|
|
  
Probe Ministries
How Do You Spell Truth?
Don Closson
What is Truth?
Do you remember the commercial that asked, "How do you spell
relief?" To the horror of elementary teachers everywhere, you were
supposed to answer "R-O-L-A-I-D-S." In a similar fashion, today, if
you ask someone, "How do you spell truth?" you might be surprised
by the response. As a young Christian in college, I was greatly
influenced by the writings of Francis Schaeffer. I will never
forget the impact of his critique of modern culture and his use of
the phrase "true truth." True truth might be thought of as truth
with a capital "T" because it is based on the existence of a
personal God, the creator of all that exists, and a revealer of
Himself via the Bible and the Incarnation of His Son, Jesus. Today,
if you ask average men and women how to spell truth, their
responses will probably indicate a view that is strictly earthbound
truth beginning with a small "t." God is not in the picture; in
fact, belief in God would be seen as a handicap in discerning truth
accurately. The methodology of science provides this type of truth
and also sets its limits. However, there is another spelling for
truth that is finding more and more adherents. Today, especially on
college campuses, the question might be answered with C-O-N-S-T-R-U-C-T,
as in social construct. Like the Rolaids answer above, this
response doesn't seem to fit. In this approach truth is generated
by the social group, whether they be white middle-class male
Americans or female southeast Asians. What is true for one group
may not be true for another, and there is no such thing as
universal truth, something that is true for all people, all the
time.
These three conceptions of truth describe three comprehensive
systems of thought that are active in Western culture and in the
U.S. The first (Truth) portrays Christian theism (what some refer
to as a pre-modern view). Although this view is still quite
popular, many in our churches function as if they were members of
the second group which is often classified as a modernist
perspective (truth). The third group (truth as social construct) is
a fairly recent arrival, but has become highly influential both in
academia and in common culture. It has been called postmodernism.
People within these three different perspectives see the world
quite differently. Until recently, Christians focused their
apologetics, or defense of the faith, mainly at modernists and as
a result often attempted to justify belief within a modernist
framework of truth. Now we are being called upon to respond to a
postmodern view that will require a far different approach.
Although postmodernism has many aspects that Christians must
reject, it has also revealed just how much Christian thinking has
been influenced by the modernist challenge.
In this discussion we will look at modernism and postmodernism in
light of Christian evangelism and apologetics. We are now fighting
a two-front battle, and we need to develop different tools for
each. We also are in need of a vaccine against assuming the
presuppositions of either modernism or postmodernism as we attempt
to live and think within a biblical framework. Much of this debate
revolves around the notion of what is true, or perhaps how we as
individuals can know what is true. This may sound like an ivory
tower discussion, but it is a vital topic as we attempt to share
the truth of the Gospel to those we encounter.
The Modernist View
In their book Truth Is Stranger Than It Used to Be, Richard
Middleton and Brian Walsh use an interesting metaphor to describe
the different views of truth and the ways that we perceive it in
our culture. Imagine three umpires meeting after a day at the park.
As they reflect on the day's activities one ump declares, "There's
balls and there's strikes and I call 'em the way they are." Another
responds, "There's balls and there's strikes and I call 'em the way
I see 'em." The third says, "There's balls and there's strikes, and
they ain't nothin' until I call 'em." Each of the umpires may make
the same call, but they will be making it for very different
reasons. The position of the first ump is known as naive realism.
He believes that his calls correspond to something quite real and
substantive called balls and strikes. He is also very confident
that he can discern what is a ball or a strike with a high degree
of accuracy. This confidence is a trademark of modernism. As we
will see later, the other two umpires reflect positions that reject
such a confidence in knowing what is true. It doesn't mean that
they don't make decisions, they just lack the confidence that their
decision conforms exactly to what is really "out there."
