At Least To Me

Such and such is true, at least to me or I believe such and such is true. The retreat takes many forms, but these are the most common utterances that one hears. A person makes a proposition or assertion of truth, and then tags it with these phrases or something similar. Surprisingly, such phrases come up frequently in conversations of varying topics.

Generally, an assertion is tagged for one of two reasons. First, the above phraseology is generally used as a defense mechanism. That is, if someone challenges me in my asserted proposition, then I can always find comfort in the notion that, "well, at least that's what I believe" and the challenger then generally backs off (to do otherwise would be social taboo, or so we are told).

Second--and really an answer to the question of why the first reason above is such a successful tactic in our culture--is that the phrase "at least to me" truly embodies the relativistic mindset. Such and such may be true absolutely; but, even if it is not, then it is certainly true to me--and you have no standing to challenge the claim that it is true to me. Who am I to challenge the truth value of the views that one personally holds? Or so the argument goes. This mindset rejects the authority and existence of absolute truth. What we are left with, then, are competing claims of "truth," none of which are objectively verifiable. The consequence of such a scenario is, ultimately, an unfortunate power struggle.

I have made a concerted effort to prune this line of phraseology from my vocabulary--both because I want to be able to defend my positions without resorting to such a tactic and, more importantly, because of the dangers of a relativistic mindset. I hope you will do the same.

Soli Deo Gloria.

Gamaliel

Gamaliel is NOT a character from Lord of the Rings, although the name sounds as though he should be. Rather, he is a man that lived during the time of the apostles. (If you have never read the story of Gamaliel, then I encourage you do so. You can find it in Acts 5: 33-39 or by clicking here. If you would like to read the story of Gamaliel in context, click here.)

Gamaliel was a well respected Pharisee, "honored by all the people." The gospels are rife with instances where the Pharisees stood in direct opposition to the message of Christ, as well as their attempts to have Christ killed. So, one would hardly expect a Pharisee to speak objectively and persuade a group of fellow Pharisees to refrain from putting the apostles to death, especially when the apostles acted contrary to the Pharisee's "strict orders." Yet, this is precisely what Gamaliel did.

Gamaliel urged his fellow Pharisees to wait to see if the apostles' message withstood the test of time: if it did, then it was of God; if it did not, then it was of man and would die on its own accord. Two-thousand years removed, we can now see that the apostles' message of forgiveness was in fact of God. However, Gamaliel did not have the advantage of hind-sight. Rather, he stood up amidst his peers to echo a voice of reason that was contrary to the will of the mob.

I have always admired this man for his ability to step back from a heated situation and critically analyze what would be the right thing to do. The ability to think objectively, critically, and independently is one we should all strive to master. It made a difference in the apostles' lives, and I'm confident we would benefit as well.

Soli Deo Gloria.

Let The Means Be Just

Let the ends be just and the means calculated to achieve the ends be equally just. Fewer things are more revealing of a person's true character than the means that one is willing to use to achieve a desired end. The question of means is, perhaps, one of the more troubling questions that we encounter in our lives. Of course, by the term "means", I am referring to the method by which one uses to achieve a particular thing; it is the road or route, if you will, by which one travels upon in reaching a particular destination.

The question of means is often a difficult one. Either we fail to ask the question altogether--whether the means are just, i.e., in line with truth--or when we do ask the question we ignore the answer. The latter is more troubling, although both lead to undesirable consequences. The latter situation is more troubling because it serves as a glimpse into one's soul.

This situation often arises when we answer the question in the negative, hence implying that either our desired end is unjust to begin with or that we must take the road least traveled to achieve our end, a route we seldom prefer. Yet, instead of choosing an alternate set of means that are just, we prefer the means that are convenient, notwithstanding their compromising nature. We rest our choice based upon the assumption that, since our end is good, we are somehow justified despite the use of unjust means. As one can see, this is a troubling routine.

We must adopt the habit of analyzing both the end and the means and whether they are in line with truth. In analyzing the particular ways that we may achieve our desired end, if we are only able to culminate methods that are unjust and contradictory of truth, then perhaps we ought to re-evaluate whether our desired end is just in the first place. Being able to do so consistently, however, requires a person of great integrity and intellectual honesty, the type of person I hope we all strive to be.

Soli Deo Gloria.

To What End?

To what end? A question of enormous import, yet one that often goes unasked and, consequently, unanswered. It applies to all issues of life--from the mundane to the life-altering. Yet we seldom pause to ask it.

