more Mainstream Apologetics ...
Evidence ID: BIB-EV97
Evidence: Philosophical Basis for God's Truth
Summary: Philosophers and critics throughout the ages have recognized that truth must conform to reality. Through the use of rational thought and empirical observation we are able to observe truth in the real world. Belief systems based on religious pluralism and moral relativism are inherently self-contradictory and thus invalid.
Description: In an age of tolerance, truth has been "denigrated to the level of personal preference" according to R.C. Sproul [REF-RCS05].
Truth is independent of likes and desires. It is rooted in the transcendent being of God which exists apart from the created order of space, time and matter.
A valid religious belief system provides a comprehensive understanding of truth devoid of contradictions. If any of the tenets of a belief system are contradictory, the system of truth is invalidated based on the law of non-contradiction [PHY-IS02], and considered irrational and inconsistent.
Philosophers and critics throughout the ages have recognized the fundamental relationship between truth and reality. Noah Webster, author of the Webster Dictionary of 1825 states that "truth conforms to fact or reality". Ravi Zacharias defines truth as "that which affirms propositionally the nature of reality as it is". R.C. Sproul says that "truth is that which corresponds to reality as perceived by God".
To fully understand the nature of truth we turn to the field of epistemology. Epistemology is the study of the nature of knowledge and the rationality of belief. It is based primarily on the theories of rationalism and empiricism.
Rationalism teaches that knowledge is the product of logic and reason (rational thought). Empiricism teaches that knowledge is a product of sensory perception (empirical evidence). Together, we use logic and reason to validate things we observe with our five senses.
The wholistic approach of rational thought plus empirical observation enables us to come to sound conclusions based on our experience of the real world.
Pluralists argue that all truth claims are equally valid. As applied to religious belief systems, religious pluralists argue that all religions are equally valid. Many of the pluralistic belief systems such as the Bahá'í Faith, Universalism, and Buddhism are based on personal beliefs as opposed to a single transcendent truth.
While religious pluralism is accepting of all belief systems, it is fundamentally self-contradictory. The Law of Non-Contradiction [PHY-IS02] says these competing belief systems are impossible and cannot coexist in space and time.
Similarly, moral relativism asserts that morality is not based on absolute standards. Rather, moral relativists ardently claim that there is no such thing as absolute truth and morality, but rather personal truth and morality. How are relativists absolutely certain that there is "no such thing as absolute truth" if there are no absolutes! Consequently, moral relativists are caught in their own self-contraction.
Another way to reason about moral relativism is to assume that if there are a seemingly infinite number of truth systems, then there must be at least one truth system that is absolute and self-consistent.
Religious pluralism and moral relativism are errant in assuming that there is no such thing as a transcendent truth. Apart from a transcendent truth, all other personal and contradictory truths are inherently invalid.
We can trust the processes of rational thought and empirical observation of the real world to guide us in discerning God's truth.
Resources:
Copyright@2025 Mainstream Apologetics