How Truth Works

“Cultural Critique Column”

Note: This is part of our ongoing Philosopher’s Series. 

This is an online  article from the Christian Research Journal.

When you  support the Journal, you join the team and help provide the resources at equip.org that minister to people worldwide. These resources include our ever-growing database of more than 2,000 articles, as well as our free Postmodern Realities podcast.

Another way you can support our online articles is by leaving us a tip. A tip is just a small amount, like $3, $5, or $10, which is the cost of a latte, lunch out, or coffee drink. To leave a tip, click here

Into thine hand I commit my spirit: thou hast redeemed me,
O Lord God of truth. (Psalm 31:5 KJV)

Social media and culture influencers today are often not people of truth. Their words and images lack the gravity of fact and often burst with illusion. They are adept at selling themselves on the Internet but inept at getting the facts straight. Or if they speak of truth, they get it wrong. Consider the words of Katherine Maher, who recently became the CEO of National Public Radio. In a TED Talk in 2021, she said this:

Perhaps for our most tricky disagreements, seeking the truth and seeking to convince others of the truth might not be the right place to start. In fact, our reverence for the truth might be a distraction that’s getting in the way of finding common ground and getting things done.

Now, that is not to say that the truth doesn’t exist, nor is it to say that the truth isn’t important. Clearly, the search for the truth has led us to do great things, to learn great things. But…one of the things that we could all acknowledge is that part of the reason we have such glorious chronicles to the human experience and all forms of culture is because we acknowledge there are many different truths….I’m certain that the truth exists for you and probably for the person sitting next to you. But this may not be the same truth….So we all have different truths.¹

Ms. Maher couldn’t be more untrue about the nature of truth. “The reverence for truth” is always “the right place to start,” since it makes us humble and receptive before reality. While there are many different beliefs, there are not many different truths. There are many different true beliefs and many different false beliefs, and we do not get our own customized version of truth, since truth is not relative to our beliefs. Truth stands independent of our whims, fears, desires, ignorance, and achievements. A belief is true if it corresponds to reality and if it agrees with every other true belief. And no false belief corresponds with reality. Although we can be arrogant in thinking we know the truth when we don’t, and we can hold the truth in an arrogant fashion, the truth itself is something sacred that should be pursued.

The Truth and You. Your relationship to truth is the most important thing about you, but few consider this deeply enough when it comes to ultimate matters of meaning, morality, spirituality, and eternity. The apostle Paul wrote that if it is not true that Christ rose from the dead, then the Christian faith is false and terribly misleading (see 1 Corinthians 15:14–17). Yet when we consider a crucial medical diagnosis, the desire to know the truth intrudes upon us. When we consider friendship and marriage partners, truth is indispensable for healthy and worthwhile associations. In these cases, we need to know what the reality of a situation is. Is the diagnosis that I am cancer free really true? Does Jane love me in a way that she would make a good marriage partner? Which religion, if any, is true? Yet what do we mean by truth, and how does truth work?

Sentences and Truth. Statements are truth-claims if they attempt to identify portions of reality aright through ideas. These statements may be thought, spoken, or written or expressed symbolically, such as sign language or smoke signals. They refer to and indicate something. Of the various theories of truth, only one is apt and inescapable. We assume it in all our serious communication. The name for this is the correspondence theory of truth: truth is a property of statements that reflect the reality to which they refer. They correspond to reality. In other words, facts make statements true. “The world is round” is a truth-claim, and is true, given the spherical nature of our planet.

For more clarity, consider two phrases. A truth-bearer is a statement that is true. A truth-maker is a state of affairs that makes a statement true. Formally, if P (any statement) corresponds to X (a state of affairs or fact), then P is true. If P does not correspond to X, then P is false. Statements without corollary facts are false, such as “There is no God” (Psalm 14:1) or “Christ has not been raised [from the dead]” (see 1 Corinthians 15).²

Although all sentences communicate something, not all of them aim directly at truth. A question does not state that something is the case, but rather requests information. An imperative makes a demand on someone; it does not describe reality, but rather desires something from reality. Other expressions are emotive utterances, such as “Hooray,” “Wow,” “Ouch,” “Yuck,” or “Drat.” While these expressions indicate subjective states, they do not make claims about reality.

