1 Aaron J C S

M.DIV III

ANTIOCH BIBLICAL SEMINARY COLLEGE, puducherry.

ASSIGNMENT PAPER ON
Conceptualize in detail the reasons as to why we believe that the truth is absolute and not relative.

Submitted by,
J C S Aaron.

In partial fulfillment of the course

Introduction to philosophy.

As a part of requirement of the programme

Master of divinity III.

TO,
DR.Abraham Christhdas

On,
07/08/2020.
2 Aaron J C S
M.DIV III

CONTENT

I Introduction.
II Many Departures from the Truth.
i) Early Departures from the Truth.
ii) Protestant Departures From the Truth.
iii)Latter Day Departures From the Truth.
iv) Our Own Departures from the Truth.
III Absolute Truth
IV Relative truth

V Relative truth’s theory

VI Pilate's truth

VII The origin of the absolute

IX Evidence for Truth Is Absolute

X The Bible's truth

IX Conclusion
3 Aaron J C S
M.DIV III

Introduction

This paper deals with defending the truth which is not relative but absolute . The “truth” is God’s“will”.The
truth, at its source, is in the mind of God. Since no mortal can read God’s mind, "No one knows the thoughts
of God except the Spirit of God." (1Corinthians 2:11).Nobody “has the truth” except by revelation from
God. God’s Spirit must communicate the mind of God to us accurately and in a manner that we can properly
examine and understand. Only then are we in possession of the truth —or more keenly, "the word of truth".
"Do your best to present yourself to God as one approved, a worker who has no need to be ashamed, rightly
handling the word of truth." (2Timothy 2:15). The truth, as we said, is in God’s mind. He gave it to his Son
who communicated to us as "words of eternal life" (John 6:68).

Many Departures from the Truth

Early Departures from the Truth

False and deceitful teaching began early. It was evident even in apostolic times. Two main thrusts were the
Judaisers and the Gnostics. The Judaisers wanted to add Jewish traditions to the gospel. The Gnostics
wanted to blend pagan philosophy and secret “knowledge” into the gospel. "Instruct certain men not to teach
strange doctrines, nor to pay attention to myths and endless genealogies, which give rise to mere speculation
rather than furthering... a genuine faith." (1Timothy 1:3-5 in part). Roman Catholic Departures from the
Truth the Roman church added its own laws and traditions to the scripture, and the writings of popes became
regarded as the word of God. Jesus condemned the Pharisees for doing the same: "You have invalidated the
word of God with your tradition" (Matthew 15:3, 6)

Protestant Departures from the Truth

The Protestant reformation produced schisms, and they wrote creeds which they consider the truth. They
even attribute the formulation of these creeds to the leading of the Holy Spirit. Thus Protestantism has
compromised and contradicted its worthy tradition of regarding the Bible as the only word of truth. Written
Creeds should have been shunned in favor of the Bible alone. Protestants acknowledge Christ as "the way,
the truth, and the life" (John 14:6) don't they? Well then, they need, and ought to have, “no Creed but
Christ”
4 Aaron J C S
M.DIV III

Latter Day Departures from the Truth

Some two centuries after the Protestant Reformation, a new wave of "latter day" movements began to sweep
the world. Christian Science, Seventh Day Adventism, the Mormons, Christian Israelites, is some
Of these. Most latter day movements hold the writings and utterances of their founders as inspired. They
claim to hold the Bible as the word of truth yet compromise and contradict that position by adding the words
of their own prophets to revelation. Latter day movements hold that "all scripture inspired by God"
(2Timothy 3:16) includes the modern day writings of their profits. Charismatic Departures from the Truth In
our own modern times, there is a new movement which in yet another way is guilty of the same.
This“pentecostal” or “charismatic” movement crosses denominational boundaries. The mainstream of this
movement holds the Bible to be God’s word. However its followers produce every day countless thousands
of utterances claimed to be direct revelations of the Holy Spirit This also compromises and contradicts the
belief that the Bible is the only "word of truth". Instead, each person has his and her own truth, personally

Whispered by God, spoken by an angel, or seen in a vision. Those myriads who claim, “God spoke to me”
do not "all speak the same thing...", and are not "perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same
judgment." (1Corinthians 1:10). If two people claim that God speaks to them, yet they teach conflicting
things, they should stop listening to the contradicting “revelations”, and go to the Bible where truly God
speaks, and by that means resolve the conflict. As Paul said, "But even if we or an angel from heaven should
preach to you a gospel contrary to the one we preached to you, let him be accursed" (Galatians 1:8).

