by Parrish W. Jones, Ph.D.

©2005 All rights reserved.

Psalm 40:1-11

Romans 1:16-25

John 14:1-7

"Truth"! When Jesus stood before Pilate who asked and affirmed: "So you are a king?" To this Jesus said, "You say that I am a king. For this I was born, and for this I came into the world, to testify to the truth. Everyone who belongs to the truth listens to my voice." Then Pilate asked, "What is truth?" (John 18:37-38a)

The question of Pilate is a profound one for those of us talking about preserving the truth. What is truth? Only if we can answer that question can we know what we are preserving. So tell me, what is truth?

You have hit on several of the 7 different kinds of truth that philosophers have identified over the years. These theories are not exclusive but often play an essential role for each other. The theory we operate on most days is the one we call "correspondence theory". That is, does what one says about something correspond to what is? Science for the most part asks this question.

The issue becomes what does one accept as evidence of the truth. In the 19th century, science became more and more adamant that all one could know as true was what one could prove through empirical investigation. That meant if you could not experience it through the senses or reason through mathematical computation from what you had experienced through the senses to a conclusion, then it was not true. So while I can not physically experience electrons and neutrons, I could prove their existence through mathematics. That is what we call coherence theory of truth.

This view led many scientists to conclude there was no God because there was no proof for God. The theory of evolution, the information of archaeology, paleontology, geology, and physics raised questions about the literal interpretation of Genesis. This apparent conflict between science and Genesis led some to deny God's existence.

There were many in the church who accepted the views of science. In fact, many clergymen were responsible for discoveries in biology, astronomy, archaeology, and geology. They chose to apply scientific notions to the study of scripture and theology. These approaches have yielded much for our understanding of scripture. Other aspects of these enterprises have led to blind alleys.

Another late 19th century religious reaction is called  fundamentalism. Oddly, the fundamentalists did not attack the premise of science regarding what counts as truth. They simply substituted another text for the text of nature, namely, the Bible. They basically said, "Science is well and good, but whatever contradicts scripture must not be true and, therefore, wrong." In order to go that route, they also had to reinterpret and re-assert views of the church about scripture, namely, that the Bible is the inerrant, infallible word of God, verbally spoken by God to the writers. The early church fathers, the Reformers, and the authors of our confessions would have never understood these late 19th century interpretations of biblical inerrancy and infallibility.

I am not going to provide an argument against the fundamentalists today except to say that both science and fundamentalism have a limited notion of truth. I know much about my wife through experience that I can never communicate to you in propositions. I also know much about God that is not so simple as saying things like, "God is omniscient." I discover new things about God everyday just as I discover new things about my wife at least four or five times a day.

We have a whole Bible. Judaism has the Torah and its appended books. Islam has the Koran. Buddhism, Hinduism and a host of other religions have volumes of writings. All these are attempts to convey to humanity the one whom we refer to as God. The Older Testament referred to God as Yahweh or Elohim. The Newer Testament referred to God as Theos or Kurios. Islam refers to God as Allah.

When I read our lesson from Romans, I hear Paul suggesting what amounts to a radical theory in our day. He says that God, the creator, has sufficiently revealed Godself in nature so that had humans properly read the text of nature, they would know God well enough to worship the true God. In fact, he says humans did not, but the failure is not God's but humans', therefore, all humanity is without excuse for their failure to respond to God's creative love and grace as disclosed in creation.

When one studies other religions and cultures, one is amazed by how much we share with them. Jesus says, in our lesson from the Gospel of John, that he is "the way, the truth and the life. . . .. If you know me, you know the Father." He does not say, "If you can recite the Westminster Catechism, you know the father." He does not say, "If you believe this or that about me and about the Father then you know the father." He says, "If you know me."

The context he sets for understanding the meaning of truth is important. The context is experiential and relational. We do not know God by knowing things about God. We may thank our more conservative brothers and sisters for reminding us that Christian experience is about what they call a "personal relationship with Jesus". Sadly, they then turn around and impose an orthodoxy of propositions one must adhere to in order to be a true Christian. Which is it? Relational or dogmatic.

The word "truth" in the Newer Testament translates the Greek word "aletheia". That word literally means to uncover or disclose. It is the sort of thing that an archaeologist does when trying to uncover an artifact or an art restorationist does in trying to take the layers of paint off a painting to restore the more ancient work beneath. That is why almost all of scripture is narrative. It shares the story of people of faith. It is testimonial. Jesus hardly ever speaks in propositions but in parables, analogies and metaphors. He never says, "I am God" but that "I and the Father are one." Discovering and discerning God is not something that happens easily or automatically any more than your relationships with parents, children, or spouse do. Trough our experience of scripture, we come to understand how Jesus is one with the God, the father.

In the sphere of religion, truth is relational. It comes to us through a relationship with God, with scripture, with the body of Christ, with the wisdom of the church, and with the poor. We know God as we get to know God and follow Jesus. I include an experience with the poor, because it seems to me that the scriptures call us to be with them as Jesus was with them and as God has a mission that embraces the plight of the poor.

So, what is the truth that we are to preserve? It is all that comes through the experience of people of faith. It is not a set of propositions about God. Instead, it is the truth of coming to know God as we relate to God through the experiences I outlined in the sermons on Servant Leadership. So the call to preserving the truth is not so much about doctrine and theology, although that is an aspect of it, but of forming relationships with God.