Modernism grew out of the Enlightenment and matured in the last
century to dominate much of European and American thought. Its
greatest American advocate has been John Dewey. Writing around the
turn of the century, Dewey's philosophy of pragmatism has dominated
American educational theory to this day. In his book
Reconstruction in Philosophy, he highlights the difference
between pre-modern and modern thinking. First, modernism rejects
the reality of supernatural events or beings. It focuses on this
world and the secular. Second, it rejects the authority of the
church or religion in general and replaces it with the power of
individual minds utilizing the methodology of science. Third, it
replaces the static world of the middle ages with a belief in
progress towards a future human utopia. Finally, it believes that
the patient scientific study of nature will provide the means for
this utopia. Humankind is to conquer and control nature for its
use.
The implications of modernism were and are profound. Under its
umbrella, humans were seen as biological machines just as the
universe became understood as an impersonal mechanism needing
neither a creator nor a sustainer God. All of human behavior could
conceivably be explained biologically, given enough time for
science to study the data. As a result, humans are viewed as self-
governing beings and free to embrace whatever their rational minds
discover. Modernists might be called rationalistic optimists
because they are quite confident in their ability to perceive
"reality as reality, relatively unaffected by our own bias,
distortion, or previous belief system. One's conclusions can
reflect reality outside ourselves, not just thoughts within our own
minds.
With the advent of modernism Christianity found itself under the
cold calculating eye of science. Modernism tells a story of mankind
as its own savior that is, with the help of science, modernism has
no need for a savior provided by God. Sin is not in its vocabulary,
and redemption is not needed; humans lack only education.
Next, we will look at the arrival of postmodernism and its
accompanying challenges.
The Postmodern Condition
We have considered the impact of modernism on the question of what
is true. Now we will focus on the postmodern view. Where modernism
is very confident that it can discover truth via science,
postmodernism is defined by its skepticism that truth of any type
can be known. Much of postmodernism is negative response to the
confidence of modernism. Yet, postmodernism is a strange
combination of a vague romantic optimism that mankind can solve its
social and economic problems, with a dramatic pessimism of ever
knowing truth at a universal level. This reflects the strong
influence of atheistic existentialism on postmodern thinking.
Individuals are told they must stand up and confront an absurd
existence and impose meaning and order on to it, all the while
admitting that there is no universal truth guiding what they choose
to do.
To a postmodern, modernism ended with atomic bombs being dropped on
Nagasaki and Hiroshima. Modernism led to imperialism and the
colonialization of the third world by the supposedly more modern
and advanced industrial nations. It led to the destruction of the
environment, and it has led to a naive confidence that technology
can solve any problem in its path.
Often, postmodernism is known more for what it doesn't believe than
for what it does. One author writes that we have come to the point
where answers to the "questions of ultimate concern about the
nature of the good, the meaning of truth and the existence of God
are taken to be unanswerable and hence, in some fundamental sense,
insignificant."
Let's consider some of the significant themes that postmodernists
have written about. The first is the theory that truth is a social
construct. This theory would argue, for example, that Western
modernity which has come to dominate the globe and define what is
rational and normative for human life is not in place because it is
any truer than other world views. Instead, it is a set of ideas
that people have used to manipulate others with in order to gain
power over them. Those who are not "scientific" are viewed as
primitive and as a result are marginalized and finally oppressed by
Western culture. Western culture, then, has not discovered how
things really are; instead, it has imposed one view on the world to
its advantage. Our basic problem is that all ideas, all concepts,
and all truths are communicated via language, and all language is
man made. No one can step outside of language to see whether or not
it corresponds with reality. In the words of one postmodernist, all
principles (or ultimate truths) are really preferences.
As a result of postmodernist thinking, anyone who claims to know
something that is universally true, true for everyone, everywhere,
anytime, is accused of marginalizing those who disagree. Once a
person or group is marginalized, a justification has been
established to oppress them. To postmodernists, a totalizing meta-
narrative (a story that claims to answer all the big questions
about reality) always results in violence towards those outside the
accepted paradigm. They point to Western culture's aptitude towards
conquering and destroying other cultures in the name of progress
and modernization.
