Understanding Truth: A Discussion

Introduction

Welcome to Christianarchy Today with Steve, Ethan, and Sean. Today, we're diving into the age-old topic of how to know truth. This is a challenging issue because there are so many opinions on what truth actually is.

Defining Truth

The Nature of Truth

First, we need to define truth—truth with a capital "T." Is truth relative? We agreed that truth is not relative. But what are the arguments for it being relative? Post-modern philosophy suggests that your truth might be different than my truth. But we must ask, is that statement true?

The Self-Defeating Argument

Dr. Fred Turck taught that making a truth claim about different truths being out there is itself a truth claim. Sean argues that it's his version of the truth claim, albeit a relative one. Still, saying that "truth is a relative thing" is, in itself, an objective truth statement.

The Dialogue Challenge

The character Sean is portraying is one that many might feel is like talking to a brick wall—wasting one's breath. This is relativism, and while it's anathema to logic, it ignites an important conversation about truth.

Religious Truth

Spiritual Objectivity

When discussing religious truth, is there a truth with a capital "T"? Absolutely, religious, spiritual, and Christian truth is not relative. But can we be sure of this truth? While truth is absolutely objective as only God has authority over it, our understanding can be subjective due to our finite experiences and knowledge.

Truth in Christianity

Why do religions claim to know the truth? They provide doctrines and teachings as interpretations of what may be seen as divine truth. For example, views on baptism vary. Where some can interpret clear biblical guidance, others see room for varied understanding, such as infant baptism.

Conclusion

In the end, while truth can be seen as absolute, our interpretations and understanding may vary. The dialogue about truth is important, but understanding who holds the ultimate authority over truth—God—helps inform our beliefs and practices. As we continue these discussions, let's seek understanding with open minds and hearts.

Understanding Baptism: A Complex Subject

Baptism: Water, Spirit, or Fire?

Baptism has been a topic of significant debate, with questions arising about its purpose and method. Is it supposed to be conducted by immersion, or can it be done by sprinkling? The truth of baptism is multifaceted—whether through water, spirit, or even fire. Baptism by fire, for example, is understood through Jesus Christ.

Do You Have to Be Baptized to Go to Heaven?

One crucial question often asked is whether baptism is necessary for salvation. Many argue that there are better ways to achieve spiritual grace, although none can be declared as the definitive method. Debates around this topic persist; however, what seems to be most important is the state of one's heart. Baptism can be a tool, but ultimately, it's the spiritual intent that holds significance.

The Capital T Truth of Baptism

The "Capital T" Truth about baptism remains elusive. Can one confidently assert that baptism is essential for salvation or specify how it should be performed? Historical practices, such as sprinkling blood on the altar in the Old Testament, might align more with sprinkling than immersion. Baptism is a vast subject, claimed differently by numerous denominations, making it difficult to ascertain one absolute truth.

Subjectivity in Religious Practice

Similar to the varied interpretations of baptism, questions arise regarding which church to attend. Is it the one with the most family members or friends, the nearest one, or perhaps the one that speaks in tongues? When subjective experiences enter religious practice, it's challenging to pinpoint a single truth. Interpretation of the Bible leads to differing views among religious followers. Despite the objective nature of divine truth, personal interpretation renders it subjective in the human realm.

The Role of Love Amidst Differences

Given our fallen nature and inability to fully comprehend divine truth, the differences arising from subjective interpretations should be addressed through love. Even when someone holds an objectively wrong viewpoint, they are still deserving of love. This lesson extends beyond Christian circles and is applicable to broader debates over truth and opinion.

Truth Versus Opinion

Can truth apply to opinions and subjective experiences? Certain facts, like the earth revolving around the sun, are indisputable. However, personal opinions, such as whether a movie is great or not, blur the line between truth and personal perspective. Differentiating between objective truth and subjective opinion can become overcomplicated, especially when personal interpretations cloud clear truths.