Our Own Departures from the Truth

Many members of churches of Christ are active agents for unscriptural change, bringing in teachings and
practices that the churches once refused. The church of Christ ought to be "the pillar and support of the
truth"(1Timothy 3:15), and not fall into the same error as the Catholics, protestants, latter day movements,
and charismatic groups. These agents also believe that the scriptures inform but do not authorize; the
scriptures contain truth but no rules for Christians; the scriptures are open to various valid interpretations.
Let's point the finger not only at popes, creeds, or would-be prophets, but anywhere we find denial of, or
mere lip service to, the principle that the Bible is the only word of truth. We may ourselves contradict and
compromise the “Bible Only” principle, if we do not ourselves insist that people subject both what we say,
and what they think, to examination by the scriptures.
5 Aaron J C S
M.DIV III

Absolute Truth
Absolute truth is whatever is always valid, regardless of Parameters or Context. The Absolute In The Term
Connotes One Or More Of: A Quality Of Truth That Cannot Be Exceeded; Complete Truth; Unvarying And
Permanent Truth. It Can Be Contrasted To Relative Truth Or Truth In A More Ordinary Sense In Which A
Degree Of Relativity Is Implied. In Philosophy, Absolute Truth Generally States What Is Essential Rather
Than Superficial A Description Of The Ideal (To Use Plato's Concept) Rather Than The Merely "Real"
(Which Plato Sees As A Shadow Of The Ideal). Among Some Religious Groups This Term Is Used To
Describe The Source Of Or Authority For A Given Faith Or Set Of Beliefs, Such As The Bible. In Science,
Doubt Has Been Cast On The Notion Of Absolutes By Theories Such As Relativity And Quantum
Mechanics. Attempts To Tie Together All The Known Facts About The Universe Into A Single Unified
Theory .Could Be Seen As Efforts To Discover Absolute Truth About This Set Of Facts. In Pure Mathe,
However, There Is Said To Be A Proof For The Existence Of Absolute Truth. A Common Tactic In
Mathematical Proofs Is The Use Of Reductio Ad Absurdum , In Which The Statement To Be Proved Is
Denied As A Premise, And Then That Premise Is Shown To Lead To A Contradiction. When It Can Be
Demonstrated That The Negation Of A Statement Leads To A Contradiction, Then The Original Statement
Is Proved True. The Logical Proof Of The Statement, "There Exists An Absolute Truth," Is Almost Trivial
In Its Simplicity. Suppose We Assert The Negation Of The Statement, That Is, That There Is No Such Thing
As Absolute Truth. By Making That Assertion, We Claim That The Sentence "There Exists No Absolute
Truth" Is Absolutely True. The Statement Is Self-Contradictory, So Its Negation, "There Exists An Absolute
Truth," Is True. This Proof Applies Only To Logic. It Does Not Tell Us Whether Any Particular Statement
Other Than Itself Is True. It Does Not Prove the Existence (Or Non-Existence) Of God, the Devil, Heaven,
Hell, or Little Green People from another Galaxy. Neither Does It Assert That We Can Always Ascertain
The Truth Or Falsity Of Any Arbitrary Statement. The Incompleteness theorem, Proved By Kurt Gödel And
Published In 1931, Actually Showed That There Exist Logical Statements Whose Truth Value Is
Undecidable, That Is, They Cannot Be Proved Either True Or False.

RELATIVE TRUTH

One of the “new” ideas today is relativism. It has contributed much to the confusion of our times. It is the
idea that all truth is relative in other words, there is no absolute truth. Two women are looking out the
window. One says to the other, “The stars are bright and clear tonight.” The other replies, “The sun is
shining really hot”. How can both women be right? Well if one is in Melbourne talking on the phone to the
other in Perth, the conversation is sensible and both women are stating the truth. This is a case in which truth
is relative in this case; obviously, the truth is relative to different time zones. One day, a car travelling about
100 kilometers per hour sounded its horn. A passenger in the car heard a certain note. A traveler walking
6 Aaron J C S
M.DIV III

along the road ahead of the car heard a higher note. A farmer standing near the road behind the car heard a
lower note. It is true that the horn made only one sound. Yet it is also true that it made three different
sounds, depending on a person’s position and motion relative to the moving car. (Had the three persons
recorded the sound on their mobile phones, each would play back a different sound).

