On Monday, February, 22nd, the Denton Record-Chronicle published the news story, “Lecturer Seeks to Define The Truth.” An introductory paragraph states: “William B. Oden, the bishop of the North Texas Conference of the United Methodist Church, talked to local United Methodists Sunday night about the nature of truth, and the human tradition of trying to define it” (1A). Among other things, the speaker said:
“Truth is difficult to define–I’ve heard it said that it is like trying to nail Jell-O to the wall. It’s duller than fiction. It doesn’t make for a good yarn. It’s lumpy. It’s shapeless. It needs editing” (8A).
Most of these “definitions” imply that truth cannot be known or that it changes (or that it’s boring and not worth knowing). How different from the attitude suggested by the writer of Proverbs: “Buy the truth, and do not sell it” (23:23). This Scriptural statement conveys the idea that truth is valuable, that it can be known, and that it should be prized above inferior material things. If the speaker brought up passages of Scripture, they were not mentioned in this article (though the speech did appear to be rich in human wisdom).
As he neared the end of his lecture, Bishop Oden said that words have always been suspect when it comes to truth “because words have always been inadequate to express the deepest truths we know and live by” (8A).
What? We would be sorely tempted to ask what these deepest truths we know and live by are, but apparently the bishop cannot tell us since to do so requires words.
The Bee Gees sure messed up on this one when they sang, “It’s only words, and words are all I have to take your heart away.” They should have sung, “I can’t speak words because they are inadequate to take your heart away.” If feelings can be communicated by words, why cannot truths be expressed by words? The Bishop may be suspicious of these words, but the Holy Spirit inspired them: Jesus prayed, “Sanctify them through your Word; Your word is truth” (John 17:17).
Frankly, we ought to be suspicious of someone who cannot communicate through words. What realm have we entered at this point unless it would be the land of subjective feelings or mysticism? God chose to communicate with us through the medium of words. He did not choose to radiate truths in our direction hoping that we would receive them–or come by them via osmosis.
Truth, the bishop said, is not a “what.” Truth, he said, is a “who.” Truth is relational, something that happens between people–between believers….
“Jesus is not the truth because his words are true. The truth of Jesus is in us and among us, in our community of truth. . .” (8A).
What kind of gobbledegook is this? When Solomon said to “buy the truth,” he was not referring to a “what” but a “who”? When Jesus said, “I am the way, the truth, and the life,” He just meant that He was in us, among us, and in our community? One is reminded of a beatnik poetry reading in which people sit around listening to esoteric nonsense and affirm, “That was deep, man,” when they have absolutely no idea what was said.
In a related article appearing on the same date and page, “Bishop Commends Church Caught in Controversy,” we learn a little bit more about the “community of truth” in which Jesus allegedly exists.
The bishop was present at the church on “The Day of Listening,” the day when delegates prayed for direction on matters of homosexuality, and he said he has been “very aware” that the Denton church had been the target of sporadic protests because a physician who performs abortions is a member there (81A).
It is appropriate to ask: “Why are people praying for direction on matters of homosexuality? Are they wondering if God still opposes it?” Yes, He still destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah over it (Gen. 19); it is still a vile and unnatural practice (Rom. 1:26); God still expects people to repent of it (1 Cor. 6:9-11); and it still serves as an example of the suffering of eternal fire (Jude 7). Praying for guidance with respect to these facts would be useless; learn from them.
If the group is wondering how to deal with homosexuals, that is not a mystery, either. We should love them enough to communicate the gospel to them–just as we would to adulterers, fornicators, and thieves. They need to be told that their practice is a sin–but that it can be forgiven when they repent and are baptized (Acts 2:38).
They fellowship an abortionist, also; she is one who terminates the lives of babies in the womb. Why do they do so–unless they all believe that abortion is acceptable? Otherwise, they would refuse her membership. Why would anyone remotely connected with the holy name of Jesus fellowship an abortionist? As John wrote, “You know that no murderer has eternal life abiding in him” (1 John 3:15). [If they do not believe it is murder, let them debate the matter in public.]
This paragraph was followed by Oden’s comment that “it can be unfortunate for any church when groups who proclaim absolute truth lobby congregations” (8A). So, is abortion absolutely right, Bishop? If it is not, how can anyone perform it with a clear conscience? Paul wrote that “whatever is not from faith is sin” (Rom. 14:23). If someone’s position is that it is absolutely wrong, and she does it, she is a hypocrite. If she is uncertain whether it is right or wrong, she has no business doing it until she knows. And if she believes that it is absolutely right, then she should be able to defend her position.