Ultimately, the complexity of understanding and determining truth, especially in religious contexts, underscores the need for open-mindedness and love in our interactions with others.

Is There Really a "Best" Movie?

The Impossible Quest for the Best Movie

Deciding on the best movie ever made is a daunting task. One could say, "There is a best movie on the planet," but the reality is quite different. It's impossible to definitively claim any film as the best because it all boils down to personal opinion.

According to What?

Determining the best movie according to some criteria is complex. You'd have to consider every movie ever made, even those shot on an iPhone, and then attempt to decide which one stands out. There is no factual basis for declaring one movie the best over all others.

Ticket Sales Aren't Enough

While one might argue that ticket sales could provide a metric, this approach is flawed. A small indie film that hardly anyone has seen could, in fact, be superior to blockbuster hits. Popularity doesn't always equate to quality or societal meaning in this context.

Opinions vs. Universal Truths

The debate over the best movie is an endless one because opinions differ. One person could argue that "Jurassic Park" is the best movie, and another could disagree. Personal opinions should not be mistaken for universal truths. This subjectivity makes it impractical for the world to collectively agree on the best movie.

The Popularity Myth

There's a misconception that if most people like something, it must be the best. However, popular opinion doesn't accurately define absolute truth. Individual preference plays a critical role in these discussions.

Objective Measurements and Subjective Views

While we can objectively measure certain aspects of a movie—such as box office earnings, production cost, or the number of awards won—these factors do not make a film the best.

Subcategories and Classifications

We can break down categories such as "best-selling movie" or "most expensive movie to produce," but even these objective qualifications don't capture the subjective experience of watching a film. What makes a movie "the best" is the impact it has on an individual viewer, and this is as unique as the viewer themselves.

The Conclusion

Ultimately, the notion of a "best" movie is subjective and varies from person to person. Objective measurements provide data but cannot encapsulate the personal connections and diverse interpretations films create. So, while discussions about the best movie may continue, they remain a matter of personal taste rather than universal consensus.

Exploring the Nature of Opinions and Facts

The Emotional Impact of Art

Did it make you emotional? Did it touch you? Did it make you want to change? These are questions that different people answer in different ways. But what if something checks all these boxes for more people than anything else? Popular opinion does not determine truth, after all.

The Complexity of Defining the "Best"

I never thought I'd see the day when Sean and I would be debating Steve on this topic. It's okay, and it's beautiful in its own way. I'm just trying to work through this argument to make sure I understand it correctly. I'm enjoying the debate, and I never knew for sure that it wasn't possible to define the "best" movie. We're reaching a conclusion, and I'm open to criticism. If I say something that feels off, go ahead and tell me because conversations like this are going to happen more and more.

Making Truth Claims About Opinions

Let's step away from the secular world for a moment. Can you make a truth claim about an opinion? It's tough, and some might say it's impossible. Although, I disagree with that. Give me an example, and I'll show you why. There's no definitive "best movie," but on some extremes, there are things that are objectively true. It doesn’t matter if people disagree with these truths; that’s their problem.

Distinguishing Between Facts and Opinions

While two plus two equals four is a fact, we're discussing matters of opinion here. What's the difference? An opinion is based on non-fact. For instance, the Earth's revolution around the sun is a fact, not an opinion. It’s about truth, not just facts.

However, the concept of the Earth revolving around the sun is still referred to as a theory in scientific terms. Despite being widely accepted, we haven't left our galaxy to see it firsthand, but our science supports it.

Scientific Facts and Changing Beliefs

You are a male—now, that's a scientific fact. If an opinion contradicts a fact, the opinion doesn’t hold. However, sometimes what people call facts are more like theories. Despite scientific evidence, some people believe the Earth is flat because it aligns with what the Bible says. They consider this their opinion based on the facts they know, but it conflicts with scientific facts.