Relative truth’s theory

This idea of relativity has been extended by some thinkers to the unjustified conclusion that all truth is
relative. Questions of religion and morals are therefore judged on the situation in which one finds
oneself truth changes according to the circumstances of the person perceiving it. The philosophy suffers
from a paradox. If one says, “All truth is relative” one must admit that one is stating a relative truth, not an
absolute truth. This means that there must be situations in which the statement is not true. So there must be
situations in which some truth is absolute. This makes the statement self-contradictory. To explain: it would
be paradoxical to say, “All truth is relative and no truth is absolute”. That is stating as absolute truth that
there can be no absolute truth. The paradox is removed if we say, “Some truth is relative and some truth is
absolute”.

Pilate's truth

Pilate had the power to free or crucify (John 19:8-10). In Jesus’ case, Pilate chose to crucify. And why?
Because he was pre-conditioned by his attitude to truth. When Jesus spoke in absolute terms of “the truth”
Pilate rejected that with the rejoinder, what is the truth? (John 18:37-38). As far as Pilate was concerned
Jesus had done nothing worthy of death. But that was only Pilate’s truth. The Jews were perceiving things
from another position. They shouted “crucify! Crucify! (John 19:15). That was their truth. Pilate capitulated,
because he thought truth was changeable, relative, and when it was all boiled down, " what is the
truth?” anyway. There's a little bit of Pilate in every one of us, and we are in danger of rejecting Jesus
because we are confused about the truth.

THE ORIGIN OF THE ABSOLUTE

The term absolute is the creation of modern philosophy, but the fact of absoluteness is an age old problem.
No chapter in ancient philosophy carries with it more pathos than the sincere but blind groping after truth on
the part of earnest but unenlightened men. The Ionians sought for a first principle, a prima material which
should explain the origin and unity of the created universe. Thales found it in water, Anaximenes in air, and
Anaximander, reaching a somewhat loftier plane, found it in the Infinite. Then followed the "Being" of
Parmenides, the "atoms" of Democritus, and a fore gleam of that which was to follow in the "nous" or
7 Aaron J C S
M.DIV III

"reason" of Anaxagoras. Ancient thought on the plane of materialism could rise no higher, and was followed
as a consequence by a period of skepticism. Out of this confusion Greek thought was led by Socrates to a
higher level, that of the moral nature of the universe. On this new plane, Greek philosophy reached its
supreme heights in the mysticism of Plato and the logic of Aristotle. It could advance no farther, and again
sank into decline. At the time of Christ, Greek philosophy was groping about on the plane of primitive
religion expressed in philosophical terms. St. Paul seems to have had this in mind, when after referring to
the "unknown God" in his Athenian address, he declared that God in His sovereignty over the nations had
appointed the bounds of their habitation , that they should seek the Lord, by which we are to understand an
intellectual pursuit of truth; if haply they might feel after him, that is in the moral pressure upon the
consciences of men; and find him, though he be not far from every one of us: for in him we live, and move,
and have our being; as certain also of your own poets have said, For we are also his offspring . Whom
therefore ye ignorantly worship, he triumphantly exclaims, him declare I unto you (Act 17:23). Thus to the
intellectual groupings and of unenlightened men, and to the moral pressure upon conscience, St. Paul adds
another factor spiritual illumination-which comes through the redemptive religion of the Lord Jesus Christ,
and brings men's groupings and pressures to full fruition in finding God. In one divinely inspired and
illuminating grasp, therefore, St. Paul combines both the creature and nature aspects of God- both personal
transcendence of the Hebrews, and the immanence of the Greeks. In this authoritative address is given the
Christian concept of God. The attempt to harmonize the diverse elements gave rise to great problems which
in every age have perplexed theology, but even more so, science and philosophy. The apostle had a deep
insight into the different tempers of mind exhibited by the Jew and the Greek when he wrote that we preach
Christ crucified, unto the Jews, with their scientific temper of mind, a stumbling block; and unto the Greeks,
with their philosophical temper of mind, foolishness; but unto them which are called, both Jews and Greeks,
Christ the power of God, and the wisdom of God (1Co 1:23-24) It is a broadening and heartening thought
that God who revealed Himself to the Jews in a more objective manner, revealed Himself in a measure also
to the Gentiles, through their search after truth. The limit of this seeking seems to have been set by the
Apostle Paul, as the knowledge of his eternal power and Godhead. Beyond this it cannot go, for the true
knowledge of God is at once ethical and spiritual. The redemptive aspect is involved. There was, therefore,
as we have indicated, a period of skepticism in Greek thought at the time of Christ. The fullness of time in
which Jesus came, seems to have applied not only to the Jews but to the Gentile world as well. It is
significant that a company of Greeks came to the disciples and said, Sir, we would see Jesus (John 12:21).
Greek thought with its search after truth through intellectual acumen and moral pressure had broken down,
and the vague, unsatisfied longings of their hearts, in connection with the providences of God, had brought
them to Jesus. The answer which Jesus gave them is significant also, and will receive fuller treatment in our
discussion of the knowledge of God. Except a corn of wheat fall into the ground and die, He said, it abided
8 Aaron J C S
M.DIV III

