HOME | CONTRIBUTE A STORY! | ABOUT MMI | CATEGORIES OF INTEREST | CONTACT ME

Where Does Truth Come From?

Orginally published on Tuesday, May 16, 2006 at 10:16 AM
by Todd Rhoades

Truth There's a big uprising going on at Patrick Henry College.  Christianity Today did a story on it yesterday here.  Seems that the majority of the professors and staff at this small conservative Christian college have left or are leaving this year. 

One of the main points of contention between professors and the college president is an article written in the college newspaper.  Read this statement and let me know what you think:

"A common misconception among American evangelicals, and one that cannot be supported by the Scriptures themselves, is that the Bible is the only source of truth," the article began. "We argue that this misconception amounts to a blasphemous denial of Christ's words in Matthew 5 that 'he sends rain on the just and the unjust.'"

CT says, "The 900-word article argued that "a Christian must refuse to view special and general revelation as hostile to one another. Nor should he hesitate to learn from a pagan. There is much wisdom to be gained from Parmenides and Plato, as well Machiavelli and Marx."

The article prompted a 2,600-word response by college chaplain Raymond Bouchoc, sent to students, faculty, and staff. The response, endorsed by Farris and Sanders, discussed seven "harmful implications" that could be drawn from the professors' article and claimed the piece "diminishes the import of Scripture.""

You can read the whole article here.

FOR DISCUSSION:  What do you think?  Does saying that the Bible is not the ONLY source of truth diminish the importance of scripture?  Where do you stand on this?  Is the Bible the ONLY source of truth?


This post has been viewed 340 times so far.


 TRACKBACKS: (0) There are 60 Comments:

  • Posted by Chris

    “I am the way, the truth, and the life.” (John 14:6)

    “For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities - His eternal power and divine nature - have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse.” (Romans 1:20)

    Seems like Scripture is not the only source of Truth.

    I do think we need to be careful to point to experience, or hunches as sources of absolute Truth, but have a real problem limiting God to 66 books when He tells us in those 66 books that He has revealed Himself through Scripture, but also through His Son and His Creation.

  • Posted by

    Does saying that the Bible is not the ONLY source of truth diminish the importance of scripture? 

    I don’t believe it diminishes the importance of scripture, because I believe that all truth has it’s foundation in the scriptures.  If it can’t be supported or affirmed by scripture then it’s not truth.  It may be a good idea, but not absolute truth.

    Where do you stand on this?

    The arguments I’ve heard on this are usually tied to other faiths. I can agree that there are good moral teaching or truths in other writings, other teachings, but as I said above, they must be rooted in the scriptures.

    Is the Bible the ONLY source of truth?

    Yes! It is the only source of absolute truth to me.

    Ed.

  • Posted by Todd Rhoades

    Ed… would you consider the law of gravity an absolute truth? Or how about the fact that 2+2=4?  Or that safety belts save lives? Or that smoking causes lung cancer? If so, where’s the scripture reference?  If not, why not?

    Todd

  • Posted by

    Ever since last Thursday I have been talking on the ever controversial issue of Homosexuality being taught as history in our schools, Homosexual marriages, and the civil rights for homosexuals. On all three of these seperate articles. I received over 200+ emails on my post. Out of the 200 emails I recieved 1% of support, 30% agreed to disagree with me, and the other 69% said the same thing as this article. This is what they said.
    1. We are talking about civil law here not Gods law.
    2. God is a Myth.
    3. The bible is a Myth.
    4. Man wrote the bible not God.
    5. Men who wrote the bible are bigots like you.
    6. You have no proof that there is a God.
    7. Jesus never said anything about homosexuality. So it is Right.
    8. The bible is not true.
    9. The bible is lies.
    10. Chritians believe in theory not truth.

    Sorry I used Homosexuality Todd, but I thought I would share some of the things they said. I was very over whelmed with these responses. It was very discouraging, but Jesus brought it to my heart this verse of Scripture Matthew 13:14-17.

