Welcome    Why Christianity?    The Cosmos    The Bible    Absolute Truth    God and Suffering    God's Eternal Plan    

Absolute Truth

Why do you expect the sun to come up in the morning?  Why do you expect the light to come on when you flip the light switch?  Our understanding of the world is rooted in the fact that things behave in what is normally a very predictable factor.  This is why the normal distribution will apply so widely.  Processes and systems are modeled by mathematics all of the time.  How can this be so?   Why do we expect an okra seed to produce okra?  Why do we expect cows to breed more cows?  The universe works on definite principles.  The workings of the universe do not change with paradigms.  There is absolute truth.

Hempel described the formulations of theories and said, “Theories are usually introduced when previous study of a class of phenomena has revealed a system of uniformities that can be expressed in the form of empirical laws”  (Hempel 94).    Many scientists study and experiment and then reach a consensus on how something behaves.  Feynman says that we can never prove something true in this manner but we can always strive for a more perfect theory (Feynman 125).  There will always be some factor out there that we cannot foresee.  However, this does not mean that the occurrences and factors are completely random.  Absolute truth can exist even if humanity cannot prove a truth absolute. 

Some might ask how man is supposed to prove anything true?  If reality is based on our perceptions then doesn’t each person experience a different reality?  How can we prove a material reality?  What I call blue you may call blue, but how do we know that we perceive blue in the same manner?  How do you know that the light will come on when you flip the switch?  You cannot know this unless you have flipped the switch and observed the effect an infinite number of times.  Does my watch run when I am not watching it?  Maybe the hand just jumped forward while I wasn’t watching it.  Does the tree that falls in the forest make a sound?  You can’t prove it if you weren’t there.  (Of course you can’t prove that a tree fell if you weren’t there.)

The answer to the “blue” question is that it does not matter how one perceives the color blue.  The color blue still exists.  Multiple people see the same thing time and time again and it is always blue.  As long as there are no outside factors to change an object, it’s color remains constant.  This is what I mean by consensus.  When experiments are conducted by many scientists the correlation from the experiments is formulated into a theory based upon the experimental data.  You expect the light to come on when you flip the switch because experience tells us this will happen.  Will the light come on every time?  No, there are other factors that might inhibit it.  Even still, how do you know that the light lasts forever or doesn’t fail every ten-thousandth time?  You can’t know this, but you will find that when the light bulb fails to come on there will always be a reason for its failure to come on; a bad wire, switch, etc…  When we flip a light switch we open the path for electrons to flow and supply a current to the light bulb.  If no unexpected factors enter the picture then the light will come on.  Does my watch run when I am not watching it?  Can I prove that it does?  Only by the evidence that the hand has moved forward can I prove this.  The proof is indirect but compelling all the same. 

Our perception does not allow us to prove anything true, only false.   This, however, does not mean that there is not truth.  Consensus of experience allows us to theorize about what truth is.  There must be truth or the universe would not be predictable.   There are absolute principles that govern the working of the universe.  Absolute truth does exist. 

The only way that we discover absolute truth is through the words that God has revealed.  We cannot determine absolute truth, but God can.  Therefore the Bible is the basis for absolute truth.  Pilate asked Jesus in John 18:38, “What is truth?”

It is impossible to prove God logically, without any missing steps or assumptions.  Of course, it is also impossible to prove anything exists without any missing steps or assumptions.  These assumptions are the basis for faith.  Kierkegaard said, “Thus God becomes the most terrible of deceivers, because the Reason has deceived itself.  The Reason has brought God as near as possible, and yet he is as far away as ever” (Kierkegaard74). However, there is no reason to believe that God attempts to deceive.  Kierkegaard’s argument that God must be a deceiving God is unfounded.

What would happen if we had to have a step-by-step logical proof that anything we believed in existed?  Does the jar of peanut butter on the kitchen cabinet exist?  Does the kitchen cabinet exist?  It would be impossible to ever believe anything existed if no assumptions were made about the nature of existence.  Assumptions are integral parts of proofs.  If you want to go to New York then why do you get on the bus marked “New York?”  It is because to the best of your knowledge, that is where the bus which is marked New York goes.  It is the same as the idea of God.  The writer of Romans (even if you do not consider Paul inspired then you must consider his “philosophical” ideas) said that the power and nature of God was evident through the creation around us.  This transcending power is evidence of a higher being.  The proof lies in the fact that to the best of our knowledge there must be a creator God.  There could never be enough proof for one to establish a logical argument that no one would deny. 

Kierkegaard is right when he says that the specifics of God cannot be shown by logical, external proofs.  God can only be proven by his WORD.  This does not mean that God is a deceiver.  Did God fail to provide enough proof?  No, humanity asks for too much proof.  God does not deceive; humanity deceives itself.

God and Suffering

References

Borges, Jorge Luis. “The Circular Ruins.” Twenty Questions: An Introduction to Philosophy. Ed. Bowie, G. Lee, Meredith W. Michaels, Robert C. Solomon.  Thomson Learning: United States. 247-251.

Feynman, Richard. “Seeking New Laws of Nature.” Twenty Questions: An Introduction to Philosophy. Ed. Bowie, G. Lee, Meredith W. Michaels, Robert C. Solomon.  Thomson Learning: United States. 123-131.

Hempel, Carl G. “The Deductive-Nomological Model of Science.” Twenty Questions: An Introduction to Philosophy. Ed. Bowie, G. Lee, Meredith W. Michaels, Robert C. Solomon.  Thomson Learning: United States. 90-98.

Kierkegaard, Soren.  “The Leap of Faith and the Limits of Reason.”  Twenty Questions:  An Introduction to Philosophy.  Ed. Bowie, G. Lee, Meredith W. Michaels, Robert C. Solomon.  Thomson Learning: United States. 123-131.