“A community of truth can be clear that God’s love is absolute truth,” the bishop said in an interview following. . . . “When a group decides there are other absolute truths, those absolute truths can become God” (8A).
So there is only one absolute truth, the love of God? Does the Bishop seriously think that it is absolutely true that God is holy and that He punishes sin? If he has not read Ezekiel lately, perhaps he may recall Ananias and Sapphira falling dead for the lie they told (Acts 5:1-11). God’s love forgives sins that are repented of; it does not overlook and tolerate sins in which people persist.
Jesus said that love was the greatest commandment–not the only one. With the Methodist Church’s failure to listen to what the Bible says on homosexuality and abortion, no wonder they need a definition of deep truths that cannot be communicated by words.
“In a day when all of us are struggling so hard to talk about and to find what is right and what is true, when we come together as a diverse community of truth, we don’t water down truth. We respect one another’s perception of truth. It is imperative that we learn respect. We must keep seeing each other as a subject to be encountered, not an object to be changed” (8A).
This is some of the finest postmodern gibberish one could ever hope to read. The following observations, however, are in order.
1. Who is struggling hard to find out what is right and true? And how are they going about it? Faithful children of God study the Scriptures to learn wisdom and truth, but most of the academic world has simply relegated truth to that which a person feels or thinks about any particular subject. If we are content to relegate everything to a matter of “perception,” then in essence the conclusion is that “Truth doesn’t matter.” If truth is irrelevant, then how can it be accurate to say we are struggling so hard to find it? Instead, people are struggling hard to bury it as an ancient, irrelevant relic.
2. What is “a diverse community of truth”? Does that mean that we all believe what we want, but that we somehow remain united?
3. “We don’t water down truth.” Oh, so truth does exist, after all? Or is this just a phrase to salve the conscience? Most modernists and liberals try to pass themselves off as truth-seeking, truth-believing conservatives. Occasionally they throw in lines like these, but everything else they say belies this view.
4. “We respect one another’s perception of the truth.” We don’t water down truth, but we respect one another’s perception of truth. What does this phrase mean, if not that “you have your truth, and I have my truth; now let’s all agree to disagree”? The only problem with this idea is that Biblical truth says the Bishop’s perception of truth is wrong. Does anyone recall Jesus, the one who died on the cross for our sins, saying, “You shall have a perception of truth, and that perception will set you free”?
5. “It is imperative that we learn respect.” Wait a minute. The Bishop is already on record as having said that “God’s love is absolute truth” and “When a group decides there are other absolute truths, those absolute truths can become God.” Is learning respect an absolute truth that has become God?” In this case, yes. That homosexuality is sin cannot be considered absolute truth; that abortion is murder cannot be considered absolute truth; but respecting beliefs which differ from what the Scriptures teach, that is an absolute truth (according to them).
6. We must not see each other as an object to be changed. [Why must we not? Is this another imperative, another absolute truth?] We can agree with the part that says not to see other people as objects. If we continue in the truths of the Bible, we will realize that all people are made in the image of God, that all have a soul which will live forever, that all will appear before the judgment seat of Christ, and that all will spend eternity in heaven or hell based on what they believe and practice.
The Bishop may have been studying too many theologians to recall that the gospel is all about change. When Paul went to Mars Hill, for example, did he try to change people from idolaters to Christians? Yes. Did he view the people as objects? No. The Bishop has set up an either-or situation which is not accurate. People are not objects, but they do need to be changed. If, for example, they think that abortion and homosexuality are all right, they need to get back into the Scriptures to learn the truth of the matter.
If they think there are several ways for a person to come to God and be saved, they need to study Paul as he writes that there is one gospel, and if anyone preaches any other gospel, let him be accursed (Gal. 1:8-9). If they think that morality can be divorced from serving God, they need to study 1 Corinthians 5 and 6:9-11. If they think that truth is merely a matter of perceptions, they need to reconsider the Word of God, which always presumes that truth exists, that it can be known, and that it can be obeyed.
The problem with many denominational speakers, “Bishops,” etc., is that they are more in touch with the writings of today’s theologians than the epistles of Paul, Peter, James, Jude, or John. And whereas they know what Jesus said concerning love in Matthew 22:37-40, they have overlooked what Jesus said concerning the false doctrine of the Sadducees just verses earlier (23-32). Jesus did not tell the Sadducees that He respected their perception of truth; He told them, “You are mistaken, not knowing the Scriptures nor the power of God” (29). He also warned His disciples against the doctrine of the Pharisees and the Sadducees (Matthew 16:11-12). Apparently, our Lord was not interested in “a diverse community of truth.”
Mankind comes to know God (and truth) through the Holy Scriptures, not the “wisdom of men” (1 Cor. 1:21).