    You can lead a horse to water, but you cannot make him drink…

  • Posted by

    Good question Todd.  Of course the primary point of needed clarification is ‘what kind of truth are we talking about?’ If I’m on a search for mathematical truth, give me a textbook over the Bible any day!!  The idea that the Bible has a monopoly on truth is preposterous, and, as professors at this college have clearly seen, it is also a dangerous claim. 
    I remember my mom being told by her (well-meaning) siblings that she shouldn’t study psychology because all she’d ever need to know was in the Bible.  Hogwash.  Scripture is our foundation, not our jail cell.  It is the earth we are rooted in, not the sun we are growing towards.  Scripture mediates God’s truth and God’s authority, but all truth is God’s truth.  Granted, if a non-Scriptural source reveals truth, we’d expect to find echoes of it in Scripture.  But that’s not the same thing as saying that “Truth” and “the propositions contained in the Protestant Scriptures” are identical…
    As Todd has pointed out, many things have been proven true totally apart from Scripture (I’m thinking of Todd’s mathematical example, as well as the truth that the Earth is spherical--something of which there is no evidence in Scripture--in fact there’s evidence to the contrary, but that’s a discussion for another day).
    Cheers!
    -Daniel-

  • Posted by

    If the written word is to be viewed as the only source of ultimate truth (knowledge of God), how did people come to understand truth before there was a written word . . . or during the nearly two thousand between the NT canonization and the time it became available to the common man via Guttenberg’s handy invention . . . or what about the remaining places today where the bible is not available.

    I think we get tripped up by making the word “truth” synonymous with the gospel.  Obviously the gospel is truth, but there are millions of other things that are absolutely true, and the fact that they exist in our world points to the gospel, even those things that cannot be supported, affirmed or even found in scripture.  If I hit my thumb with a hammer I’ll experience pain, if I don’t change the oil in my car it will stop running, if I don’t put money in the bank my checks will bounce, if I have too much alcohol to drink I’ll wake up with a headache (okay - that one is in scripture) . . .

    The bible is the ONLY sacred writing that points to the one eternal God of creation and to Jesus, who is the ONLY means of salvation.  But the God of scriptures did indeed reveal Himself to His creation THROUGH His creation, not ONLY through His written word.  The most important “non-written” revelation was the entrance into time and history of the incarnate Word.

    Wendi

  • Posted by eric

    I affirm that the Bible gives us everything we need to know about finding our way to God and living a life that is pleasing to Him.

    It does not contain all the truth we need. A lot of problems happen when we attempt to find every truth needed in the pages of the Bible. What happens is that it is often twisted.

    Is everything you need to know to have a successful marriage found in the Bible? No, but it does offer some guidelines. Is gravity? No.

    But the Bible does tell us what it means to follow Jesus and be His disciple and how to receive forgiveness for our sins. It has everything we need to bring us to salvation and live a holy life.

  • Posted by Todd Rhoades

    I would agree with Eric and most of the posters here so far.  Would you say that (from the post itself) that this article by the professor was blown WAY out of proportion and that the president and chaplain over-reacted to the professor’s article?  Is this not another example of something that well-educated men could’ve worked out without a major public story?  (The CT article does go into some of the communication problems that led up to this story going public; and it appears to me (as an outsider) that for as small a school as this is/was, that there was not much open communication between the president/founder and the teaching staff.)

    Todd

  • Posted by

    1. Yes to both questions Todd.

    The professor did blow it out of proportion, and the president and the Chaplin did over react.

  • Posted by

    Ed… would you consider the law of gravity an absolute truth? Or how about the fact that 2+2=4? Or that safety belts save lives? Or that smoking causes lung cancer?

    The law of gravity is certainly a truth, however it can be overridden by God and is subject to God because He is truth.  This is what a miracle is...when God intervenes and supercedes the natural laws.  I do understand that we don’t see the teachings of Newton in the scripture per se’. We do however see natural law being controlled by the God of the Bible though.

    Math is a principle designed by man and is relative. We know it as fact or truth because it’s the system that we designed. God did however use numbers and measures in specific detail in His word.

