THE PROBLEM OF TRUTH

INTRODUCTION.
Pilate therefore entered again into the Praetorium,
and called Jesus and said unto him,
"Are you the King of the Jews?"
Jesus answered, "Do you say this of yourself,
or did others tell it to you about me?"
Pilate answered, "Am I a Jew?
Your own nation and the chief priests delivered you unto me:
what have you done?"
Jesus answered, "My kingdom is not of this world:
if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight,
that I might not be delivered to the Jews:
but now my kingdom is not from hence."
Pilate therefore said unto him, "Are you a king then?"
Jesus answered, "You say that I am a king.
For this I have been born,
and for this I have come into the world,
that I should bear witness unto the truth.
Every one who is of the truth hears my voice."
Pilate said unto him, "What is truth?"
(John 18:33-38)
Many times in human history has this question been asked, but there is probably no more famous moment than when it was ask by Pilate, the Roman governor of Judea, during the trial of Jesus. This problem and the problem of the good are probably the most basic and most important problems that man has to face. For the answer to these problems determines a man's whole view of reality and life. It is not surprising therefore that this question has so often been asked in human history. And many answers have been given to this question; many have claimed to have "the truth". It is probably for this reason that we detect a note of skepticism in Pilate's question. Being an educated and politically wise person, Pilate had no doubt heard many of these claims to "the truth". So many conflicting claims to truth could not all be right. But which one was right? Who could say? Thus Pilate was skeptical when Jesus said that he was born into the world to bear witness to the truth. As far as he was concerned Jesus was just another claimant like the rest. But if Pilate had listen to the witness that Jesus had to bear concerning the truth, he would have heard a witness to the truth like he had never heard before and would never hear again. Let us examine the main solutions to the problem of truth that Pilate had no doubt heard and then the solution that Jesus gave in his witness to the truth.
THE PHILOSOPHICAL SOLUTIONS TO THE PROBLEM OF TRUTH.
During the long intellectual history of man many answers have been given to this problem of truth. The problem of truth is really three problems:
(1) What is truth?
(2) What is the criterion of truth? and
(3) How do we know the truth?
The first problem leads to the second problem and the third problem raises the problem of knowledge. We will begin with the first problem: the nature of truth.
1. THE NATURE OF TRUTH.
  In the history of philosophy there have been two main theories of the nature of truth: the correspondence and the coherence theory. Both these theories of the nature of truth are theories of propositional truth. That is, truth is a property of propositions or statements. They both attempt to say how a proposition may be true.
  1. THE CORRESPONDENCE THEORY.
  2. THE COHERENCE THEORY.
2. THE CRITERION OF TRUTH.
  As we have seen above, the problem of these two different views of the nature of propositional truth; that is, the correspondence and coherence theories, raised the problem of the criterion of truth.
  What is the criterion by which the truth of our statements may be determined?
  Historically there have been many answers to this problem.
  The following is a list of the chief criteria or tests that have been proposed to answer this problem of the criterion of truth.
  Social criteria:
  1. Custom.
  2. Tradition.
  3. Consensus gentium.
  4. Authority.
  Psychological criteria:
  1. Instinct.
  2. Feeling.
  3. Sense perception.
  4. Intuition.
  Philosophical criteria:
  1. Correspondence.
  2. Practical consequences.
  3. Consistency.
  4. Coherence.
  5. Systematic Consistency.
3. KNOWLEDGE OF THE TRUTH.
  Now we turn to the third problem of the problem of truth: how do we know the truth? This raises the problem of knowledge: what is the source and criterion of knowledge? Historically there has been two solutions proposed to this problem: empiricism and rationalism.
  1. EMPIRICISM.
  2. RATIONALISM.
  3. SKEPTICISM.
    Both empiricism and rationalism leads to skepticism (each in its own way). Empiricism leads to skepticism because the senses cannot give us a source of knowledge of the real world or of universals (general ideas) and a criterion of knowledge to distinguish between appearance and reality. Rationalism also leads to skepticism because reason cannot give us a source of factual knowledge and of a necessary criterion of knowledge. Since both empiricism and rationalism leads to skepticism, the following problem has arisen: what is the criterion of the knowledge that does not lead to skepticism? In attempting to avoid skepticism and the difficulties of both empiricism and rationalism, some philosophers have attempted a synthesis of reason and sense experience (Aristotle and Kant). But these attempted syntheses have turned out to be another form of rationalism and hence have not answered the basic problem of rationalism: how is the truth of the basic presuppositions of reason established?