Even though questions, imperatives, and emotive utterances do not directly state truth, they live in the intellectual neighborhood of truth. An honest question requests an answer that is true. An imperative desires that a state of affairs occurs and becomes true. For emotive utterances, statements such as “John said, ‘Wow,’” or “Jane said, ‘Yuck,’” are true if John did say “Wow” and Jane did say “Yuck.” Thus, the statement, “John said, ‘Wow,’” can be true even though John’s utterance of “Wow” does not make a truth claim; it is neither true nor false.

Whether anyone (S) is justified or warranted in believing P is a question of epistemology; it does not address the nature or essence of truth itself (which is metaphysics). However, an intellectually virtuous person seeks knowledge about reality where needed. Knowledge occurs to S when S believes P is the case, P is the case, and one is justified (through reason or evidence) in believing that P is true.

The goal of a good person is to attain knowledge about matters of moment. One should avoid ignorant pronouncements lacking knowledge and communicating in ways unconcerned with truth.³ Too many trouble the air without knowledge.³

Antithesis. The subject of this article is not so much epistemology but the logic of truth understood as correspondence to reality — that is, how truth works or should work in our set of beliefs. But it does address epistemology inasmuch as it speaks to the logic of truth claims. If this logic is violated, knowledge becomes impossible.

If we seek the truth about truth, we must immediately introduce the idea of antithesis as a necessary and negative test for truth-claims. The antithesis is the either/or relationship. John is either a citizen of the US or not. If 2+2=4, then any number other than 4 is antithetical to the sum of 2+2. (This also highlights the narrowness of truth. There is only one number that is the correct answer and an unlimited number that are false.) Put another way, an unambiguous statement and its negation cannot both be true. Sam cannot be 67 years old and not 67 years old on June 7, 2024. He could be neither, but he could not be both.

Contraries and Contradictories. Antithesis works in two ways concerning statements. Antithetical statements may be contradictories or contraries. First to contraries. If A and non-A are contraries, both A and non-A cannot be true, but they may both be false. One cannot be both a Republican and a Democrat at the same time (although one could switch parties over time). One may be a Libertarian or a Green Party member as another option. Concerning religious truth claims, both Buddhism and Islam cannot both be true in their essential truth-claims, since Buddhism denies the existence of a Creator and Islam affirms it. However, both Buddhism and Islam would both be false if another religion, such as Christianity, is true to fact. This is because the Creator in Christianity is a Trinity, something Islam and Buddhism deny. All religions would be false if there were no God or gods and no sacred reality, such as Nirvana.

Statements A and non-A are contradictories if (1) they cannot both be true and if (2) they exhaust the logical options. That is, one must choose A or non-A, not neither and not both. Thus, one is either a member of some political party or of none. For an example from metaphysics: either there is some sacred reality (personal divine, nonpersonal divine, or nondivine) or not (atheism). Further, every whole number is even or odd — not neither, not both. Every human being is either male or female, gender confusion notwithstanding.⁴

Two Kinds of Truth and Falsehood. What is logically contradictory is impossible, not simply unlikely. It is unlikely that a major league baseball player today will bat .450, but it is not impossible, given a stupendous talent. However, the claim that, in the same season, Jones plays major league baseball and Jones does not play major league baseball must be untrue; it is necessarily false. It is likewise impossible for an object to be red all over and white all over. Although the White Queen says to Alice in Lewis Carroll’s Alice in Wonderland, “Sometimes I’ve believed as many as six impossible things before breakfast,” the sheer strength of belief can never make the impossible true. Nor can belief make any false statement a true statement, impossible or otherwise. Some Christians claim to believe that Jesus is one hundred percent divine and one hundred percent human. But this is impossible, since it means that X is only D and X is only H. This is a contradiction and is, therefore, false. It cannot possibly be true. The proper formulation is that Jesus is truly divine and truly human; that is, He has a divine nature and a human nature in one person. This is what the historic creeds have affirmed, never a contradiction or hopeless paradox.

To be more precise, truths come in two flavors: contingently true statements and necessarily true statements. Falsehoods likewise come in two flavors: contingently false statements and necessarily false statements. Let me illustrate.