alone: but if it dies, it brings forth much fruit (John 12:24). The hindering cause does not lie in the failure of
the intellectual grasp, or even in the lack of moral pressure, He said, but in the sense of sin which brings a
moral and ethical unlikeness to God, and thereby destroys the true basis for personal and spiritual
knowledge. There must, therefore, be a death to the sinful nature, and the infusion of a new life, before there
can be spiritual comprehension. In the redemptive Christ all the seeming contradictions of life find their
principle of unity. Here the Jewish idea of sin as transgression finds forgiveness, and the Jewish mission is
thereby fulfilled. Here the Greek conception of sin as a "missing of the mark" or failure, finds its completion
in Jesus. This then is the prophetic vision of Christ, a light to lighten the Gentiles, and the glory of thy
people Israel (Luk 2:32) in this brief historical sketch, we have reviewed the various philosophical concepts
of God regarded as the Absolute. The Jews held to the idea of a transcendent God. Because of their belief in
creation through the Divine Word, they never regarded God as apart from all relations, and were thereby
preserved from an agnostic position. However, when brought into contact with Greek philosophy at
Alexandria, Philo and the Neo-Platonists carried the idea of transcendence to such extreme lengths that it
issued in agnosticism. They were therefore, under the necessity of superseding the idea of creation, and
consequently posited a series of emanations in order to account for the world. From this false philosophy
there arose the several Gnostic sects, which exerted an unwholesome influence in the church. But Greek
philosophy on the whole was pantheistic. That is, it regarded God as the Absolute, not apart from all
relations but inclusive of all such relations. The difficulty of the agnostic position concerning the Absolute
lay in its failure to relate God to the universe the weakness of pantheism lay in its failure to distinguish God
from the universe. Christianity, and therefore Christian philosophy, took a mediating position. It maintained
that God as Absolute is neither apart from relations on the one hand, nor inclusive of relations on the other.
It maintains that the Absolute is independent Self-existence. As such it is capable of existing apart from all
external relations, or of entering into free relations with created beings, either in an outward and
transcendent manner, or an inward and immanent manner. Christian philosophy maintains that to hold less
than this is to limit and thereby destroy any true conception of the Absolute. We turn our attention now to an
investigation from the Christian viewpoint, of the various theories of the Absolute which have been current
in modern philosophy The New Platonists taught that the original ground and source of all things was simple
being, without life or consciousness; of which absolutely nothing could be known, beyond that it is. They
assumed an unknown quantity, of which nothing can be predicated. The pseudo-Dionysius called this
original ground of all things God, and taught that God was mere being without attributes of any kind, not
only unknowable by man, but of whom there was nothing to be known, as absolute being is in the language
of modern philosophy-Nothing; nothing in itself, yet nevertheless the dynamic or (cause of all things). The
universe proceeds from primal being, not by any exercise of conscious power or will, but by a process of
emanation. The primary emanations from the ground of all being, which the heathen called gods; the New
9 Aaron J C S
M.DIV III

Platonists, spirits or intelligences; and the Gnostics, aeons; the pseudo-Dionysius called angels. These he
divided into three triads: thrones, cherubim, and seraphim; powers, lordships, authorities; angels, archangels,
principalities.

Evidence for Truth Is Absolute

Since the world does exist and we can know it, predications made concerning the universe can be true or
false. Truth then is not some ethereal concept but it is a property of proposition. What we call truth are
simply predications made about reality which are correct. Another way of saying it is that truth is what
corresponds to its referent. Truth about reality is what corresponds to the way things really are. All non
correspondence views of truth imply correspondence, even as they attempt to deny it. The claim: "Truth
does not correspond with what is" implies that this view corresponds to reality. Then the non-
correspondence view cannot express itself without using a correspondence frame of reference. The
correspondence view of truth is therefore literally undeniable. The correspondence view of truth proves truth
is absolute. There cannot be any relative truths. For if something is really true—if it really does correspond
to reality—it is really true for everyone everywhere and for all time. In the proposition “Joel has a brown
horse on Christmas morning 2014,” if Joel does indeed have a brown horse on that Christmas morning then
it corresponds to reality and is absolutely true. Even mathematical truth is absolute. The statement 7 + 3 = 10
is not just true for mathematics majors nor is it true only in a mathematics classroom but it is true for
everyone, everywhere at all times. Clearly if an educator rejects absolute truth they face some serious
challenges. One option is to say that truth is relative. However, the claim that truth is relative is an absolute
claim. People who say truth is not absolute but relative are saying that the only absolute truth is the
statement, “There is no absolute truth.” Or, if somebody says, “It is only relatively true that relativism is
true” they suggest that statement might be false for some people (that it might be absolute). But if relativism
were true, the world would be full of contradictions. If one person says, “There is milk in the refrigerator”,
and the other insists, “There is no milk in the refrigerator” and they are both right—then there must both be
and not be milk in the refrigerator. If relativism were true, a student would be right even when they are
wrong. It would mean students could never actually learn anything, either, because learning is moving from
a false belief to a true one that is,