The question is an important one to ask, as the answer will serve as the rutter of one's life. To what end do I exist? Perhaps this is the most fundamental of all questions that we are faced with. Since we are concerned with truth, we are obligated to answer the question as follows: To love and serve the Lord. A failure to answer as such leads to devastating consequences, and any other answer serves only as a distraction.

To what end do I work? To what end do I urge the importance of education? To what end do I attend church? To what end do I urge participation in sports? To what end do I date/marry? The list literally goes on.

We should also pause to note that our answers to these and the many other questions must be in align with our principles, with truth. In other words, if in asking the question "to what end?" with respect to a particular course of action the answer is one that would contravene our ultimate end or would cause us to act contrary to what is right and true, then we ought not pursue such a path. We must always analyze whether our end is just and true. This is an exercise that we must make a conscious effort to complete. When we fail to even ask the question, it becomes increasingly difficult to even ascertain whether our end is right and true.

In our next post we will address the importance of a means analysis and, hopefully, the importance of connecting means and ends.

But for now, I ask you, to what end?

"The great end of life is not knowledge but action." -- Sir Francis Bacon.

Soli Deo Gloria.

The Faith of One Man

"Josiah was eight years old when he became king, and he reigned in Jerusalem thirty-one years. He did what was right in the eyes of the LORD and walked in the ways of his father David, not turning aside to the right or to the left." II Chronicles 34: 1-2.

Chapter 34 marks the beginning of King Josiah's reign. The passages leading up to chapter 34, however, describe the decadence of the people of Israel and, in particular, how their kings had lead them astray. The nation of Israel, a chosen people, had forgotten the Lord and all that He had done for them. Then, beginning in verse 1 of chapter 34, like a breath of fresh air, the young king commits himself to following the Lord.

As a result, the entire nation of Israel, during the generation of King Josiah's regin, turned again to following and worshiping the Lord. "As long as he lived, they did not fail to follow the LORD, the God of their fathers." II Chronicles 34: 33b.

It is simply amazing that the faith of one person, in this case a young man even, can alter an entire generation and cause an entire nation to again turn to the Truth. Of course, what is not contained in the Scriptures is the many struggles and hardships the young king had to endure in order to remain steadfast in following the Lord. But the struggles are not alltogether important. Rather, it is the testament to the power of a holy God moving through the faith of a single person. An illustration we should all pause to consider.

"Because your heart was responsive and you humbled yourself before God when you heard what he spoke against this place and its people, and because you humbled yourself before me and tore your robes and wept in my presence, I have heard you, declares the LORD." II Chronicles 34: 27.

Soli Deo Gloria.

This Blog's Purpose

Unus Veritas. Latin for "one truth." Implicit in this succinct phrase is the notion of objective truth. A simple phrase, yet it produces profound implications for its subscribers. Unus Veritas is a basic assumption that will undergird the majority--if not all--of the posts on this blog.

The purpose of this blog is to challenge the author, its readers and commenter's to a better understanding of Truth. However, in order for this aim to come to fruition, truth must exist and it must be knowable. This, then, brings us to the second assumption of this blog; viz., truth exists and we are capable of knowing it. This may seem obvious, indeed I hope that it does. However, many modern thinkers would disagree.

It is important that we pause to note that objective truth necessarily implies the existence of truth outside of one's own being. That is, truth exists outside of one's own perspective or frame of reference. Hence, truth is not contingent upon one's own cultural upbringing--a particular proposition that is true today is just as true 1000 years ago. Thus, any claims to truth made herein should not be contingent upon you understanding my personal perspective. Rather, such claims should be contingent upon whether or not they are actually true. This subtle difference has important consequences. For, one could not claim authoritatively that a particular proposition is absolutely true if all truth was relative to the particular speaker. Thus, we arrive at a third assumption, or perhaps better classified as a corollary to the first, that truth is not relative to the speaker, but finds its existence outside him or her.

Lastly, we must address our fourth and final assumption. This assumption will serve as the foundation for all posts that will appear in this blog. Namely, that because truth is objective and it finds its existence outside of one's self, it must have its source in someone or something. My presupposition concerning this matter is that truth finds its existence in the Creator. All truth flows from and stems from the Creator of heaven and earth, the God of Abraham, Issac, and Jacob, the triune God as revealed in the Holy Scriptures. I do not believe that truth exists outside of God. Rather, that truth is an intrinsic part of His nature. Everything that is good and true flows from His nature. As Christ so boldly stated all those centuries ago: "I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me." John 14:6.

I hope that this blog will contain thought provoking words and ideas. I welcome your comments.

Soli Deo Gloria.