The Fluidity of Scientific Understanding

Scientific facts can change. For instance, it was once a scientific "fact" that the Earth was flat and the sun revolved around it. Opinions can be true, but what constitutes a fact can evolve. An example is the mathematical certainty that two plus two equals four; that's not subject to opinion under our current system.

The Relativity of Opinions

You argued that some opinions are not relative, but also said some can be true. Give an example of this. What I provided doesn’t necessarily hold up because people have varying views. Ultimately, distinguishing between opinion and truth can be complex due to our differing perspectives.

Understanding Science and Truth

The Nature of Scientific Proof

In discussing popular opinions, it's important to note that popular belief doesn’t equate to proof. Objective proof is key—that’s when you can truly say something is scientifically validated. However, even when someone provides evidence, it often remains a theory. Belief plays a role, too. For instance, a Ph.D. who launches satellites based on a round Earth can demonstrate its roundness, but it's essential to acknowledge that not all surrounding conclusions are factual. There are learned individuals who can challenge accepted facts and show exceptions within scientific opinions about the Earth being round.

I like to argue when people emphatically declare something contradicting the round Earth as a fact. Is there any other opinion we can state as fact? Perhaps, but let's shift focus.

The Nature of Science

Science isn't settled—it continuously evolves, which is a commendable way to discover truth. However, because it evolves, it often resembles an opinion. For instance, there was a time when the Earth was believed to be flat, backed by what was considered adequate evidence.

While scientific knowledge expands, some facts become challenging to dispute. Take, for instance, the simple observation that grass is green—unless you're colorblind. Or more definitively, plants growing under the right conditions: this can be objectively observed and doesn't change with science.

The Limits of Changing Scientific Paradigms

While our understanding of phenomena like evolution might evolve, the fundamental fact of evolution likely will not. Yet, acknowledging that our biological understanding could change entirely is crucial. There are possibilities, and while unlikely, we must remain open to scientific advancements and shifts.

What if what we know as gravity is explained differently in some cosmic truth? Such prospects question our pursuit of truth. Bit by bit, we edge closer to truth, but as perspectives shift, the unalterable can indeed change. This marks the significance of open-mindedness in scientific inquiry.

Exploring the Reality of Truth in Science and Religion

The Nature of Truth in Science

Within the scientific community, there seems to be an ongoing debate about the nature of truth and what constitutes an objective fact. As someone who has delved into science, physics, and biology, I've come to realize that everything is debatable. There are many opinions on these topics, making it challenging to differentiate between facts and opinions. For instance, is evolution a fact or an opinion? Personally, I consider it an opinion.

Microevolution vs. Macroevolution

When discussing microevolution, which refers to animals adapting and changing over time, I believe it's a fact. We've observed these changes, so we can rely on empirical evidence. However, this confidence doesn't necessarily extend to other areas. For example, many argue over whether we can genuinely claim the Earth is round based solely on personal observation or whether it relies heavily on equations and external evidence.

Investigating Religious Truths

Truth is essential, particularly in matters of religion. One pressing question is how someone can know if they're following the correct religious path. Mormons might say their feelings, such as a 'burning in the heart,' affirm religious truths. Emotions are considered by many as a way to discern truth. So, what can we say to Christians about discerning truth?

Christian Truth and the Role of Spirit

For Christians, discerning truth is closely tied to the love it produces. Truth is validated through the love, joy, peace, and long-suffering it cultivates, aligning with the fruit of the Spirit. The word of God supports this process, providing a reliable basis for discerning religious truths.

The Search for God's Objective Truth

Ultimately, the challenge lies in recognizing God's objective truth. This involves asking whether religion itself is true and evaluating how this truth can be proven. These inquiries are crucial for Christians and are foundational in developing a strong, truth-based faith.

Conclusion

Whether in the arena of science or religion, the pursuit of truth requires both empirical evidence and spiritual discernment. For scientists, this involves reevaluating assumptions and continually questioning existing beliefs. For Christians, it involves a deeper reliance on the love and evidence of the Spirit's work in their lives, aligning with the teachings found in the word.

