 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
||||||
Please open a Bible to the book of John, chapter 18, and locate verse 37. This text is in the midst of a fascinating dialogue between Jesus Christ and an official of the ancient Roman government. Here is the full text. |
||||||
Pilate therefore said unto him, Art thou a king then? Jesus answered, Thou sayest that I am a king. To this end was I born, and for this cause came I into the world, that I should bear witness unto the truth. Every one that is of the truth heareth my voice. Pilate saith unto him, What is truth? And when he had said this, he went out again unto the Jews, and saith unto them, I find in him no fault at all. |
||||||
A very poignant question is asked by Pilate: "What is truth?" It is a question that still echoes in the hollow halls of
academia, and bounces around unanswered in the hollow cathedrals and sanctuaries dotting our terrestrial landscape. Let us take a practical look at this subject in light of a new religious paradigm – Post Modernism.
We begin with a definition: Post-Modernism is a statement that truth is relevant. If I believe something, then my belief is true for me, but this truth need not be truth for someone else. Your belief, whatever it happens to be, is
just as good as mine. It is an encouragement to believe anything you want to believe, and to accept other beliefs as valid – as valid as your own. We may informally call this, "toleration."
In essence, it is a statement that truth is defined and created by the people who believe it. In defining spiritual truth, I myself would assume that the spiritual world exists, that it is real, and that it has
specific properties and characteristics, just like the physical world in which I live. I would infer from this assumption that when two people experience a legitimate disagreement on some matter of spiritual truth (as opposed to
semantic misunderstandings or poor/incomplete communication), at least one of them is wrong/inaccurate/incorrect. I reason this way because of what I learn from the physical realm. If two people have a disagreement
about gravity, one believes in gravity and the other one does not, and they both jump off of a tall building, will they both fall? It depends on whether there really is gravity or not, doesn't it? It makes no difference what people
believe about gravity. If two people legitimately disagree on some property of the spiritual realm (that is, they do not misunderstand one another, but experience a genuine difference of belief), they either both
misunderstand that property and are both wrong, or one of them understands the property correctly and the other one does not, or there is no spiritual reality. Is there some other option? No, there is not. Both of them being
correct is not an option if words are to retain any meaning. Is this inconsistent with Post-Modernism? Academically, one must consider the possibility that the This implies that the concept of "correct" is meaningless. I am contradicting Post-Modernism, which says I am "correct" in contradicting it. If I am correct in saying that something
is incorrect when it is actually correct, then this word "correct" is void of meaning. We could say the same thing about the word "truth," about "reality," and any other word we would like to contemplate. The approach can be
applied to anything, any concept at all. To say that two people with conflicting beliefs about the spiritual realm, or anything at all, are both entirely correct and completely valid in their beliefs is inconsistent
with any sort of logic or reason. To claim that two conflicting beliefs are valid is to strip the word "valid" of its meaning. To say that two opposing ideologies are entirely true is to reject the concept of truth.