    I wear a seat belt because I believe it increases my chances of survival and it’s the law.  Is it absolute?  Of course not.

    Same principle for smoking, but I get your point.  These are not imperatives in the scripture, but I can find them as principles. 

    Isaiah new the earth was round.
    God stopped the sun for Hezekiah.
    Math is all over the Bible.
    Gird up your loins with the belt of truth...okay it’s a stretch smile
    Your body is the temple of the living.
    God...good stewardship applies.

    Thanks for the challenge Todd.

  • Posted by

    Yes – the article was blown way out of proportion, and the over-reactions of Farris and others really proves the resigning professors point.  PHC (and I fear many fundamentalist Christian institutions of higher education) has indeed become a place where students are not taught HOW to think but rather indoctrinated about WHAT to think.  When a college academic dean tells a professor “there are some questions we can’t ask in class or entertain,” it seems pretty clear that indoctrination has trumped education.  It also shows that “discussionâ€? is not the order of the day at PHC, either in class or in the president’s office where faculty issues should be handled.

    Anything can become an idol if it becomes the object of our worship, even scripture.  I fear that has happened at PHC.

    Farris was right in stating (of the departing professors) that ["A public declaration would serve only your personal purposes to appear to be vindicated in the eyes of the students,” he said. “That is an unprofessional and unchristian motive. … In short, no, you do not have my permission to publicly discuss your reasons for departure."]

    Too bad he didn’t follow the same advice instead of writing letters to parents, students and the media calling into question the professor’s adherence to the authority of scripture.  It smacks of the pot calling the kettle black.

    This PHC debacle has surfaced in the New York Times, LA Times, Washington Post, New Yorker . . . what must the lost think of us???

    Wendi

  • Posted by

    I have something else to say.

    It would be important for us to understand that Truth is not necessarily a concept, but a person.  Jesus said that He was “The Truth.” In him is the source of truth. He is the Word and the Word became flesh.

    Before the written word, God was instructing Israel with many truths that would sustain their lives. Before science God new there were parasites on food.  He new that cleansing the body would keep down illness.  He new that woman needed to practice hygiene during menstrual cycles.  He even new that it was a great idea to leave the camp with a shovel when you needed to take care of business, if you know what I mean.

    Jesus said in the great commission to teach everything he commanded.  This meant everything. The proof of that is found in other world religions that don’t have God’s word.  Their religious rituals and practices are literally killing them and their children.  For example bathing in the Ganges river causes infection and death.  But it is one of the requirements of a Hindu.

    Finally, in the garden, Adam ate from the tree of knowledge of good and evil instead of the Tree of Life, which is Jesus.  We still today are trying to find life and truth in a tree that leads to death.  He is truth!  He is life!

    Peace out.

    Ed.

  • Posted by

    Ed, a couple thoughts.  First, past tense for the verb ‘to know’ is ‘knew’ (not ‘new’).  I’m confident you knew that, but I just thought I’d bring it to your attention.  We all make mistakes grin
    If God makes a ‘miracle’ does he really ‘suspend’ the laws of nature?  If I catch a falling pen, am I beating gravity?  No.  The law of gravity describes what happens to objects when there are no other factors to consider (e.g. hands to catch things, God, etc.).  In fact all of the ‘laws’ of nature are descriptive, rather than prescriptive, and so I think the idea that God ‘transgresses’ or ‘breaks’ the laws of nature is a very unhelpful way to frame things.
    Also, where do you get this idea that Isaiah knew the Earth was spherical?
    More importantly, and this isn’t addressed to Ed in particular, can we, as Christians, acknowledge that there is ‘untruth’ in Scripture?  Again, I think our answer will depend on the way in which we are using the word ‘truth’.  Any thoughts?
    Cheers,
    -Daniel-

  • Posted by

    If the Bible contained all Truth, why would we need the Holy Spirit to “guide us into all truth?” Just asking the question, believe me I don’t believe the HS would contradict the Word, but what about what the Word doesn’t touch on?