4. THE PROBLEM OF ONTOLOGIAL TRUTH.
  In our examination of these theories of propositional truth, we see that there is an another kind of truth: ontologial truth. The problem of propositional truth raises the problem of ontologial truth, the problem of the criterion of reality: how do we decide what is real? For the choice of the criterion of propositional truth leads to and involves the choice of something as real. The truth of propositions are based on the reality of something that is the criterion of reality, ontological truth. Further more, each epistemology makes an ontological assertion as to what is real. Empiricism asserts the reality of the object (Realism) that is known through the senses. Rationalism asserts the reality of the rational (Idealism). Empiricism appeals to the reality of the object beyond the senses to establish the truths of the senses. Rationalism appeals to the reality of the rational, the universal and necessary, to establish the truths of reason. For both of these criteria of knowledge involves an appeal to something that is assumed to be real.
  This raises the question: what is real? To answer this question an appeal must be made to a criterion of reality, the Truth. Thus the problem of the criterion of propositional truth raises and involves the problem of ontological truth: what is the criterion of reality? The criterion of reality answers the question: what is real? Whatever is the criterion of reality is the Truth and the Truth is the criterion of reality; it is ultimate reality, the really real. Realism asserts that the objects of senses are ultimately real, the Truth; Idealism asserts that mind or the rational is the ultimately real, the Truth.
  1. REALISM.
  2. IDEALISM.
5. THE BIBLICAL SOLUTION TO THE PROBLEM OF TRUTH.
  The analysis of the problem of ontological truth above showed that both empiricism and rationalism make an appeal to a criterion of reality, the Truth, as the criterion of propositional truth: empiricism to the reality of the objects of sense knowledge, and rationalism to the rational, the universal and necessary.
  1. THE CLUE TO THE SOLUTION.
    But both empiricism and rationalism ignore the freedom of human choice in determining the criterion of knowledge of the truth. The criterion of knowledge is not rationally necessary nor empirically given; it is chosen. Both of these epistemologies allow no place for this choice.
    Now an analysis of human choice discloses the fact that choice involves a reference to a criterion of choice and ultimately to an ultimate criterion of choice. The choice of what statements or propositions are held to be true depends ultimately on the choice of this ultimate criterion. This observation raises the question: what is the ultimate criterion choice?
  2. STATEMENT OF THE SOLUTION.
    1. Negatively: Any ultimate criterion which denies or destroys the freedom of choice by which it is chosen can not be the true ultimate criterion of choice. Such an ultimate criterion is a false criterion. All false criteria imply and result in a denial, diminution and lost of the freedom of those who choose them.
    2. Positively: Only that ultimate criterion which maintains and guarantees the freedom of choice by which it is chosen can be the true ultimate criterion of choice. What ultimate criterion can guarantee and fulfill that freedom of choice?
      Since an impersonal or non-personal reality (Nature or Reason) does not have this freedom, only another person who has the freedom of choice can be this ultimate criterion. But not only must this person have freedom of choice but he must be committed to the preservation of freedom of the one who has chosen him, that is, he must motivated by love. And in order to be able to preserve that freedom, his freedom must be unlimited. This implies that this person must also be the basis and ground of the rest of reality; that is, he must be ultimate reality (God) and the criterion of reality. And since the Truth is the criterion of reality, that person will be the Truth. Thus the Truth is a person. And if we are to know this person, that is, who he is and that he exists, he must reveal himself. For the only way we can know another person is only by what he says and does. But the initiative lies with the other person. If he chooses to remain silent and inactive, no knowledge can be had of him in addition to the fact that he is there. If this person who is ultimate reality (the Truth) is to be known, He must reveal Himself. The Bible claims that He has taken the initiative and He has revealed Himself in word and deed, and that the Bible is the record of that revelation. Who is this person that is the Truth? The Biblical answer is that Jesus Christ is the Truth. Jesus said,
      "I am the way, the truth, and the life;
      no man comes to the Father, except through me." (John 14:6).
      He is the source of the knowledge of God. That is, Jesus Christ, the Son of God, is the way to God, the revelation of God, the Father, the Creator of all reality except God Himself. Through Him, as the pre-incarnate Word of God, were all things made and He is basis and ground of the rest of reality that God has created (John 1:1-3; Col. 1:15-17). He is the criterion of the real, the Truth, because through Him God has determined by His sovereign creative choice what is real. And as such He is committed to the preservation and fulfilment of our freedom.
      "And you will know the truth and the truth will make you free...
      So if the Son makes you free, you will be free indeed." (John 8:32, 36).
      The Truth that will make you, a person, free is the Son of God. He sets free and perserves the freedom of one who chooses him as their ultimate criterion of the reality, as the Truth.
  3. THE CONSEQUENCES OF THE SOLUTION.
    1. Negatively: Reason is not the ultimate criterion of knowledge of the truth. Neither are the senses. The object of the senses is not ultimate reality as assumed by Empiricism. Neither is the rational the real, that is, ultimate reality, as claimed by Rationalism.
