Most people understand that if an ultimate absolute exists, it must be God. But some people doubt God’s existence or totally deny it and could assume a different ultimate absolute. So let’s look at the end result of denying God’s existence and contrast it with the rational choice of affirming God as the bedrock of truth and reality. While I will not try to prove God scientifically or empirically, I will lead you to see that belief in God is a logical necessity.
God’s existence can be inferred in the same way that physicists infer the existence of black holes. Black holes are by nature invisible, but astronomers know they exist because of gravitational effects on certain stars that only something like a black hole could cause. God is also invisible, but we know He exists because of effects in the universe that only something like a god could cause. In that sense, we do indeed have proof of God’s existence. So let’s look at how to affirm God’s existence as the ultimate absolute so you can build on His bedrock a life of certainty.
Thursday, February 28, 2008
Wednesday, February 27, 2008
Is There Proof of the Ultimate Absolute?
An ultimate absolute cannot be proved because if it could be proved, it would not be the ultimate absolute. It would be only a conditional standard in need of validation by a deeper, self-evident truth, which would actually be the ultimate absolute. But it should not be accepted blindly. Before we place our trust in the ultimate absolute, reason should show us that it is a logical necessity with no rational alternative. We have reached bedrock and it is time to assume solidity and start building.
Of course, we can insist on empirical proof even at the basic foundation of our beliefs. A builder can blast a hole in the bedrock to see just how sturdy it really is, but then he ruins it as a basis for his foundation and he will never have a house. In the same way, if you refuse to accept an ultimate absolute, you will never be certain of your beliefs; you will have a hole in your life—empty and meaningless.
Are we saying, then, that it is impossible to know truth with certainty?
Of course, we can insist on empirical proof even at the basic foundation of our beliefs. A builder can blast a hole in the bedrock to see just how sturdy it really is, but then he ruins it as a basis for his foundation and he will never have a house. In the same way, if you refuse to accept an ultimate absolute, you will never be certain of your beliefs; you will have a hole in your life—empty and meaningless.
Are we saying, then, that it is impossible to know truth with certainty?
Monday, February 25, 2008
The Bedrock Truth
We accept without question the universal belief that society should be preserved but why? (See previous blog). Who came up with that idea? Why does it matter? Why do we think we should believe it? Before we can trust even this seemingly obvious foundational truth to be really true, we must look beneath it to see if it has the bedrock support of an ultimate absolute. And if we find such an absolute, we can lay proofs aside and dig no deeper. We have reached the bedrock truth that must simply be accepted as a logical necessity too obvious to question.
Thursday, February 21, 2008
Finding the Ultimate Absolute
When validating our deepest beliefs and convictions, reason tells us to look beneath our beliefs layer by layer until at the bottom of the stack we find a foundational truth we feel we can safely assume to be true—a truth beyond empirical proof, a truth that we accept as necessary or too obvious to question.
The process of working our way through these layers goes something like this: We believe it is right to help stranded motorists because we accept the validity of the maxim “do to others what you would have them to do to you.” We believe this maxim to be valid, because it is rooted in our understanding that we are mutually dependent on each other for survival in a world filled with trouble and pain. We believe that we should take this mutual dependence seriously as necessary to survival, because we accept without question the universal belief that society should be preserved. Virtually everyone accepts this truth as foundational. It is a universally assumed absolute adopted by all societies in all places and in all times. Yet even this absolute stops one step short of being bedrock.
The process of working our way through these layers goes something like this: We believe it is right to help stranded motorists because we accept the validity of the maxim “do to others what you would have them to do to you.” We believe this maxim to be valid, because it is rooted in our understanding that we are mutually dependent on each other for survival in a world filled with trouble and pain. We believe that we should take this mutual dependence seriously as necessary to survival, because we accept without question the universal belief that society should be preserved. Virtually everyone accepts this truth as foundational. It is a universally assumed absolute adopted by all societies in all places and in all times. Yet even this absolute stops one step short of being bedrock.
Wednesday, February 20, 2008
True Beliefs
The only safe way to determine whether our beliefs are true is to assure ourselves that they rest on a solid, dependable foundation. We must look beneath each belief, layer by layer, until we find the ultimate absolute that supports it.