Surprisingly, Post-Modernism makes the statement that words have no meaning… that there is no reality. Post-Modernism cannot actually be contradicted, because it invalidates the concept of contradiction, reason, logic, and
meaningful communication of any form. Post-Modernism cannot even make a valid statement; in Post-Modernism, statements with meaning cannot be made! Post-Modernism is, essentially, a denial of reality. It even denies itself
! How nice! Sounds to me like we have come full circle, back to where Pilate was two millennia ago, standing face to face with Jesus Christ Himself. Pilate was a Post-Modernist. Pilate did not accept the concept
of truth, even though he was staring Him in the face. Post-Modernism is not new after all; it is as old as Man. Doesn't Post-Modernism gag on itself when it condemns intolerance? Post-Modernism does condemn
intolerance. How can a thought system that axiomatically presumes reality does not exist condemn anything? The Post-Modernist is only angered by intolerance, by Realism, by folks who claim that there is spiritual reality and that it is possible to be correct about it. The Realist says it is
better to be correct than incorrect, and is therefore denounced by Post-Modernism. Post-Modernism Ultimately, truth
cannot be a matter of respect... or disrespect... or opinion... or toleration or intolerance; it is a matter of… reality! The greatest Person Who ever lived – measured by anyone's standard -- said, "I am… the truth." (John 14:6) This Person, Jesus Christ,
is the only Being who has ever claimed such a thing… and He backed His words with many infallible proofs, based upon physical reality. He healed the sick, gave sight to those blind from birth, cleansed the leper, gave hearing to
the deaf, and speech to the dumb. He raised the dead. As a homeless Man, foresaken by His family, He befriended the poor, the fatherless, the widow, and the child. He denounced false religion. He denounced hypocrisy. He denounced
materialism. He denounced racism. He denounced divorce. He denounced perversion and corruption and dishonesty. He approved of loving God with all of your heart, mind, strength, soul, and body, and your neighbor as yourself. Jesus Christ was intolerant of wickedness. He said the world was wicked and that He had come to show us the way to God. He said that He Himself was THE Way to God… the ONLY way! "I am the way, the truth,
and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me." (John 14:6) He did not accept any other belief system as valid. He condemned every lie, and He proclaimed the truth.
Is the belief system of Jesus Christ just as valid as any other? He said he would be crucified by the religious leaders of His day. He was crucified by them.
He also said that three days after his crucifixion He would rise again from the dead. His tomb is empty. Today... right now... the empty tomb of Jesus Christ stares Post-Modernism in the face. I am
not aware that any person denies any of the above facts with any credibility. So then, what does the Post-Modernist do with these facts? Did Jesus Christ not really die? Just faint up there on the cross? Did the
seasoned Roman centurion call Him dead before He was? Did Jesus somehow, after being beaten, scourged and crucified, three days later... with no food or water or help from anyone, somehow force his way out of a sealed tomb,
overcome the fearless Roman guards, and escape? That was not how He lived. Why would He change? Or did the frightened, bewildered disciples, who could not even stand with their Messiah in the garden of Gethsemane
when He was still alive... and fled from Him in terror, somehow steal Chirst's body? And did they all, without exception, fearlessly lay down the rest of their lives for a lie? Something they KNEW was a lie? Were they totally
insane? Five hundred people saw Jesus Christ alive after the crucifixion at the same time. They saw Him ascend into heaven, and they put their lives on the line to proclaim that fact to those who killed Him. That
fact would stand as incontestable proof of the resurrection of Jesus Christ in any courtroom today. Why is this so hard for us?? Jesus Christ said He would rise again from the dead.
He did. The spiritual realm is actually real, it does have characteristics, and Jesus Christ is real and alive and the Son of God – just as He said. Even with the facts available to them, few made
the effort in Jesus' day to seek Him, even with the prospect of eternal damnation staring them in the face. Instead of seeking Him, they hated Him. They killed Him. I expect the same today… people have not changed. We are sinful.
We do not have an intellectual problem with the Bible, or with Jesus Christ. Our problem is a spiritual one. Yes, an intellectual problem implies that you are willing to obtain and verify all the pertinant facts,
that you actually have obtained and evaluated these facts, and with the same consistency and rigour and logic and reason and common sense that you use in other areas of life, you have concluded based on the evidence that there is a
problem. You have not done that with Jesus Christ. You have not done that with the Bible. The Bible says that one of the properties of the spiritual realm is that the wrath of God
abides on those who do not believe on Jesus Christ; they presently stand condemned. You can read that as easily as I can in John 3:18 and in John 3:36. This is not a matter of interpretation; it is a fact, a real property of the
spiritual realm. This means that the wrath of God abides on atheists, Hindus, Muslims, Orthodox Jews, Buddhists, most Mormons, most Catholics, most Protestants, and on most Baptists… on just about everyone.