One can easily see that a Christian world view conflicts with much
of what postmodernity teaches. Christianity claims to be true for
everyone, everywhere. It is not surprising that postmodern
feminists and others have pointed their finger at Christianity for
oppressing women, gays, and anyone else who holds to a different
construct of reality. How do we as Christians respond to this
critique? Do we side with the modernists and join the fight against
postmodern influences? Or can we find something helpful in the
issues raised by postmodernism?
Postmodernist Kenneth Gergen argues that, "When convinced of the
truth or right of a given world view a culture has only two
significant options: totalitarian control of the opposition or
annihilation of it." Another has written that modernity has given
us "as much terror as we can take." Postmodernists argue that by
claiming to know the truth we automatically marginalize and oppress
others. It encourages the questioning of everything that modernism
has come to accept as natural or good. Capitalism, patriarchy, and
liberal humanism are just a few ideas that modernity has left us
with and that we have to realize are just social constructs. We are
free, according to postmoderns, to throw off anything that doesn't
work since all institutions and social norms are social constructs
created by society itself. However, with this freedom comes
disorientation. The current social scene in America is a prime
example of this effect. Traditions about family, gender roles,
economic responsibility, and social norms are being questioned and
abandoned. This has left us with a sense of loss, a horrifying loss
that acknowledges that there is nothing solid undergirding why we
live the way we do. It has left us with an amazing amount of
pluralism and a radical multiculturalism that some feel has removed
essential buffers to chaos.
The confidence of modern man in rugged individualism has been
deconstructed by postmodernism to reveal the inevitability of
violence and subjugation. What is left? Many postmodernists argue
that not only is the self a construct, that the autonomous self is
a myth, but that the self is actually a servant of language. Most
people see language as a tool to be used by individuals to express
ideas to another person. Many postmodernists see things quite
differently. They would argue that our language uses us instead.
Another way of thinking of this is that we don't have a language,
a language has us. All that we know of reality is given to us by
the symbols present in our language. This has created a self-
identity problem of dramatic proportions for postmoderns. Many have
responded by embracing this lack of rootedness by seeing that life
is being in a "state of continuous construction and
reconstruction."
Now that we have briefly surveyed both the modern and postmodern
positions, let's begin to think about them from a biblical
standpoint. We should first acknowledge that when doing
apologetics, or defending the faith, we are not merely attempting
to win arguments or make others look foolish. Apologetics should
always be done in the context of evangelism, the goal of which is
to share the gospel in a meaningful way, to convey the truth of
special revelation concerning God's plan for salvation with
humility and compassion.
Christians should probably reject both the confidence of modernism
and the pessimism of postmodernism regarding our ability to know
and understand truth. Modernity's dependence on science as the only
valid source for truth is too limited and fails to consider the
effects of the fall on our ability to know something without bias.
We are often sinfully rational, willfully rejecting what is true.
On the other hand, the postmodern view leaves us without hope that
we can know anything about what is really real. It holds that we
are literally a prisoner of the language game played by our culture
group, regardless of its social class or race.
Next, we will consider how postmodern thinking should affect
evangelism.
A Christian View of Truth
We have been considering the challenges of modern and postmodern
thinking to the notion of truth and the communication of the
Gospel. Earlier we used the metaphor of umpires who call strikes
and balls within different frameworks for knowing. The ump who
"calls 'em the way they are" is a naive realist; the second ump who
"calls 'em like he sees 'em" represents the critical realist view,
and the ump who says "they ain't nothin' until I call 'em" portrays
a radical perspectivist view. The questions before us are, What
view should a Christian take? and How does this choice affect the
way in which we do apologetics and evangelism?