  • Posted by

    I “knew” that.  Thanks for the heads up Daniel.

    I’m going to email you when I get home, if I can.  It seems that MSN is messed up today.

    Tha passage is Isaiah 40:22.  I have some other info for you as well.  The shape of the earth is certainly up for question.

    Later.

    Ed.

  • Posted by Mark

    The Bible is the sole source of Absolute Truths. The other part is your conscience.  One’s conscience is the closet thing we have to standing before God.  It is the very thing that God gave us that draws us Back to Him when we sin or do wrong.  If we live our lives making excuses, legitimizing our sins and wrong thinking, we are basically killing our conscience.  A very dangerous place to be.

  • Posted by

    Mark writes “The Bible is the sole source of Absolute Truths.”

    Except for, as has been stated, simple math like 2+2=4, or the number of bones in the human hand.

    I think you might have meant the sole source of “absolute MORAL truths”? And if so, is that also problematic? Just asking…

  • Posted by Mark

    Peter,
    Problematic? No.  Perhaps you are right using the word ‘Moral’, however Mathmatics are not Truths, they are perhaps better defined as something else.

  • Posted by

    “The Bible is the sole source of Absolute Truths"--Mark, why do you think this?  On what basis do you think this?  Is this grounded in the Bible (and if it is how is that not circular?)?  Is it perhaps grounded in certain extra-biblical philosophical presuppositions?  Dare I say ANTI-biblical philosophical presuppositions? 
    To me all this emphasis on the Bible being ‘inerrant’ or ‘the source of All Propositional Truth’ or what have you is a lot like arguing that the number 3 is blue.  Well no, the Bible isn’t inerrant and 3 isn’t blue.  But the Bible isn’t ‘errant’ and 3 isn’t red either.  Maybe we shouldn’t be talking about the color of numbers in the first place.  Sometimes needless energy is spent trying to answer the wrong questions.
    My two cents.
    -Daniel-

  • Posted by

    Okay Daniel.  That made no sense to me.  Are you saying the Bible is’nt or is inerrant?  If it is’nt, how do we know what to believe and what not to believe?  Do we pick and choose or do we trust that somehow God, through man and many centuries, has givin us His trustworthy word?

    More to come I’m sure.

    Ed.

  • Posted by

    This is the way I see it and I think I know what Todd is getting at.

    The bible is TRUTH… The Bible is the Absolute Truth, The Whole Truth and nothing but The Truth… How do we know this? Because the Bible is the Word of God and God is Truth.

    But.... Sound like a Billy Goat don’t I… Don’t get any ideas Peter Hamm… Just kidding with you dude… I haven’t seen you in a while. But I think this is what Todd is trying to get at…

    How do we know the truth about the sky being blue? How do we know that the sky isn’t really green or yellow.

    How do we know the truth about the grass being green? How do we know it is not actually blue or orange?

    What about all these health foods, water, and milk? How do we really know the truth about them being good for us?

    What about the truth about two cups of coffe a day helps with preventing a heartattack?

    How do we know the truth about baby asprin helping in preventing a heartattack or stroke?

    How do we know the truth about wine helping prevent strokes?

    How do we know the truth about power lines causing cancer? 

    I hope I have helped shed a little light on this subject.

  • Posted by

    Back to the article in Christianity Today and what happened at PHC . . .

    When I read this complete article, perhaps the statement that troubled me the most was this:

    ["Acting academic dean [Marian Sanders] told me I couldn’t use that [lifeboat illustration] any more,” said Root. “She said that there are some questions we can’t ask in class or entertain.” ]

    Obviously this is Root quoting Sanders – but based on the actions of Farris and other PHC administrators, I imagine this was fairly close to what he was told.

    After reading this MMI post and the CT article, I read the following while doing homework:
    ---------------------------------------------
    Triumphalism refers to the tendency in all strongly held worldviews, whether religious or secular, to present themselves as full and complete accounts of reality, leaving little if any room for debate or difference of opinion and expecting of their adherents unflinching belief and loyalty.  Such a tendency is triumphalistic in the sense that it triumph – at least in its own self-estimate – over all ignorance, uncertainty, doubt and incompleteness, as well, of course, over every other point of view.