    2. Positively: But since God created a real world to be perceived by our senses, the objects of senses are real. Thus sensation can be used as a factual criterion of knowledge of the created world - sensation appealing to the reality of the object as its criterion. And since the rational is a function and expression of the will, reason can also be used as a criteria of knowledge - reason appealing to the universality and consistency of the propositions of knowledge as its criterion. Reason provides a formal criterion of knowledge and sensation provides a material criterion of knowledge. Reason and sensation are not mutually exclusive but complementary criteria of knowledge. The Biblical epistemology is empirical, but not Empiricism, and rational, but not Rationalism. Ultimate reality is neither the empirical objects of Realism nor the rational ideas of Idealism, but the person through whom all things were created.
6. THE CONCLUSION TO THE PROBLEM OF TRUTH.
  The Biblical view is that the personal creator God is ultimate reality and He has created the empirical objects of the senses and man in his own image whose statements are true when they correspond to the reality that God has created. The image of God is not reason, but the person, Jesus Christ (Col. 1:13-15; compare II Cor. 4:4). He is the model and pattern according to which God created man. Note that the Scriptures never says that the image of God is in man, but rather that man has been created in the image of God.
  What does it mean for man to be created in the image of God?
  According to Genesis 1:26-27, being created in the image of God means for man to have dominion over creation and to have a personal relationship with an equal human person - woman; these are the two aspects of man being created in the image of God. Both of these presuppose freedom - the freedom of choice and the freedom of action. This freedom is the presupposition and possibility of being in the image of God. Since God created man with freedom, dominion over creation and personal relationships with equal personal beings become possible. With freedom of choice and of action, man can exercise his dominion over creation. And since love is the essence of personal relationships, with his freedom of choice and of action, man can love an equal person and enter into a personal relationship with her.
  The freedom of choice and not reason, neither self-consciousness, nor self-transcendence, but freedom of choice is that which make possible man's dominion over creation and personal relationship with an equal personal being. This freedom of decision, not his reason, is what distinguishes man from the rest of creation; this is what gives to man his existence as a person or self and to his reason that human and personal character. Man as a personal being in a created physical world is as such a union of spirit (person or self) and body (psycho-physical organism).
  "Then the Lord God formed man of the dust from the ground, and
  breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and
  man became a living soul [nephesh]" (Gen. 2:7).
  Man's soul is the union and expression of a spirit or person in and through a body. And his existence as a person is found in his ability to choose, to make decisions.
  "I choose, therefore, I am", not, "I think, therefore, I am".
  To be is to choose, not to think nor to preceive.
  Man's reason is a function and an expression of his will.
  "...whatever evidence one accepts,
  whether that of experience or that of logic,
  will depend upon neither logic or experience alone,
  but upon a decision by the individual concerned
  in favor of the one or the other." [1]
  Knowledge and reason depend upon a prior decision as to what is real and to what is the criterion of reality; that is, what is ultimate reality, the Truth. Ultimate reality is not the universal and the necessary. That is, Reason, the universal and the necessary, is not God. God is a person (or more accurately, three persons) whose existence is not in His reason but in His unlimited sovereign free decision and will; it is not the universal ideas in God's mind that determine how or why God will create man and the world, but His unlimited sovereign will (Rev. 4:11). Since reason is a function of will, God is rational and His reason is a function of His will. Thus the world that God has chosen to create is rational. And that world is real, but it is not ultimate reality.
  Man also is a person (or more accurately, a spirit [person] in a body) whose existence is also to be found, not in his reason, but in his limited free decision and will. And since decisions involve a reference to an ultimate criterion beyond the self, to a god, the Biblical view of man is that man is a religious animal, a being who must have a god; the view that man is a rational animal is not the Biblical view of man. Reason is not that which makes man different from the rest of the animals.
  Reason is not God and Reason is not man's ultimate criterion but the sovereign will of the Creator who made all things and has revealed Himself in Jesus Christ. This is the basic choice that a human person must make if he is understand what is real and what is the Truth, the criterion of reality. Is the Truth the universal and necessary or is it the sovereign will of the personal Creator who made all things and has revealed Himself in the person of Jesus Christ?
  This choice explains the basic incompatibility between Greek philosophy and the Biblical view of God and man; it also explains the conflict between Greek philosophy and the Christian faith and the failure of the attempted synthesis of these divergent points of view by Augustine and Aquinas. All attempts to synthesize the classical Greek philosophical view of God and man with the Biblical view will fail. And worst of all, the Biblical view of God and man will be and has been obscured and misunderstood.
End Notes

[1] E. LaB. Cherbonnier, "Biblical Metaphysic and Christian Philosophy,"
Theology Today 9 (October 1952): p. 372.
To read this article, click here.

THE PROBLEM OF TRUTH

End Notes