wrong. You might feel that a less exclusive approach to religion would be more generous and more tolerant. But, to claim that truth is found in all religions is still to make an exclusive claim--namely, that those who disagree with this claim are wrong. The inclusive approach to religious claims is, in fact, very ungenerous and intolerant with regard to religions which make exclusive truth claims. We simply can't run away from the problem. We have to face the question as to which claim to exclusive truth is, in fact, right.
It is not Jesus Christ's exclusive claim to truth that is the problem. The real problem exists in the way in which limited and error-prone human beings relate to a claim such as was made by Jesus Christ. Christians need to take the words of their own Scriptures to heart: "For we know in part and prophesy in part.<|>.<|>.<|>.<|>Now we see but a poor reflection" (I Corinthians 13:9,12 the Bible). Christians need to be humble in their proclamation of the truth. After all, they can't really take credit for the truth that they have found. And they don't understand it as fully as they might.
On the other hand, for those who are still wondering what to make of religious truth, I would remind them that it is foolish to rule out Christ's claims arbitrarily because they are exclusive. Instead, a more open approach to the matter is to take these claims seriously and to investigate as carefully and honestly as you can whether Jesus' claims are, in fact, right.
Elmer J. Thiessen teaches philosophy at Medicine Hat College in Medicine Hat, Alta.
"No seeking can be called serious which is without any clue. Wandering about in a twilight where all cats are grey is not seeking truth." Lesslie Newbigin, The Gospel in a Pluralist Society
"The absolutely true, meaning what no further experience will ever alter, is that ideal vanishing point towards which we imagine that all our temporary truths will some day converge." William James
"An important part of our own commitment to one particular tradition or faith standpoint will be our desire to share this outlook with others, to testify to its truth, to express the universal intent attaching to it by exposing others to it, engaging in the humble task of persuasion." Trevor Hart, Faith Thinking, pp. 68-9
Return to the M.B.Herald Vol. 36, No. 4 Home Page