Exploring the Existence of God

Reasonable Suggestions for God's Existence

When discussing the existence of God, one must start from a foundational understanding. It's not about "proving" God's existence, as that's a heavy term, but rather proposing a reasonable suggestion that God exists. This suggestion comes from philosophy and scientific findings. Although God cannot be placed in a test tube or discovered through the scientific method, events throughout evolutionary and human history suggest the possibility of God's existence.

Historical Accounts and Christianity

Christianity's truth can be reasonably suggested through various historical accounts. While we can't delve into details here, we can acknowledge some compelling points. For instance, the universe's beginning implies a beginner. Non-biblical historical accounts from Josephus and others within the first century mention a man named Jesus. Eyewitness accounts, the writings of Paul, and the sacrifices made by early Christians add credibility. These factors can lead one to a reasonable belief in Christianity's truth.

The Role of Faith

Despite the evidence, belief in God often comes down to faith, but it should be faith grounded in something objective. Feelings alone, being subjective, aren't reliable indicators of truth. There are scholars, like Bart Ehrman, who challenge these beliefs, pointing out that one can reasonably take the opposite stance. Ultimately, faith remains a crucial element, especially when evidence for multiple possibilities, like the multiverse, makes it impossible to know for certain.

Debates in Science and Faith

The complexity of topics such as the multiverse serves as a reminder that certain scientific questions remain in the realm of faith. Even faith should anchor itself in evidentiary principles. While we might reasonably deny certain aspects, faith provides the substance of things hoped for and the evidence of things not seen.

The Apostles and Historical Truth

Examining the apostles showcases a compelling apologetical argument. They denied Christ only to later claim to have witnessed his resurrection. These individuals endured horrible deaths, holding on to their belief in Christ's resurrection. This raises an important question: why would they sacrifice their lives for something they knew to be false? Even Bart Ehrman acknowledges that these historical events took place. While this doesn't irrefutably prove Christianity's truth, it strengthens the argument for Christ's existence and influence.

Conclusion

While the existence of God and the truth of Christianity are subjects of debate, they rest on a foundation of reasonable suggestions supported by historical and philosophical evidence. Faith, necessary for belief, must be built on objective grounds, appreciating the complexity and nuance in both science and spirituality.

Understanding Historical Claims and Beliefs

The discussion pivots around the nature of historical claims and religious beliefs, referencing historical figures and events to consider the reliability and interpretation of history.

The Nature of Belief and Historical Events

The conversation begins with a reference to Jim Jones and the events at Waco, illustrating the point that strong belief, such as those held by the apostles or individuals committing acts of violence in the name of religion, does not necessarily equate to truth. There’s an acknowledgment that while belief can support a narrative, it doesn’t confirm its veracity.

Debating the Resurrection and Historical Claims

A central debate emerges around the resurrection of Christ. The argument is made that if Christ did not resurrect, the claims of this event could have been fabricated, similar to the delusions held by individuals committing extreme acts for their faith. Yet, the historical fact of Christ’s deathSeparation from God—now overcome. Physical death remains, but it no longer separates us from life with God. on the cross is also acknowledged, opening the debate about the reliability of historical documentation.

The Debate on Reliability of Historical Sources

The reliability of historical records is questioned. The argument suggests that writings of historical events could be altered or fabricated, questioning the very foundation upon which history is understood. The conversation revisits the need for multiple sources to verify a claim, but also highlights the challenge in proving historical truths definitively.

Confronting Historical Assumptions

The discussion touches on the idea that people often write stories, challenging the assumption that all documented history is true. The dialogue warns against abandoning historical education while recognizing that victors often write history, which can bias historical narratives.

Archaeological Evidence and Historical References

Despite skepticism, the discussion acknowledges archaeological discoveries that support biblical narratives. For instance, the pool where Jesus healed a blind man was discovered, reinforcing parts of the biblical story. Nevertheless, this evidence doesn't confirm the miraculous events associated with these places but does provide a tangible link to historical accounts.

