"In respect of things eternal life is vayn and mortal" - inscription on Lamport Hall, Northamptonshire. A reminder that truth is bigger than we think. |
“What is
truth?” Pontius Pilate’s cynical, rhetorical question was flung at Jesus
shortly before the Roman Governor of Judea condemned the Jewish preacher to
death, at the behest of a noisy demonstration, despite ruling that he was innocent.
It has recently taken on a fresh significance.
Oxford
Dictionaries have named “post-truth” as their word of the year for 2016. The
term means that objective facts are less influential in shaping public opinion
than emotional appeals. It suggests that “the public” is interested more in
their view of what reality should be than in what it actually is.
It
is a development of the word popularised by US comedian, talk show host and one
of Time magazine’s 100 most
influential people of 2012, Stephen Colbert. For him, “truthiness” is
preferring one’s wishes to be true rather than those that are factually true.
It
has long been the case that many newspapers, magazines and some broadcast
channels gear their coverage to the assumed interests – and prejudices – of
their audiences. It is also the case that we buy, or tune in to, the media
which conform to our established opinions. Apparently, we are less interested
than ever in being willing to have our opinions modified or even changed. What
I believe is true, is true.
We
should be concerned. Public debate on complex issues is degenerating into
blinkered and emotive slogans, exaggerated or imagined threats, sweeping
generalisations, counter-assertions rather than careful answers, and personal
attacks on the integrity and motives of both protagonists and opponents. Fake
news spread on social media becomes imprinted on minds and is difficult to
delete from memories. When objectivity declines, anarchy or extremism rises. The
mob rules. And civilisations crumble.
In
Barack Obama’s words, “It’s easy to make a vote on a complicated piece of
legislation look evil and depraved in a thirty-second commercial, it’s very
hard to explain the wisdom of that same vote in less than twenty minutes.”1 And who has 20 minutes to consider anything
these days?
Not a new problem
Cultural
changes do not happen overnight and the seeds of “truthiness” and “post-truth”
thinking (if it can be called thinking) were sown long ago. In the 1960s Aldous
Huxley had already noted that the political spin machine was speeding up: “The
methods now being used to merchandise the political candidate as though he was
a deodorant, positively guarantee the electorate against ever hearing the truth
about anything.”2
That was the era when traditional
constraints and beliefs were being questioned widely, and increasingly
overthrown. It was a time when the ability of science to solve human problems
was being questioned. And above all the idea that “truth” is relative – what’s
true for you may not be true for me – was gaining popularity, especially with
regard to human conduct and morality. It’s hardly surprising; it’s more
comfortable to do one’s own thing than to toe party lines and do what other
people expect of us.
Christian thinker Harry Blamires
summarised it thus: “Where intellect and feeling were in conflict, where wisdom
and whim collided, it became the smart thing to reject the intellect and wisdom
because they belonged to the sphere of rule and regulation, of fixities and
demarcations, while feeling and whim inhabited the ever-changing environment of
the fluid, the environment of the Age of Aquarius.”3
(The
“Age of Aquarius”, thought of as the age of freedom, is an astrological
assumption made popular by the 1960s hippy movement and the song from the
musical Hair “This is the dawning of
the Age of Aquarius”; in fact many astrologers don’t think it begins properly
until at least the 22nd century. Ironically, the current period has also been
dubbed “the Information Age” in which more people have access to more facts
than ever before.)
An
exponential rise in medical and scientific discoveries – think about the
boundary-pushing Large Hadron Collider – has created an assumption that “truth”
is a temporary thing, a summary of what we know now which may be disproved
later.
The
ancient Athenian mentality has grown in academic circles: “All the Athenians…spent
their time doing nothing but talking about and listening to the latest ideas”
(Acts 17:21). That has its plus side, of course: it’s good to explore and learn
new things, to develop our understanding about the world, and even to challenge
some traditions. But truth also has its boundaries; it is not eternally
elastic. Some things are not true, and no volume of conspiracy theories or
Facebook “likes” can make them true.
