I’m the type of nerd who enjoys watching debates for entertainment. I avoid political debates, but religious debates, particularly around science, history, and philosophy, are favorites of mine. One thing I’ve picked up, that I’ve found helpful in everyday conversation is the concept of defining your terms. Even if we speak the same language, live in the same city, or even have the same family, people often have different definitions of things that we believe we have common ground on. If you’re married, you will understand what I mean. This why it’s so important that, when talking about fact and fiction we can agree on one core word. What is truth? The meaning of that word has changed so much recently, that we need to approach the concept with a fresh mind if we are to engage in any level of conversation, even with our own minds.
If you want to understand how the discussion on truth has changed recently, a brief understanding of the two greatest factors that have impacted our culture in this matter will greatly help. I only have a very cursory knowledge myself, but I feel like it’s as good a place as any to start. To understand these concepts better, I highly recommend listening to sources such as Frank Turek and, a personal favorite, the Veritas Forum.
The two concepts I’m talking about is first, Modern thought verses Post-modern thought, and second, Western philosophy versus Eastern philosophy.
Into the Post-Modern World.
Modernism is a world-view that leans most heavily on empirical data, rationality, and physical proof to form an understanding of truth and reality. Modern Philosophy draws from ancient Roman Stoicism in many areas, though it’s much less concerned with honor and morality. Largely, it simply focuses on the idea that emotions and spirituality are the enemy. Humanism has become the religion of Modern Philosophy. Instead of looking to God to solve society’s ills, they decided it is their job to fix it. Even if it must be forced.
It’s impossible to pinpoint a starting point for Modern thought because these cultural changes take place over a long period of time and differ depending on the country. Personally, I associate the rise of Modern Thought with the Industrial Revolution and Humanism. I think the movement had its roots earlier, in the Enlightenment period when music, art, science, and Philosophy were seeing their first baby steps. If you doubt me in that, read Sir Thomas Moore’s Utopia and compare it to Marx’s theories of society. You might even find a lot of threads to our current way of thinking.
However, it was during the Industrial Revolution that people began to see real, tangible ways in which they could better their lives and the lives of those around them. Writings such as those of Charles Dickens encouraged a rise of activism, and Communism was getting a genuine foothold. Because of that, people were depending less and less on churches and spiritualism to better their lives and focusing on their own actions.
It’s inevitable that Humanism, such as it was, would give rise to modern thought. Particularly in the Western world. Modern thought really began to take off during and after the world wars when people were disillusioned with religion and God after the horrors of war.
If I were to point to a culmination, a result of years of humanistic thought, I would indicate the early 2000s and the rise of “New Atheism”. While the communist perspective has most recently been unhitched from Modernism and adopted by Post Modernism, the anti-religious viewpoint that fueled communism remained. Atheists like Christopher Hitchens and Richard Dawkins tried to convince us that religion was irrational and the world would be much better without it. Richard Dawkins has since come out expressing regret for that stance.
Post Modernism is, in many ways, a rebellion against Modernism. Where Modernism demonized emotions and elevated empirical truth, Post Modernism hates rigid definitions of truth and reality. Some of the first post-modern thinkers began to question the validity of reality, arguing that we cannot trust our intellect and rationality. Instead of arguing that we find the most rational individual and allow them to define reality for us all, postmodern thought argues that every person’s version of reality is equally valid. What may be the perfect world for one individual is a living hell for another. What is moral for one person, is evil for another. The most clear, objective truth for one person could be a complete delusion in another’s eyes. Post-modernism believes that both are equally right. What we must then do is to prioritize subjective truth, personal experience, and emotional well-being rather than trying to encourage everyone to agree on the same thing.
While post-modernism has still held strong to humanism, it has abandoned the stoic roots of modernism.
Of course, in broarder culture, these ways of thinking are watered down and blended. There are many post-modernists who insist that religious people are irrational. There are many modernists who think that religions are objectively wrong, while they no longer hold to humanism as being a resolution for suffering. Dawkins, for instance, insists he is culturally Christian because cultural atheism leads to the rise of far worse ideologies.
In many ways the current American culture war is one of modern versus post-modern thought. The most obvious place I see this played out is in the current battle over gender. Postmodernists, who believe that truth is subjective and personal experience is more important than objective rationalism insist that trans individuals are the gender they say they feel they are. Modernists may agree that trans individuals can live and be accepted into some social areas as the gender they identify as. They insist, however, that science and chromosomes get the final say. Thus postmodernists say “Trans women are women” and modernists say “Trans women are men, even if we want to treat them as women.”
Western vs. Eastern Philosophy.
