Truth?

Where does the idea of truth come from? What makes something true? Why do we think in the realm of true and false?

If something is true then it can never be false. For example, 2+2=4. If that is true, then it can never be false. If there exists a possibility for it to ever be false then it was never true. But, some may say, it is now 1 o'clock and in an hour that will not be true, it is only true for that moment. However, we know that the passing of a moment verifies its existence. If it is now 2 o'clock, that verifies the truth that it was previously 1 o'clock. So it does not prove things can be momentarily true because they can still be seen as true once the moment passes. The fact that I'm now 26 years old verifies that it was true to say I was 25 last year.

But we treat some truths as unchanging. We think 2 plus 2 equals 4 now, and will always equal 4. If we say that 2+2=5 is a possibility in the distant future, then the truth of 2+2=4 is undercut. The very reliability of math would be demolished. However, we treat and trust math as very reliable. We think and act as if 2+2 will always equal 4. Therefore, to us, true and false are eternal concepts. It will always be true that I was 25 last year and 2 plus 2 will always equal 4. So we, as finite creatures, at our foundational thinking level, think in infinite terms. This leaves two possibilities. An infinite "thing" exists, and we are thinking rightly, or an infinite "thing" does not exist, and we are thinking wrongly.

If we think in the realm of true and false by a mere evolutionary process, then does truth even really exist? Is it not just something we created? A mere means by which we converse, a way in which we choose to look at existence? And if we created the idea of truth, then we can create a new idea. I can choose to ignore "truth" and think in my own terms. But is such a thing even possible? I can say 2+2=100, but 2 dollar bills added to another 2 dollar bills will not suddenly become 100. If I say gravity does not exist and then jump off a building, I will fall. The things around us simply are. So if something is "there", it cannot suddenly be "not there" just because I say so. So truth must come from somewhere. Truth is, in a sense, imposed upon us. I cannot fly by saying gravity does not exist or create money merely by stating exaggerated addition.

But why do we, as humans, think in terms of true and false? Why do we not just merely exist and act on instinct alone? Even if a man says, "There is no such thing as true and false! All is relative!" Such a man is insisting his view is true and that the opposite is false. This kind of thinking self destructs. Or some say, "There are no absolutes, I trust gravity to keep me in place because it always has. And I trust 2+2 to equal 4, because it always has." Yes, but if your friend was always on time, would you place such a trust in him? "I trust my friend will always be on time because he always has." Such thinking, when placed in another situation, looks quite foolish. People around you would protest, "But what if there is an accident? Or if he forgets?" Would such a person cross their arms and say, "No, he will always be on time because he always has." But alas, such is the reasoning of many. "Gravity will keep me here because it always has and my bank account will stay as it is because it always has." But what if gravity stops? Suddenly, the earths rotation stays the same, but the laws of gravity change. Or what if 2 dollars suddenly became 1 dollar? If there are no absolutes, then such things are possible, and faith placed in gravity or math is really quite foolish. Someone who is sick and claims they are not is often referred to as "delusional". So I suppose someone who has faith in absolute things but claims they do not could also be referred to as "delusional". And I don't suppose anyone should really take what they say seriously.

Is Reason Sufficient?

It has been said that to claim “reason is insufficient” would be self defeating because it is by reason that such a conclusion is arrived at. Such a statement, aside from seeming too confident in reason, seems inaccurate due to the fact that reason is quite simply the most dependent function of the human mind. One may read the previous statement and think to themselves, “Well how can you say such a thing and even trust it?” I would respond by pointing out that reasoning must of necessity have input to even function on the minutest level. Without information, reason is just an engine without gas.

Picture a child sitting in a bare room with nothing inside. The child observes his/her surroundings and takes in information. Based on this information the child can decide to move, sit still, lie down, etc. Like gas in an engine, this enables reason to function. Apart from information intake the child would not be able to reason about anything. “I can think. I can see. Can I move? I can. I will move over here.” Without knowing that movement is possible or that observation is the means by which the brain takes in information, reason would be at a stand still.

One might conclude from the above argument that a person’s reason is only as good as the information it receives. If the same young child was shown videos of little children jumping off buildings and slowly floating to safety, he/she might reason incorrectly about what would happen if they were to jump from a high location. So the real question is not about the sufficiency of reason, but the reliability of the information received through observation. Someone might say, “We conclude what is right and wrong by reasoning with our minds.” After stating this you must show what information influenced your reason to come to such a conclusion. You must also prove that this information is reliable. Essentially, you have reasoned that reason is how you determine right from wrong. What influenced your reason to reason that reason is reliable? Is the information that has been observed trustworthy? What makes it trustworthy? Have we simply reasoned that the information is trustworthy? If so, what information lead us to reason that information itself is trustworthy? It seems a tad circular does it not? You reach a point when, with reason stripped down, it is seen as insufficient due to its dependent nature.

At this point one might ask, “How can you even trust your current argument if reason is insufficient?” My response is that everyone takes a leap of faith when trusting his or her reason. There is no irrefutable concrete evidence that reason is trustworthy. Even if there were hard evidence for the trustworthiness of reason, it would be by reason that we judge and examine said evidence. One must reach a point where a leap of faith is taken, and a large amount of trust is placed in reason. It is dishonest to claim that no leap of faith is made when trust is placed in reason. Concluding that the faith of a Christian is no more of a leap than that of an atheist who trusts his or her reason.

So the question remains: Is reason sufficient? The gas and engine analogy seems to function well to answer this in a short and simplistic way. An engine cannot run on its own just like reason cannot function without information. An engine will only run as well as the gas put into it just like reason will only function as well as the information plugged into it. It would obviously be easier to see whether or not the best gas was used in the engine by observing how well it ran. It would prove a tad more challenging to see whether or not the best information was plugged into a person’s reason. Pragmatism is not a conclusive way to solve this problem. Thus concluding that reason is not solely sufficient, but highly dependent. Forcing strong skepticism on the anti-faith crowd that places so much confidence in reason and ridicules faith with such derision. Ironically it is faith that they place so blindly in reason’s sufficiency in spite of the absence of any hard evidence, the very thing people of faith are commonly labeled with: blind faith with no evidence.

Naturalism

Supposing we live in a closed system, a purely natural world, what in nature tells us all men are born with equal rights? Nature, on the contrary, seems to show us quite a different view of man. Deformities, mental retardation, and simple things like size difference show us that no one is born equal. The natural abilities of a midget woman and a seven foot Kenyan man are vastly different. How then, does a purely natural system give we humans any reason to believe in equal rights? If we have merely evolved from animals, why do the principles of 'survival of the fittest' vanish from our minds?

The seven foot Kenyan man is bigger and much stronger than the midget woman. Why would it be wrong for him to capture her, rape her, and claim her as his personal possession? If we are but highly evolved animals then the Kenyan man is using his reason, intellect, and strength to make a decision based on what he wants. Who are we, as fellow evolved animals, to tell him what he desires is wrong? "She has rights!" some may cry. Yes, but why? She was born smaller and weaker than him. Why can't we conclude that a stronger person has more rights based solely on the fact that they are strong? Nature doesn't give us any reason to believe every human has equal rights. A closed natural system can only lead to no rights and no equality, ending in barbaric or sophisticated 'survival of the fittest'. The man who claims there is no supernatural, that we live in a closed natural system, and also claims that humans have equal rights must take reasons and philosophies about the existence of man from outside his closed natural system. This is pure and indefensible contradiction of thought and practice.

How then, would this same man defend and hold to belief in human dignity? Why does life have value? Why is molesting and murdering a child wrong? What in a closed natural system gives self attesting proof that mankind has dignity? In a close naturalistic system we are highly evolved animals, but still animals. A lion may see fit to eat and slaughter his young. How do animals, highly evolved or not, suddenly deem that this is wrong? And not just wrong, but punishable and condemning?

A father, in a closed natural system, is free to do whatever he pleases with his children. They are his offspring, are they not? They are his, if you will, creation. In a closed natural system, what is the difference between destroying a created house and a created infant? Are they not simply the result of my actions? And therefore subject to my decision whether or not to allow them to exist? To hold to naturalism while also clinging to human dignity is also an indefensible contradiction of thought and practice.

A Source For Truth

Is it reasonable to look within man for truth? Man who is born with imperfections, dependencies, and a mortal body that slowly dies from the moment of conception. Is it not more reasonable for man to see his nature being imperfect and ultimately corrupt as a reason to look for his antithesis as the source for truth? An imperfect, dependent, and mortal being should naturally assume the existence of a perfect, independent, and immortal being. This should then lead to a subordinate view of man below the immortal perfect being that must of necessity be above and superior to all that exists.

Therefore, faith and belief in a god is far more reasonable than the denial of a superior existence. The only reason we know we are imperfect is because something perfect must exist. Those who deny the possibility of a perfect being existing deny their own imperfection, deem themselves a god among men and therefore define perfection by their imperfect perception and existence. Is this not the behavior of insane men? Did not Hitler take this view to it's logical end? He deemed himself a god and became the one who sought to define perfection by getting rid of what he thought to be imperfect.

Men who deny God and yet live peaceably with other men deny their own supposed godlike nature by living equal to and not above other men. If they be a god, they are not one worthy of worshiping, let alone worth listening to.

Circular

Men sneer and rail against God's Word. They claim, "It is the word of God because it says it is the word of God, how circular!" But I protest with all strength from God. Who claims what the unbeliever says is true? Well the unbeliever of course! "We say this and that about existence, and it is true!" Who is claiming something while at the same time being the attestation that it is truth? That is circular! Life apart from God is circular! No peace and no joy. Just fat headed puffed up blind men running in a circle of self attesting "truth". "We are right because we say so! This is true and there is no God!" God's wrath burns hot for those who deny Him. On the day of judgment I will tremble and testify against those who saw the truth and sneeringly rejected it in pride! I pity the blind men of this world, and I pray for strength to plead with them daily in patience and love.

Lullaby of Death

What is the parent's course of action when a child needs to be lulled to sleep? A peaceful and kind song of love to calm and lull the child into rest. The child feels warm, good, and happy. A euphoria floods their face as they drift into sleep. It is not necessarily their tired disposition that puts them at peaceful ease, but rather the soothing and kind song of love being whispered and sung. So the main cause, the prodding and soft pushing, is the lullaby itself.

The same child, when blindfolded and running toward the edge of a cliff is again in need of their parent's help. The child's need is now much different. Would a parent not appear to be out of their mind if they tried to lull the child to sleep in an effort to keep them from running off the cliff? A simple game near a cliff would prove deadly. What parent would be mindless enough to behave in such a way? And yet many preachers are just as mindless in their preaching. Lulling people to sleep as they hurl themselves headlong into hell.

This stems from the same lunacy in the above example with the child heading toward the cliff. More concern for someone's feelings trumps the ultimate concern for where they are headed. Don't startle them or upset them! Tell them how grand life can be and how much God loves them. As the child ran toward the cliff who would be hesitant to scream and shout? Who would only softly say, "You are loved, isn't that wonderful?" A patient dying wants cured! The child, if he knew the cliff was there, would want to be spared!

Imagine the conversation between the parent and child after the fact. The child is broken, bleeding, and barely alive. Would the child say, "I'm glad you told me I was loved." What lunacy is this? The child would shout and wail, "Why didn't you tell me?!?" Dare I say, one day many preachers (so called) will hear similar cries from a lake of swelter. All the men whom they have lulled to sleep will be abruptly awakened by the pain of death and the sting of suffering. And no excuse will be available for either party.

The law is on their hearts and they enjoyed the tickling comfort from their so called shepherd. Just because a man did not steal the bread, if it fills his stomach and warms his heart he is guilty for eating it. The greater crime is committed by the initiator, but the partaker is not innocent merely because he only "went along" with it. The soldiers that stood watch are guilty along with the wretched rabble that sent our Lord to the cross. Yes we can see how a larger measure of guilt and shame for the lazy preacher, the bread thief, and the ones who cried, "crucify Him!". But all partakers are not absolved and made innocent by their passive involvement.

You sir, who sit and slumber beneath the soft blanket of dead preaching are guilty as well! Stand and be judged!

Trust God

If God's Word be true and men are dead in their sins and haters of God then it is only by faith in the power of God's choosing, Christ's dying, and the Spirit's moving that we preach to sinners. How else can the dead be made alive? How else can foe become friend? How else can a rebel become a son? Do our words have power? Do we? Does such a thing happen from mere realization and motivation? No! Such a thing is a miracle! A miracle only possible by the Creator of all, the Sustainer of all, the Lord of all.

Shed off speeches of motivation and lectures of morality. Cling only to Christ and His Gospel. Preach only Christ crucified. Trust only God.

Beings of Conflict

Why is it that every book, story, movie, etc. has the element of conflict? Why are men drawn to a fight? sports? wars? gossip? The answer is simple: we are beings of conflict.

The law of God on man's heart, which is commonly called, "the conscience" is in conflict with our sin nature. The remnant of what was in Eden remains and we know we are made for more, but our rebellion wars against it. This makes conflict alluring to us. Why? Because conflict is the consuming state of our nature. Which team will win the game? Who will win the debate? Did you hear about so and so? Who will win the election? Conflict!

But God brings peace to us. The only peace sufficient for beings ingrained with conflict. The peace of Jesus Christ the risen Savior. I say risen because it is important to note His peace was wrought in His death and secured by His resurrection. His blood bought us, His resurrection secured us. "Are we not secure because He bought us?" you may ask. Of course we are secure because His payment was perfect and sufficient. But we are secured by the resurrection because our second life is made possible by the same power that raised Christ from the dead. Being secured and being secure are quite different. We are secured by His resurrection, by the power, and secure in Christ because we can't be removed from Him.

So, miserable creature in conflict, doesn't being secure sound blissful? Doesn't an unmovable foundation sound glorious? Are you tossed about by lusts, desires, aspirations and the like? Does not Christ smell sweet? There He stands, unmovable and unshakable. He is the antithesis of what we are and yet He died that we might live. Embrace Christ!!

Reformed Pastor Pt 6

Chapter 2 - Section 2

-No matter how much I study and read, if the ends to why I am doing them be wrong, I am a great hypocrite.

-Knowing much with the goal of helping others and being edified is praiseworthy and wise.

-Before acts of grace the state of grace must come. True mercy, forgiveness, and compassion are not possible apart from knowing these things from God Himself.

-Many men are not proficient because they refuse to learn. There is no end or stopping point. A wise man can always be taught more.

-No matter how lovingly we deliver it, some men will always hate and revile us for telling them the truth.

-You will never preach earnestly to men that you don't fervently pray for.

Reformed Pastor Pt 5

Chapter 2 - Section 1

-Don't lead a man to living water only to muddy it by a sin filled life. Striving to be holy should bring about a desire to lead men to living water. To be living in sin only to haphazardly attempt to lead men to living water calls the motive of a man's heart into question. Why lead to living water that is apparently too bitter to drink ourselves?

-Paul was stirred by the idolatry of other men. Do we get so stirred? Do we even take notice? The constant denial of God that surrounds us dulls our senses to the rank repulsiveness of men's misleading words. If you smell not the odious stench that pours forth from the Tempter's workers how often do you unknowingly inhale and exhale the same stench?

-If you are weak you are exposed to dangers, your consolations and delight in God are abated, and the sweetness of wisdom's ways have been taken. You are less serviceable to both God and men and bring less honor to your master.

-Men would sooner believe the gospel you preach if they saw it deeply seated and burning within your chest. Are you cold? Luke warm? What gospel are they seeing compared to the one you are preaching?

-If we would remind ourselves daily that we are dying then we would see through the veneer fog of the present and press forward to what is eternal, what is to come.

Reformed Pastor Pt 4

Chapter 1 - Section 2 - Part C

-A prostitute will enter heaven more quickly than a pharisee because she doesn't need convinced or debated into believing she's in sin and misery.

-Speaking loudly without truth is like shooting a gun with powder and no bullet. It may spark and make lots of noise, but little damage is done to the enemy. Mix your zeal with truth, a truth that is humbling, a truth that has power, a truth that pierces.

-Men see meaning in your actions as much as they hear meaning in your words. We should strive to make sure both meanings match and compliment each other rather than one destroying the other.

-Even if you carry good meat to people, dirty hands can still spoil the meal you prepare for them. Don't let sin sour your delivery of the gospel anymore than our imperfection already does.

Reformed Pastor Pt 3

Chapter 1 - Section 2 - Part B

-The nearer I stand to God the greater dishonor I can bring Him. If He pulls us close and blesses us with even a whisper of grace, let us honor Him as our King through obedience and faith. Would you work less and show less loyalty to your job after being promoted? We honor those who bless us in ways that seem like favors from an ant in comparison to the grace of God. A drop of grace from God would drown a lifetime of favors and blessings from men.

-The only reason to doubt whether God will bless the work you do is if the message we proclaim has not changed our own hearts. If we do not work for God for whom do we work? If it be for us then every prayer and praise should be done in the mirror since we are worshiping ourself as a god.

-If sin be evil and should be fled from, why would you embrace it as an old friend so often? Would you slumber with venomous snakes? Or dance on thin ice above awaiting doom? Such actions would be the behavior of someone out of their mind or someone longing to be hurt. Do you long to be hurt? Are you out of your mind? If no then forsake your old friend with whom you've enjoyed so many hours of consuming death and destruction to your own soul. Pluck out the needle of death from your arm! Rise from this bed of ashes you seem content to lie in each night. Let Christ be your portion day and night.

Reformed Pastor Pt 2

Chapter 1 - Section 2 - Part A
-Is this perverting my judgment? Weakening my resolutions? Cooling my zeal? Abating my diligence? (good questions to ask about everything)

-As overseers we are blessed with more available restraint because we are up in front of people. The elevated position should humble rather than puff up. People can and should keep us from sin by confronting and rebuking us. We should in turn be thankful and receive their dealing with our sin. Any help in exposing and ending our sin should be wanted and welcomed.

-As learned men we cannot commit a small sin. The Lord in His grace has blessed us with knowledge and wisdom, and we spit upon that blessing when we sin.

-How often do I secretly cherish what I publicly disgrace? My shame should be great for the odious things that I cling to in the dark. Why does the wretched smell of sin become sweet in the dark? Because the light of Christ makes the Word taste sweet and our sin bitter. Oh that I would cling to the feet of Christ that the most lustrous sin would look like a rusting corpse of poison.

-If I seek to rescue men from Satan's grasp, a careless approach will not do. Great diligence and reliance on God's moving must be in place. How often we rush in headlong to speak of Christ's power and drain our very words of their efficacy by drowning them in mindless zeal.

Reformed Pastor Pt 1

** Time for a new series **

My thoughts after reading The Reformed Pastor

Chapter 1 - Section 1
-Deal plainly with sin and rebuke. You are the best friend to the man you plainly rebuke. Temporary disapproval from men means nothing compared to the eternal approval of God.

-All studies, even theological and Biblical ones, are worthless if we aren't doing so to seek and know God more.

-Everything we have didn't just come from God out of kindness and grace. Everything we have exists only because God does. Yes He graces us and blesses us, but the very things by which He blesses us only exist because He is God. View all things, especially ourselves, in light of this.

-Men will have less prejudice toward a meek and humble man. The proud man puts of such a stiff air that the very air for open minded listeners is choked and evaporated from the room. Put off pride if you wish men to hear you. Put on humility if you wish men to see Christ rather than yourself.

-"It is easier to chide at sin than to overcome it." We pick and chisel at sin, thinking if it be less frequent that we've had some type of victory. The death of a sin is the only true victory over it. Not that sin can cease in this life, but that our election would be made sure by a distaste and a disenchantment with our most favorite sin. Oh that Christ would sweeten our tongue making sin taste like dung.

Pt 10 Longing For Christ

Do you long for Christ, or do you long to long for Christ? Longing for Christ should embody the Christian, but how often do we find men saying, "I want to long for Christ much like these great men of the faith"? One should examine such a longing. Instead of being focused on Christ and His commands, you are focused on a 'longing' that you wish to have.

If you wish to long for Christ because you wish to be more like Him, then you do in fact long for Christ. However, if you hope to long for Christ because you see it as something to be obtained, like a good quality, then you do not long for Christ, but have an idol. You have a picture in your mind of what a 'good' or 'honorable' Christian should look like, and you long for that instead of Christ. Longing for a longing is an endless battle. You will never find any form of rest with such a fallacious approach. Long for Christ and Christ alone!

NEXT:

PART ELEVEN: The Bible