What does pure
Further, if we all "intolerantly" followed the commands of Jesus Christ -- even if there is
no reality as the Post-Modernist claims -- the world would be a relative paradise because we would all love one another as ourselves. We would follow the golden rule. We would not tolerate anything else. Isn't that
what the Post-Modernist wants? Peace on earth? Everyone loving everyone? So why isn't Jesus Christ the greatest hero of Post-Modern philosophy? Why can't the Post-Modernist passionately agree with Pilate; "I find in Him no fault at
all." ?? Post-Modernism is not internally consistent; it is not pure. It is intolerant of intolerance, and is thus itself intolerant, and condemns
itself. It only tolerates lies. Jesus Christ represents ultimate reality because He represents the truth. Post-Modernism insists that there is no reality, and it resists, harasses and defames anyone who disagrees. That is stupid. If it does not make any difference what we believe, why not believe the safest thing, the very best thing for us to believe practically? Does Post-Modernism respond to bomb threats in our schools, to threats against
our national security, or to evident personal danger in the same way it responds to the practical potential of an eternal hell? Does Post-Modernism just stick its dumb head in the sand and insist the physical
world does not exist? No? Then why do Post-Modernists do this with the spiritual realm? Why is there such a hatred for an intolerant belief in Jesus Christ? The only reason? It would appear to me that
Post-Modernists hate spiritual truth. Ultimately, Post-Modernism is not a denial of spiritual reality; it is not toleration of opposing views. Post-Modernism is a hatred of spiritual reality. Have you a better answer? We say the same thing for Atheism, and for any other system of thought that does not sincerely integrate the historical fact of the resurrection of
Jesus Christ. We can certainly ignore reality, we can simply deny it, like Post-Modernism does. However, if the Bible is
true and accurate... ignoring reality does not change a thing. Hell and Heaven are still real. Unbelievers are still condemned. Believers are still saved. Gravity is still basic to physics. Now, if something as
vast and credible as the Holy Bible said I was condemned, I would certainly want to look into it and at least
check things out very carefully. The last thing I would do is ignore it... or deny it... the most illogical thing is to be blindly careless about it. If I know a little bit about Islam, and Hinduism, and
Catholicism, Protestantism, and a few other "isms," the place that I, as a true believer in Jesus Christ, am standing doctrinally and practically is the very safest place that one can possible be. I am not aware of ANY
other system of religious thought or practice that would condemn me for the life I am living, or for what I believe. If I happen to be wrong... if my assumptions about the spiritual realm are incorrect, or if some other religion
happens to be correct... I do not perceive any danger for myself at all. If Jews are right... I am safe. If Islam happens to be correct about the spiritual realm... I'll be fine.
IF the BIBLE is correct... however... I am one of the VERY few people that is safe. I have absolutely nothing to lose as far as I know. Show me otherwise, if you can. As far as I can see, logically, axiomatically,
philosophically... there is no safer place to be than where I am. If there is no hell, or if God accepts everyone just as they are, if we are all the children of God, or if the standards are low enough so that if
we just have some basic humanitarian decency about us then we are OK, then most all of us will make it to heaven. If sincerity is all it takes, then all of my fussing and commotion about salvation won't accomplish much of anything,
I know. It won't do much harm either, I suppose... other than encouraging people to really be sincere, and perhaps upsetting a few unthinking, insincere folks along the way. In the end, if Post-Modernism has its way, we'll all
return to dust and be completely forgotten. If tolerance preachers ARE right, if nothing really matters eternally... a philosophy of blind indifference is OK, and passionate fact-based apologetic appeals are fine too. However, as long as If you are not a loving believer in Jesus Christ, why aren't you? Take out any basic text on probability theory and recall the concept of expected value: the sum of the products of probabilities of outcomes occuring and the expected gains or losses associated with them. The
expected outcome of a disciple of Jesus Christ is heaven... if there is a heaven. The Given the impossibility of Jesus Christ accidentally fulfilling better then 300
specific prophesies concerning His birth, life and death – which He did, the archaeological precision of the Bible in every minute detail, and the scientific accuracy of the biblical record in all things which can be measured and
replicated in a science lab… who in their right mind would just ignore what it says? No one in their right mind would… only those who hate the Truth, Jesus Christ, will ignore it.
Don't live hating the truth. Don't die hating the truth. |
||||||