I’ve heard stories of missionaries preaching the gospel to Hindus in India. They found that the particular sect of Hindus they were working with were eager to accept Christ. The missionaries were ready to rejoice until they saw the tokens of the Christian faith being added to the pantheon of similar idols.
While Eastern Philosophy has been wrestling throughout the ages around their staunch belief in monotheism, Eastern philosophy has long held to pantheism and panentheism. These beliefs have led them more easily to be able to hold multiple concepts of “Truth” in their mind at once.
In Western thought, it can be incredibly different to hold two, seemingly conflicting truths in our heads at once. For instance, the idea of the trinity is incredibly difficult to Western churches. For Eastern thinkers, they can more easily hold multiple truths at once. It is more difficult to narrow truth to one single thing, and even more difficult to know how to identify that truth.
Eastern Philosophy also emphasizes ideas that promote social harmony and good while Western Philosophy emphasizes individual responsibility and the impact of the individual life.
In recent years Eastern Philosophy, spiritualism, and theology have joined with other Western spiritualist viewpoints such as witchcraft, and paganism, and “new thought”, carved out a significant niche in American religion. Those modalities for spiritualism have actually had a significant impact on Christianity itself, as well as the American political and social system. The podcast Unobscured explored the boom of spiritualism in America in its second season and its clear to see how Eastern philosophy and religion impacted that movement.
When these worldviews blend with the post-modernist perspective, it has created a culture that is incredibly hostile to the concept of Objective truth.
Does Truth Exist.
We have seen how Post-modernism screams “you cannot know truth” and “You must depend on your own beliefs and experiences to judge your understanding of truth.” Eastern thought joins it to chorus “What’s true for you is true for you. What’s True for me is true for me.” and “Social respect and peace is one of the highest moral values.”
That very term “my truth.” is, for the modernist thinker, counter-intuitive. The modernist mind doesn’t have room for subjective truth.
As Christians, we find ourselves at a crossroads. Religion used to be clear-cut and simple. You are either right about your beliefs, or you are wrong. People may not have appreciated people “preaching” to them, or attempting to convert them. However, at least in Western countries, you weren’t likely to get jailed or killed by doing so. The new postmodern religions must leave room for all religions to be subjectively true, meaning any claim to objectivism becomes the new enemy. You have likely heard many people state that they don’t have anything against Christians, but Christians must keep their belief systems private.
At one point people understood that Christians sharing their faith was loving, even if they considered it misguided. However, the combination of atheist extremists and post-modern spiritualists has changed the public view of Christianity. We are now considered the most intolerant and unloving individuals in society.
As Christians, we must ask ourselves if our beliefs rest on an outdated worldview, or if we have solid ground to stand on. If we decide to change with the times and adopt a more post-modern view as with many progressive Christians, we may become more palatable. We might survive the culture war, even if we are diminished. If we do not, perhaps we will go the way of the stoics and fade into history.
The Bible is clear about the Christian stance in these matters. Truth does exist. We cannot find this truth by imperial data, however, or by experience and relativism. The only truth for Christians rests in the creator God and His revelation through the scriptures.
Sola Scriptura
To the post-modern ear, that statement sounds incredibly narrow and intolerant. To the modern mind, it might look incredibly foolish and unprovable. But for the Christian, we have a very clear and logical path to this conclusion.
In scripture, we see that God is the creator of heaven and earth. The first three chapters of Genesis make it clear that God was the originator. Whether or not you accept the Genesis account as literal or not, most Christians agree that the universe began with God.
Scripture also calls God “the Alpha and the Omega”. As we already discussed in the article on Frankenstein, God is not a God who has abandoned His creation. So not only is God the originator, he is the continual wellspring of the universe.
If that is true, God is the only one who wrote the rules. This isn’t just about the moral law. God is the originator of science, history, philosophy, and more. As I discussed in my article about The Three Body Problem, Science is the study of what already exists. We can only discover rules that already existed before we came. If scripture, and the science that backs it up, is to be believed, that means that God is the source of all reality.
If this is true, then we know that God chose to create a world where objective truth was such a thing. We can also know this because the statement “Truth is subjective” is a self-defeating statement. In other words, if that statement is true, it is, by definition, false.
We also know this because the word “Truth” occurs in the bible over four hundred times. God even refers to himself as “truth”. John 14:17 states, “I am the way, the truth, and the life.” I believe this to mean not that truth and God are synonymous, but that we derive the meaning of truth from the person and nature of God himself.
Apart from God and scripture, there is no objective answer for the tension between modernism and post-modernism. There is no clear path on whether Eastern philosophy or Western philosophy should be adhered to. There is no meaning for the word “truth”. But because we know the author of creation, we can know for certain that truth does indeed exist. And it exists in the character of the creator God.
Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In