We place confidence in our beliefs in much the same way that we place confidence in our houses. We trust the second story because it is built on a strong and dependable first story. We trust the first story because it is built on a strong and dependable foundation. We trust the foundation because it is built on strong and dependable bedrock. We trust bedrock because—well, because it would be silly to spend time and money to analyze bedrock by digging through it to prove what everyone already knows: bedrock is solid, dependable and safe to build on. Bedrock is the builder’s absolute.
The process is the same when it comes to validating our deepest beliefs and convictions. Reason tells us to look beneath our beliefs layer by layer until at the bottom of the stack we find a foundational truth we feel we can safely assume to be true—a truth beyond empirical proof, a truth that we accept as necessary or too obvious to question.
We place confidence in our beliefs in much the same way that we place confidence in our houses. We trust the second story because it is built on a strong and dependable first story. We trust the first story because it is built on a strong and dependable foundation. We trust the foundation because it is built on strong and dependable bedrock. We trust bedrock because—well, because it would be silly to spend time and money to analyze bedrock by digging through it to prove what everyone already knows: bedrock is solid, dependable and safe to build on. Bedrock is the builder’s absolute.
The process is the same when it comes to validating our deepest beliefs and convictions. Reason tells us to look beneath our beliefs layer by layer until at the bottom of the stack we find a foundational truth we feel we can safely assume to be true—a truth beyond empirical proof, a truth that we accept as necessary or too obvious to question.
Monday, February 18, 2008
Real Truth
The democratic ideal of majority rule, augmented by the principles of equality and tolerance, has led many to accept the principle that whatever the majority of society endorses carries the weight of truth. Controversial practices such as abortion, homosexuality, euthanasia and sexual freedom become right if society as a whole says they are right. Many people today insist that they have as much right to adopt these values as those of fidelity, chastity, love and fair play. They conclude that we decide for ourselves what is true based on majority opinion. But what if the majority opinion is wrong?
Government, with its finger to the wind of the majority, has no more right—and ultimately no more ability—to legislate changes to the universal basics of morality than it does to legislate changes to the length of a day. Reality will not budge one inch to satisfy the whims of a self-serving society. Any apparent success in changing moral principles or core truth is a temporary illusion that will soon shatter into grief and chaos. Real truth is solid and immovable. It is rigidly supported by an absolute that is not conditional or subject to change of any kind.
Government, with its finger to the wind of the majority, has no more right—and ultimately no more ability—to legislate changes to the universal basics of morality than it does to legislate changes to the length of a day. Reality will not budge one inch to satisfy the whims of a self-serving society. Any apparent success in changing moral principles or core truth is a temporary illusion that will soon shatter into grief and chaos. Real truth is solid and immovable. It is rigidly supported by an absolute that is not conditional or subject to change of any kind.
Thursday, February 14, 2008
Absolutely
Humans are saddled with persistent questions about our own meaning, destiny and purpose. We want assurance that the conclusions we reason out and think through with our minds are valid. To assure us that such beliefs are true, we need a standard that is unconditional. We need an absolute.
Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary defines absolute as “perfect, unquestionable, fundamental, ultimate.” An absolute is rock-bottom truth or a ground of knowledge that is beyond question. It is the final authority. It is what we use as proof when anything is challenged. An absolute must stand beyond challenge to function as a reliable standard.
To be certain that any belief is true, we must find beneath it an absolute on which it rests. We must know there exists a final authority beyond question to serve as the ultimate answer to our questions. Our claim to knowledge collapses like a line of falling dominoes unless that knowledge ultimately rests on something that can’t be knocked over. If truth is not supported by an absolute, one belief is as good as another, and none can be held up as truly right to the exclusion of all others.
Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary defines absolute as “perfect, unquestionable, fundamental, ultimate.” An absolute is rock-bottom truth or a ground of knowledge that is beyond question. It is the final authority. It is what we use as proof when anything is challenged. An absolute must stand beyond challenge to function as a reliable standard.
To be certain that any belief is true, we must find beneath it an absolute on which it rests. We must know there exists a final authority beyond question to serve as the ultimate answer to our questions. Our claim to knowledge collapses like a line of falling dominoes unless that knowledge ultimately rests on something that can’t be knocked over. If truth is not supported by an absolute, one belief is as good as another, and none can be held up as truly right to the exclusion of all others.
Wednesday, February 13, 2008
The Search for Certainty
I fully understand that few people are won to belief in God by sheer reason. It seems that most come to Christ through the testimony of someone who cares about them and whose life radiates such joy and confidence that the unbeliever’s mouth waters to have the same thing. Many other people, however, wouldn’t think of believing in God until they feel the solid foundation of truth under their feet. Whichever you are, I hope that you will see that the foundation of Christianity is firm and solid.
I make no secret about my conviction that Christianity presents the only accurate picture of reality. My purpose is to counter the postmodern view that asserts that external, absolute truth—that is, a truth that is true for all people, in all places, and at all times—cannot be known through reason or science because truth is either nonexistent or unknowable. To the contrary, truth is certain and founded on solid absolutes.
Faith in God is not an irrational leap into the dark or a desperate hope without substance. Rather, such faith is utterly rational, soundly grounded, intellectually defensible, and emotionally fulfilling. You don’t have to check your brains at the door of the church to become a believer. The God of creation is the only complete, rational answer to people’s religious and philosophic questions. And the ultimate absolute that gives us certainty is nothing less than a personal God who invites us into a relationship with him.
I make no secret about my conviction that Christianity presents the only accurate picture of reality. My purpose is to counter the postmodern view that asserts that external, absolute truth—that is, a truth that is true for all people, in all places, and at all times—cannot be known through reason or science because truth is either nonexistent or unknowable. To the contrary, truth is certain and founded on solid absolutes.
Faith in God is not an irrational leap into the dark or a desperate hope without substance. Rather, such faith is utterly rational, soundly grounded, intellectually defensible, and emotionally fulfilling. You don’t have to check your brains at the door of the church to become a believer. The God of creation is the only complete, rational answer to people’s religious and philosophic questions. And the ultimate absolute that gives us certainty is nothing less than a personal God who invites us into a relationship with him.
Monday, February 11, 2008
The Real Truth
To say that one truth is as good as another is to say that it really doesn’t matter what you believe, because all religious beliefs are mere coping illusions that we grasp in desperation to help us get through the uncertainties and mystifications of life. What if there is a God out there, a God who is the only source of certainty, meaning, purpose, and identity? And what if, as Christianity affirms, there is only one road by which you can reach Him and that is through a relationship with the person of Jesus Christ? What would that do to the notion that we should affirm all beliefs as valid? It would kill it.
If there is one solid absolute truth, then the idea that we can create our own truth is fatal. It is the most dangerous doctrine we can adopt, because if you hold to a belief that does not exist as an objective reality, you are in jeopardy of missing out on the promises and benefits of knowing the real God. You are in danger of throwing away your life.
If you believe that a real truth may exist out there somewhere, but it is impossible for you to know it, the answer is not to throw up your hands and adopt some convenient imitation of truth that seems to work for you; you must keep searching. If real truth exists, no substitute will give you the answers you need.
If there is one solid absolute truth, then the idea that we can create our own truth is fatal. It is the most dangerous doctrine we can adopt, because if you hold to a belief that does not exist as an objective reality, you are in jeopardy of missing out on the promises and benefits of knowing the real God. You are in danger of throwing away your life.
If you believe that a real truth may exist out there somewhere, but it is impossible for you to know it, the answer is not to throw up your hands and adopt some convenient imitation of truth that seems to work for you; you must keep searching. If real truth exists, no substitute will give you the answers you need.
Thursday, February 7, 2008
The Truth about Religious Experience
Why do we abandon rational objectivity when it comes to matters of religion? They don’t classify it as a hard reality in the same category as buying a car or swallowing a pill. If there is a personal, absolute God who exists as a reality independent of our belief, His claims must be seriously investigated by a standard at least as hard-nosed as we would apply when buying a car. A right relationship with Him is crucial to our ultimate destiny.