    The only antidote to religious triumphalism is the readiness of communities of faith to permit doubt and self-criticism to play a vital role in the life of faith.  Unfortunately, it is unusual when a religious faith leaves room for profound questioning of itself on the part of its adherents.  Even more rarely does religion actually invite and encourage such questioning.

    While there will always be people who want to be told by someone else what they ought to believe and do, a spirit of skepticism still pervades our world [could that be any more true than in our affluent western culture?], and belief of any kind must either come to terms with this skepticism or else content itself with becoming the refuge of a human segment that is afraid of its own humanity and will say amen to whoever delivers it from itself.

    - The Cross in Our Context – Douglas John Hall
    ---------------------------------------------
    I bet Hall would find PHC to be a perfect example of the triumphalism he describes. 

    Thought it fit the thread so decided to pass it along.

    Wendi

  • Posted by

    Ed, zip me an email if you’d like.  But essentially, I’d simply like to echo what Wendi has just said.  The words ‘metaphysics of presence’ and ‘oppressive metanarrative’ come to mind.  The point being, let’s avoid triumphalism.  Thanks for the input Wendi.
    Cheers,
    -Daniel-

  • Posted by

    Todd said
    Ed… would you consider the law of gravity an absolute truth? Or how about the fact that 2+2=4? Or that safety belts save lives? Or that smoking causes lung cancer? If so, where’s the scripture reference? If not, why not?
    Not to be argumentative but the law of gravity changes on different planets or is non-exsistant in outer space so it is not absolute but changes in different enviroments. Sometimes 1+1=1 when a man and woman come together and a new life is created(sometimes it equals twins(2), triplets(3), etc.),not everyone that smokes develops lung cancer and sometimes people that have never smoked develop lung cancer, sometimes seat belts do kill people and not wearing them has saved a life ( not that I would recommend not wearing them but in certain accidents it has been a proven fact due to physics that being restrained would have resulted in death). There is only one Absolute Truth revealed in Scripture but as fallible human beings we can’t grasp that huge of a concept with our finite minds and that is where faith comes in. God bless!

  • Posted by

    Scripture teaches that God is the source of ALL Truth and it is important to hold this fundamental principle in God’s Nature BECAUSE if there is ANY truth (even the most miniscule) outside of God, then God would not be omniscient, omnipotent, be a liar, untrustworthy, etc.

    God reveals Himself in Scripture and through Nature, called General Revelation and Special Revelation.

    The debate starts over Natural Revelation and Natural Theology.

    One is God’s Revealing Himself through Nature the other is the result of that Revelation.

    Another way to get to the CORE of the “debate” is to ask:

    Can man learn anything about God from nature?
    If yes:  1 Corinthians 2
    If no:  Romans 1

    Quagmire???  Was Paul confused??? Does the Bible (Word of God) contradict itself???

    Not at all…

    Understanding the term “know” in context of Revelation is key…

    One way “know/knowledgeâ€? is used in both Hebrew and Greek is to have cognitive or intellectual knowledge of (Romans 1).  Another way “know/knowledgeâ€? is used is personal or intimate “Adam KNEW his wifeâ€?.

    Along the lines of some of the presentations on this blog:

    How does a person KNOW 2+2=4???

    Why doesn’t it change tomorrow?  Could 2+2=5 next week?  Is 2+2 4 on Mars or Pluto?

    The unbeliever can count no doubt BUT he cannot give an account for counting.

    In the Christian Worldview I can count AND account for HOW we can count and it rests in the Character and Nature of God.

    Honestly, I’m surprised at some of the posts from church leaders… Amazing!

  • Page 1 of 3 pages

     1 2 3 >
Post Your Comments:

Name:

Email:

Location:

URL:

Live Comment Preview:

Remember my personal information

Notify me of follow-up comments?

Please enter the word you see in the image below: