Welcome to the MHB Podcast. This is Michael Baun. And welcome to my twenty eighth episode. Tonight I want to talk about testing truth. For the second class in the Bible study, I presented the idea that discerning truth in reality is central to the Christian worldview. I provided five tests that can be used to determine truth: empirical adequacy, logical consistency, coherence theory, correspondence theory, and experiential relevance. After the initial presentation, we all gathered together and discussed the material for an hour. During this discussion, some interesting objections were raised and I want to address those tonight. But first, let’s give an overview of why we should use the five tests and what they are. Here’s the line of reasoning for using the five tests:
God is the God of reality, so it follows that if we act and think in a way that aligns us with truth in reality then we will be aligning ourselves with Christ at the same time. This is because Christ calls Himself truth. If we act or think in a way that fails the 5 tests then we will be acting and thinking in a way that opposes us to Christ. It’s impossible to be salt and light in reality without being able to discern truth because failing to discern truth in reality is equal to failing to discern Christ in reality.
I believe a strong case can be made that when you believe something that is false, and then act upon it, your action is detrimental to your well being. Consider: If I pick up a loaded gun, believe that it’s not loaded, and then act on that belief, I risk a high probability of disaster. Or if I step to the ledge of a building, believe that I can fly, and then act on that belief, I risk a high probability of disaster. Or consider 2003, many Americans were made to believe that Iraq possessed WMD’s and had a partial role in 9/11. Americans acted on that false belief by supporting the war effort to invade Iraq – an invasion that is commonly considered a mistake today. In all of these instances, the tragedy is brought about expressly because a person or people believed in something that was false and acted upon that belief. We prevent things like that by using these five tests to arrive at truth.
The first test is empirical adequacy. This is the test that does belong to science. For example: if I tell you that I can go outside and pick up a rock, drop it, and watch it float away, then you know that my claim is not reasonable on grounds of empirical adequacy.
Second is logical consistency. Does the claim reject itself? You might think this one is obvious but it actually gets overlooked quite a bit in the West. Take these popular examples:
- There is no truth. That is a truth claim rejecting all truth claims, including itself.
- You should not judge. That is a judgment rejecting all judgments, including itself.
- What’s true for you is not true for me. That is a statement rejecting universal truth, while claiming to be universal truth.
Our third test is coherence theory. Does the truth hold up when all of the facts involved are present. The classic example of when a truth claim falls apart under coherence theory is when it has to be taken out of context in order to pass the other four tests. This happens all the time when journalists post shocking headlines about something without letting you know the whole story. If they told you the whole story it wouldn’t be as shocking, so they remove enough context to accomplish their goal. You also see this problem when people take Bible verses out of context in order to make Scripture say whatever they want it to. In order for something to be true it must remain true when all of its context is present.
Fourth is correspondence theory. Does all of the truth correspond with all of reality? One of the best examples to look at involves consciousness. We don’t know what consciousness is. We don’t know if it is material or if it is something else. But we do know that it exists. And so presenting a truth claim that does not allow for consciousness would be to violate correspondence theory. So when someone says that we are just a bunch of molecules smashed together in a unique way – they are making a big big big assumption about consciousness for which they have zero evidence.
Fifth is experiential relevance. Have you experienced this truth before? Consider love. Do you love your spouse, your family, or your pet? If you do then you’ve experienced love and you know that love is real. So a truth claim that puts forward the notion that love doesn’t exist or that love is just a mixture of chemicals in the brain would be in violation of experiential relevance.
Empirical adequacy, logical consistency, coherence theory, correspondence theory, and experiential relevance. These five tests will equip you so that you don’t have to depend on sources. It used to be that you could determine with reasonable accuracy whether something was true by checking the source. But when enough individuals have surrendered honesty for power, this source-checking method begins to fail. I also think that you should keep these tests in mind when interpreting Scripture. God’s Word is the final authority, but these tests can help prevent us from misunderstanding God’s Word.
So the first major objection to these tests was that they do not allow for discernment from the Holy Spirit. My answer to this objection is to suggest that these tests are not mutually exclusive with the Holy Spirit. In fact, it’s not clear to me where discernment from the Holy Spirit ends and human rationality begins. Consider this example: Let’s say you are trying to decide whether to start a new ministry and you turn to God in prayer for answers. A couple days later your answer seems to come to you out of nowhere and everything snaps into place. You could say your answer came to you through divine revelation. The first thing any wise and mature Christian would do is check this divine revelation against Scripture to ensure that it came from God. This very act of checking it against Scripture entails that you are using the tests logical consistency and coherence theory.
Furthermore, consider this: The Bible refers to Christ as the Logos, or the Word of God. In a sense, Christ is truthful speech. Couple this idea with the Bible telling us that where two or more are gathered He is there among us. It follows that if we are engaging with each other in truthful speech, the Holy Spirit is with us and helping us to get closer to the truth – or closer to Christ. But what if we are gathered together and the speech is not truthful? What if we are lying to each other or arguing in bad faith? The result is that all participants will leave the conversation further from the truth. So this means that in order for God to bless us with his Spirit during such a conversation, we need to know that we aren’t lying to each other. The best way of doing this is to support what we say to each other with reason. Which is exactly what God wants us to do when he says “Come and let us reason together.” You cannot arrive at reason without traveling through one of these five tests. So in that type of conversation, the Holy Spirit and these five tests are inextricably linked.
Also, it’s important to add that reason is the only thing that scales universally among people. Imagine you are sitting at a campfire with ten people of ten different worldviews. These people might disagree on everything, but all of them will agree on one thing. They will agree that if you stick your hand in the fire, it will get burned. This is because all ten of them can clearly see the reason in that scenario. All of them believe that fire burns you, and they believe so correctly. So in my view, reason is the only universal language among human beings. This makes it critically important for evangelizing. If you approach someone who lives by a different belief system to tell them about the Bible, there will be a language barrier because you are expecting them to believe your premise before even entering the conversation with you. You might as well be speaking Greek. If you encounter someone who is troubled or has recently gone through tragedy, you might get lucky and catch them when they don’t have a structured set of beliefs. They will be open to the Gospel. However, if you are dealing with people who already have belief systems, reason is the best language they are going to understand.
The next major objection was that miracles and divine revelation do not fit the five tests. My answer to this is to suggest that while miracles and divine revelation are super-natural phenomena, they are not super-reality phenomena. Miracles and divine revelation only violate these five tests when you are beginning from the assumption that all of reality can be reduced to nature. I would suggest that nature is only part of a broader context of reality. I’m suggesting that there is more to reality than what our five senses can observe about nature. Consider intuition. Almost everyone has an experience with the still small voice revealing something to them that they didn’t know. Where did that information come from? It certainly wasn’t biological or environmental, yet still it exists. You can see this happen with dreams as well. Often, people will have dreams while they sleep in which new information is revealed to them. Where does that information come from?
Even information itself seems to be immaterial. Write your name on a piece of paper. No matter how close you zoom in on your name, the atoms that make up the ink will never tell you what is written there. In a similar sense, how do you get to know someone? You certainly cannot get to know someone by analyzing their DNA. You get to know someone by having a conversation with them and exchanging information. So, while I agree that miracles and divine revelation are super-natural phenomena, I do not agree that they are super-reality. I believe in the resurrection, that means I believe it happened in reality despite the fact that it violated the laws of nature. So, if human beings had a grasp on ultimate reality I would suggest that something like the resurrection would pass all five of these tests.
I’ll just close by saying this: Marxism is a national tragedy anywhere in the world where it is attempted. Marxism also fails all five of these tests. Nazism or fascism is a national tragedy anywhere in the world it is attempted. Nazism and fascism also fail all five of these tests.
God is the Way the Truth and the Life. God passes all five of these tests. If you orient your life in a Christlike way you will promote well being for yourself, your family, your community, your city, and your nation. You’ll promote it today, tomorrow, next week, next month, next year, and five years from now. Christlike behavior promotes well being across time. You can demonstrate this, thus you can satisfy empirical adequacy. The Bible says God never contradicts Himself, neither does the truth – and that’s logical consistency. The true Christian understanding can only be discovered when reading the entire Bible in its context because it is a narrative – that’s coherence theory. We are conscious creatures, the Bible accounts for consciousness where naturalism cannot because the Bible calls it spirit. That’s correspondence theory. Finally, if you search for God He will reveal Himself to you. That’s experiential relevance. God passes all five of the tests for truth – and that’s because He Himself is truth.
If you find this content valuable, feel free to share it and to use it in your own studies. If you’d like to support this podcast, you can do so at www.patreon.com/michaelhbaun. There is a link in the description. Your generosity goes a long way to promoting the growth of this enterprise and the cause of free speech. Thank you all for joining me this evening, and I will see you in the next episode.
The MHB Podcast 