From an absolutely false belief to an absolutely true one. So relativism would seem to be an embarrassing
choice for an educator. Another alternative to absolute truth is epistemological agnosticism which asserts
that truth about reality is unknowable, that we only know appearance, not the underlying reality of
something. This however is akin to saying “the only thing we can know is that we cannot know” and is also
self-defeating. Skepticism is similar to agnosticism. It holds that we should doubt all truth. We should
suspend judgment on all truth claims about reality. We can only know sensory data, but not the underlying
10 Aaron J C S
M.DIV III

reality. Skepticism is also self-defeating because the claim “we should be skeptical about everything” would
include being skeptical about skepticism. It also claims that doubt is the only thing that should not be
doubted. The only view that is not self-defeating is that truth is absolute. And this is the only view which is
appropriate for the Christian educator.

The Bible's truth

The Bible does not see all truth as relative. What it calls “the truth “is absolute, and all will be condemned
who do not love, know, believe, and obey that truth (2Thessalonians 1:8, 2Thessalonians 2:10-12).
Some may point to 2Peter 1:12 which speaks of “the present truth” We know that some things true in Old
Testament times are not true now, and some things true now won't be true in heaven. Some truth is relative.
But that does not mean all truth is so. In reality, everybody has the truth who has access to the Bible, for it
provides the truth concerning Christ and the things of Christ. All those having a Bible have the truth; and
none has more truth than another. Of course, we all depend upon our ability to interpret and understand "the
word of truth". This has led people to think that the Bible can be validly interpreted in many ways and leads
people to different constructs of truth. In that case, the Bible would be an influence for truth, but not the
truth. The Bible itself, however, denies that claim and presents one God and Father; one Christ and Savior;
one final covenant and sacrifice; one way of salvation; one truth. Jesus said, "I am the way, the truth, and the
life; no one comes to the Father except through me" (John 14:6). There is one truth just as there is one
Christ. He said again, "If you continue in my word, then you are truly disciples of Mine; and you will know
the truth, and the truth will make you free" (John 8:31-32). Paul said, "There is one Lord, one faith..."
(Ephesians 4:5), in contrast to "every wind of doctrine, by human cunning, by craftiness in deceitful
scheming" (Ephesians 4:14). There is one truth; many lies. Lies, however, have no power over the truth.
Therefore, whoever you are, if you have a Bible in your hands, you can learn to read and understand the
truth, and in doing so expose every lie.

Conclusion

There is eternal and absolute truth. We can recognize it among the lies, the truth (2Timothy 4:3-4). You can
find the truth just as you could find a diamond ring accidentally thrown into the garbage can. Sifting through
all that garbage might involve a lot of work, but you would recognize and distinguish the diamond ring very
easily once it turned up. You would hardly wonder whether you were looking at the diamond ring or just
another piece of garbage, would you? Jesus plainly says,” You shall know the truth and the truth shall make
you free” (John 8:31-32). The writer to the Hebrews speaks of unchangeable truths (in this case an oath and
a promise God made) in which our hope is fixed as “the anchor of the soul” (Hebrews 6:18-19). Without
11 Aaron J C S
M.DIV III

such an anchor we will be all at sea in life. Paul presents the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ as
absolute truths (1Corinthians 15:3-4). You can believe in these things without doubt or confusion. What's
more, you yourself can die, be buried, and be raised with Christ (Romans 6). Absolutely.
12 Aaron J C S
M.DIV III

Bibliography

Anthony, Michael J., and Warren S. Benson. Exploring the History and Philosophy of Christian Education:
Principles for the 21st Century. Grand Rapids, MI: Kernel Academic & Professional, 2003.

Galli, M., and T. Olsen. 131 Christians Everyone Should Know. Nashville, TN: Broadman& Holman
Publishers, 2000.

Geisler, Norman, ed. Baker Encyclopedia of Christian Apologetics. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 1999.