When
a crowd becomes infected by a false “meme”, a rumour or belief that causes a
group to act as one (usually violently in vocal terms, if not in riotous
terms), the foundations of civilisation and human decency can be shaken. Not
long after Paul’s discovery of the Athenian love of novelty he was hauled into
the huge amphitheatre in Ephesus by a howling mob stirred up by influential
business owners who saw Paul’s preaching as a threat to their profits. Luke,
the narrator, notes that “the assembly was in confusion: Some were shouting one
thing, some another. Most of the people did not even know why they were there”
(Acts 19:32).
Or,
as the 19th century nihilist Friedrich Nietzsche put it, “Nothing is
true, all is permitted.”4
Pursue truth in love
There are two remedies
for the potential evils emanating from a post-truth world. One is for
individuals to seek political, social and even scientific truth even if it
threatens to overturn our previously-held opinions. Cautious consideration
rather than hasty acceptance or rejection should be the hallmark of rational
humanity. Or, don’t believe that everything you read in your newspaper is
unbiased and objective.
In practice, that means taking such
steps as:
·
Learn
to distinguish between proven fact and disputable allegation· Check the facts on both sides of an argument
· Be measured in voicing opinions
· Don’t jump on bandwagons and repeat allegations without checking them carefully first.
The second is to learn to live
truthfully, which is easier if we also recover the mindset that recognises that
some truths are eternally valid and non-negotiable. They provide a basis for
living in the world. These include the existence of a just and loving God and
the teachings and redemptive actions of Jesus Christ who is God’s truth embodied in human form. And they form the basis for
truth-full living.
Of course, there is the risk of elevating
some Christian traditions and biblical beliefs to the level of indisputable truths
or required behaviours when there may be scope for discussion. Our finite minds
cannot fully comprehend the works and wisdom of an infinite God. So even with
the scriptures in our hands, we are required to listen carefully to others.
Bishop
Lesslie Newbigin once wrote, “We are missionaries, but we are also learners,
only beginners. We do not have all the truth, but we know the way along which
truth is to be sought and found. We have to call all people to come this way
with us…”5
So
take some time to look at the biblical references to truth below, and resolve
to walk the way they point to.
Think and talk
1. Look at these warnings or examples of unfounded
rumours and their consequences in the Bible. 2 Kings 7:5-7; Jeremiah 51:46; Matthew
24:4-8,11,23-28; John 21:22-24. What can we learn from them and what similar
examples of false rumours, allegations or beliefs that have caused problems in
your country or local community?
2. What is the source of truth? Isaiah 45:19;
John 14:6,17; 15:26; 16:13. (Note Jesus’ frequent use of the claim “I tell you
the truth” before his pronouncements; in some Bible versions this is “verily,
verily” or “truly, truly”.)
3. What is the effect of truth? Psalm 15:1-3; Proverbs
16:13; John 8:32.
4. How is truth to direct our lives? Psalm 51:6;
John 4:23-24; Ephesians 4:15; 6:14; 1 John 1:6-8.
5. How has truth been distorted or discarded down
the ages and with what effects? Jeremiah 7: 27-29; Romans 1:18-23; 2:6-8; 2
Timothy 4:3-4.
References
1. Barack Obama, The audacity of hope, Canongate Books 2008, p. 132.
2. Aldous Huxley, Brave new world revisited, Chatto & Windus 1966, p.84.3. Harry Blamires, The Post-Christian mind, SPCK 2001, p.8.
4. Friedrich Nietzsche, Thus spake Zarusthustra, George Allen & Unwin 1932, p.313.
5. Lesslie Newbigin, Truth to tell, Eerdmans 1991, p.34 quoted by Henry Knight, A future for truth, Abingdon Press 1997, p.137.
© Derek Williams 2016. Material may be
reproduced for personal or small group study with full acknowledgement of the
source.
No comments:
Post a Comment