If we accept the view of the first ump who "calls 'em the way they
are," we have adopted a modernist perspective. Unfortunately,
experience tells us that the assumptions that come with this view
don't seem to hold up. It assumes that common sense and logic will
always lead people to the Truth of the Gospel we just need to give
people enough evidence. While this approach does work with some, it
works mainly because they already agree with us on a theistic,
Western view of reality. However, modernism has also led many to
see the universe as a godless machine run by the logical laws of
nature as discovered by science. For example, New Agers or Hindus
have a common understanding that leads them elsewhere. Their basic
assumptions about reality are quite different from ours, and it is
much more difficult to find common ground with them. In fact, they
have consciously rejected the Western view of reality.
The third ump who says "they ain't nothin' until I call 'em" sees
truth as entirely personal. Although we admit that people do create
personal frameworks for interpreting life and reality, there is
ultimately only one true reality, one true God. However, we might
learn from the perspectivist in order to find common ground when
witnessing. One commonality is the notion of an acute consciousness
of suffering by marginalized people. Christianity shares this
concern yet offers a radically different solution.
The second umpire states that there are balls and strikes, and "I
call 'em as I see 'em." This view of truth, called critical
realism, recognizes that there is one true reality, but that our
ability to perceive it is limited. The Bible teaches that sin has
distorted our view. Even as believers we must admit that we don't
always understand why God does what He does. This is partially
because truth is personal in the sense that it is rooted in a
personal God, and we can never know all that there is to know about
Him. Even Peter, who walked with Christ, didn't understand God's
plans. He rebuked Jesus when Jesus told His disciples that He would
go to Jerusalem, be crucified, and resurrected.
The best evangelistic approach attempts to find common ground with
an unbeliever while never relinquishing all that is true of the
Christian world view. If rational, logical arguments are
persuasive, use them. If storytelling works, as in the more
narratively oriented societies of the Middle East, use it. We
should not be limited to either a modernist or postmodernist view
of truth, but work from a distinctively Christian perspective that
holds that the God who created the universe wants us to gently
instruct others in the hope that He will grant them repentance and
lead them to a knowledge of the truth.
© 1996 Don Closson
Notes
1. Richard Middleton and Brian Walsh, Truth Is Stranger Than It
Used to Be: Biblical Faith in a Postmodern Age (Downers Grove,
Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 1995), p. 31.
2. John Dewey, Reconstruction in Philosophy (New York: Henry
Holt and Company, 1920), pp. 47-49.
3. Dennis McCallum, ed. The Death of Truth (Minneapolis,
Minn.: Bethany House, 1996), pp. 23-26.
4. Timothy Phillips and Dennis Okholm, Christian Apologetics in
the Postmodern World (Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press,
1995), p. 31.
5. Middleton and Walsh, Truth Is Stranger Than It Used to
Be, p. 35.
6. Ibid.
7. Ibid., p. 52.
About the Author
Don Closson received the B.S. in education from Southern Illinois
University, the M.S. in educational administration from Illinois State
University, and the M.A. in Biblical Studies from Dallas Theological Seminary.
He served as a public school teacher and administrator before
joining Probe Ministries as a research associate in the field of education. He is the
general editor of Kids, Classrooms, and Contemporary Education.
He can be reached via e-mail at dclosson@probe.org.
What is Probe?
Probe Ministries is a non-profit corporation whose mission is to reclaim the
primacy of Christian thought and values in Western culture through media,
education, and literature. In seeking to accomplish this mission, Probe provides
perspective on the integration of the academic disciplines and historic
Christianity.
In addition, Probe acts as a clearing house, communicating the results of
its research to the church and society at large.
Further information about Probe's materials and ministry may be obtained by
writing to:
Probe Ministries
1900 Firman Drive, Suite 100
Richardson, TX 75081
(972) 480-0240 FAX (972) 644-9664
info@probe.org
www.probe.org
Copyright (C) 1996-2007 Probe Ministries
Email this to a friend
copyright
© 1995-2007
Leadership U. All rights reserved.
Updated: 14 July 2002
|