Conclusion on Reasonableness of Historical Beliefs

In concluding, the conversation focuses on weighing the reasonableness of historical beliefs. The discussion suggests weighing various pieces of evidence, such as the writings of Josephus and findings from archaeological excavations, to make informed conclusions about historical figures like Jesus. It questions whether it is more reasonable to assert Jesus likely existed or was the messiah, acknowledging that reasonableness is subjective and varies based on the interpretation of available evidence.

Understanding Truth and Belief Systems

In the complex world of belief systems, one might ask whether there is such a thing as objective truth. This discussion touches upon a variety of worldviews and the notion of truth within those frameworks.

An Exploration of Beliefs

Reflecting on personal beliefs, one could make reasonable arguments for many different things. This makes the concept of truth rather subjective. It's essential to clarify that while personal beliefs are significant, they don't inherently determine truth. Some may say, "I believe in history and I believe the Earth is right," which indicates faith in objective truths, albeit context-dependent ones.

The Question of the Multiverse

The multiverse theory is another area where opinions vary. While some might not believe in it, these beliefs often pose a risk to public perceptions or even sponsorships. Yet, when expressing these views, it’s crucial to help the audience understand that one can argue points without necessarily subscribing to them.

Determining Capital T Truths

A prevalent question is how we determine "capital T truths." Consider different religious perspectives: Mormons might look at evidence and believe it confirms Joseph Smith as a prophet, whereas Muslims might regard the Quran as a divine revelation via angel Gabriel to Muhammad. The challenge lies in sifting through these beliefs to find the truth.

A Personal Perspective on Truth

One method involves questioning everything. When confronted with conflicting interpretations, such as a pastor's teachings about eschatologyStudy of “last things”—TGNN teaches all biblical eschatology was fulfilled in 70 A.D. More, one might turn to group discussions or texts that encourage testing all beliefs. Test them by the spirit and scripture, and evaluate if the outcomes foster love.

The Role of Scripture

Christian truth, especially, suggests testing all things by spirit and scripture. If the spirit's guidance diverges from love or scripture, it's considered to be incorrect. However, the method of discerning truth varies, with some proposing a more fundamental approach: assume all is untrue until proven otherwise, similar to Descartes' philosophy of denial and reconstruction.

Knowledge Through Scripture

Questions about knowledge and truth inevitably lead to scripture. It might not explicitly state how to know, but it does convey that knowledge of God leads to eternal life. Jesus' declaration, "I am the way, the truth, and the life," emphasizes that knowing the truth liberates us.

In this discussion, the pursuit of truth involves testing beliefs through various lenses—be it personal experience, religious doctrine, or philosophical reasoning. This exploratory process is crucial for unraveling the intricacies of truth and belief.

Understanding Internal and External Truths

In 1 John, it talks about knowing internally by the Spirit that something is true. However, how do we reconcile this with others who also claim to know internally that something is true, especially when there are contradictory views?

Evaluating Truth Through Love

Joseph Smith once claimed he had a revelation that men should take on extra wives. While it may be mentioned in the Bible and was practiced by others, we should ask if it produces the fruit of love. If it does not, then it should be rejected because it doesn't yield that fruit. It’s crucial to consider the following when evaluating truth:

• Test all things.
• Seek the facts.
• Have the Spirit.
• Refer to the Word.
• Evaluate whether it produces love.

If any of these aspects are lacking, it's time to question the purported truth.

Reflections and Future Discussions

We’ve covered a lot of good material today, and we’ve provided the longer episodes that our audience requested. It’s a great opportunity to look back and reflect on the topics discussed. Next week, we’ll be diving deeper into the discussion on homosexuality.

Stay tuned for our next episode on "Homosexuality Uncapped" as we further explore these complex issues. We appreciate you being part of these conversations. Let's wrap it up for now, and we’ll continue next time with more in-depth discussions.