Understandably, it is likely that most unbelievers who turn to religion are not at first interested in truth or their ultimate destiny. They are searching for certainty in a painful and uncertain world. So they choose a belief system that seems to meet their most pressing needs, regardless of that system’s truth claims. They blindly accept whatever promises to ease their burdens and provide an element of certainty in their lives. But when they don’t find the peace and relief they seek, they will jump the fence to a greener pasture that seems to offer a “truth” that works better for them.
Ultimately, those who hold to a personal belief that is not grounded in absolute truth will come away empty. No mere belief, no matter how sincerely held, can provide long-term certainty, meet human needs, and solve physical, emotional or relational problems. The only kind of God that can meet their needs is a God who is real—a God with whom we can make a solid connection and establish a relationship.
Understandably, it is likely that most unbelievers who turn to religion are not at first interested in truth or their ultimate destiny. They are searching for certainty in a painful and uncertain world. So they choose a belief system that seems to meet their most pressing needs, regardless of that system’s truth claims. They blindly accept whatever promises to ease their burdens and provide an element of certainty in their lives. But when they don’t find the peace and relief they seek, they will jump the fence to a greener pasture that seems to offer a “truth” that works better for them.
Ultimately, those who hold to a personal belief that is not grounded in absolute truth will come away empty. No mere belief, no matter how sincerely held, can provide long-term certainty, meet human needs, and solve physical, emotional or relational problems. The only kind of God that can meet their needs is a God who is real—a God with whom we can make a solid connection and establish a relationship.
Wednesday, February 6, 2008
Truth in Everyday Life
No one employs mere belief when dealing with the down-to-earth realities of everyday life. For example, none of us would buy a used car assuming the truth of the salesperson’s enthusiastic pitch that it’s in excellent running condition. We would have it checked out by a reputable mechanic or insist on a generous warranty. We all know that believing a car to be in tiptop shape doesn’t make it so. Or if a stranger offered you an unknown pill, guaranteeing that it would cure your migraine headaches, you wouldn’t swallow it on the spot. We don’t take pills unless they are prescribed by a trusted physician and prepared by a licensed pharmacist. It doesn’t matter how much we believe they will work or want them to work; we know that the wrong pills won’t help us and could even harm us.
In making everyday life decisions, we insist that truth precede belief. We don’t trust our lives and health to what we hope, dream, wish, or think will happen. Our beliefs are conditioned on dependable, objective, verifiable truth. “True for you” doesn’t work for any of us in the material world. We insist on going beyond belief to what is objectively true. So, why do we abandon objectivity with religion?
In making everyday life decisions, we insist that truth precede belief. We don’t trust our lives and health to what we hope, dream, wish, or think will happen. Our beliefs are conditioned on dependable, objective, verifiable truth. “True for you” doesn’t work for any of us in the material world. We insist on going beyond belief to what is objectively true. So, why do we abandon objectivity with religion?
Monday, February 4, 2008
What Is True vs. What Is True For You
If mere belief determined reality, it would matter little what anyone believes. For the person who chooses to believe in Christ and the Bible, Christianity would become the truth. The same could be said about any other religion, sect or cult. If belief determined reality, whatever god a person chose to believe in would become god for that person. And for the atheist, reality would consist of a universe with no god at all. In the postmodern world, all these “truths” are considered equal because truth is whatever a person chooses to believe. As long as it’s “true for you,” then it’s true.
But we must ask, does the phrase “true for you” really mean anything? Can truth exist as a reality solely for the persons who believe it and for no one else? Consider a simple illustration. You and your friend find an apple on the table. Your friend believes it is full of worms, but you believe it is fresh and worm-free. Can your differing beliefs about the apple create two different truths that each of you can experience as reality? The way to find out is to slice the apple open. Then you will discover that either the apple has worms or it doesn’t. The truth about the apple is independent of whatever either of you may believe about it.
But we must ask, does the phrase “true for you” really mean anything? Can truth exist as a reality solely for the persons who believe it and for no one else? Consider a simple illustration. You and your friend find an apple on the table. Your friend believes it is full of worms, but you believe it is fresh and worm-free. Can your differing beliefs about the apple create two different truths that each of you can experience as reality? The way to find out is to slice the apple open. Then you will discover that either the apple has worms or it doesn’t. The truth about the apple is independent of whatever either of you may believe about it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)