That Alaska is the 49th state of the union is a contingent truth. It was possible that Hawaii (the 50th state) attained statehood before Alaska, and that Alaska became the 50th state. Put another way, several factors had to be in place for Alaska to be the 49th state, any of which may have failed to obtain. Similarly, while it is true that my wife Kathleen was born in Minnesota, it is possible that she could have been born elsewhere to the same parents. To cite a biblical example, Jesus said He could have called upon angels to save Him from the cross, but He did not. This means He had the power to do so, but it was not part of God’s plan of salvation, and it didn’t occur.

Other truths are necessarily true, since they do not depend on any conditions or contingencies for their truth value. The essential laws of logic are in this category. The laws of noncontradiction, identity, excluded middle, and bivalence are always and incorrigibly true. They cannot be false. They are necessarily true. Although I will not argue it here, a strong case can be made that the statement “God exists” is necessarily true when God is understood according to classical monotheism.⁵ On a more pedestrian level, the operations of the multiplication table (and all basic mathematical operations) are necessarily true as well. 7×7 must be 49 and nothing else.

Some statements are contingently false, such as “Al Gore won the US Presidency in 2000.” Gore, in fact, lost to George W. Bush, but he might have won, given a different voter turnout or a different way of qualifying ballots. The statement is false because it fails to correspond to reality; but it is contingently false, since its falsehood depends on factors that might have been otherwise. To put it psychologically, we can imagine them otherwise.

Other statements are necessarily false. These statements violate one or more laws of logic, and their falsehood follows from an understanding of the meaning of the statement; nothing more is needed. For example, “The Trinity means that there is one God and three Gods.” Since one cannot possibly equal three, this statement is necessarily false by basic mathematics. There can be no such being. However, this is not the teaching of the Bible, nor has any historic Christian creed or any confession made such an absurd claim. Rather, there is one God (or Godhead) in three co-equal and co-eternal persons — Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. This is not clearly a contradiction, although there are several ways of stipulating the one and three relationship in a logically coherent form.⁶ It is also necessarily false that one can be pro-life (abortion is morally wrong) and also pro-choice (abortion is permissible at any time for any reason).

Elusive truth. Truth may elude us for several reasons: (1) it is unknowable by mere mortals; (2) we are not adequately pursuing it; (3) we are not gifted enough to know it; or (4) we don’t have enough time to acquire it. Let us consider each.

1. Some truth is unknowable by mortals, although all truth is known by God. However, in some cases approximations can be made, some of which are better than others. No one knows when Jesus will return, but we can know He has not yet returned. The purpose of many evils under the sun cannot be known by weary earthlings, as Scripture readily admits (Deuteronomy 29:29; Ecclesiastes 8:16–17; Romans 11:33–36). However, we can know that God is both all-good and all-powerful; therefore, for any evil God ordains, there is some sufficient reason for its occurrence.⁷ On a more commonplace level, no one knows how many breaths he or she has taken in their lifetime, although if one is still alive, one can know that one has breathed sufficiently to reach that point.
2. Some truths remain unknown, not because they are unknowable, but because one has not adequately pursued them. As I write, I have just moved to Lowell, Michigan. There are many facts about this town and about Michigan that I do not know. However, since I hope to live here indefinitely, I will pursue these truths about the best restaurants, internet service, churches, and snow removal services.
3. Some truth is unavailable because one lacks the skill, capacities, or ability requisite to some knowledge. Although I may be able to learn more about mathematics than I now know, my abilities in this area are limited — far more limited than gifted mathematicians such as John Lennox or William Dembski, for example. Those who cannot hear cannot know what a John Coltrane saxophone solo sounds like.
4. Time also limits our knowledge. Students cramming for a test may choose to study only some of the material likely to appear on the examination, since the test is tomorrow and their capacities to learn testable material is limited by the clock. As I age, I realize that time is running out for me to know some subjects I would like to study (e.g., the philosophy of emotion) or music I would like to appreciate more (e.g., classical music). Our acquisition of knowledge should be framed and animated by this old and true adage, “Only one life and quickly past. Only what’s done for Christ will last.” As has been well said, “Hell is truth seen too late” (see Matthew 25:46).

Truth and Virtue. A virtue is a right and good habit or disposition one possesses. There are both moral and intellectual virtues, but all are praiseworthy and make normative claims on us. To violate any virtue (say, by being intellectually impatient) is wrong. One should repent of any violations of virtue (Matthew 4:17) and pursue better cognitive habits (Hebrews 5:11–14).

Despite the clarity and necessity of these ideas about truth, one is free to spurn them (at least to some degree). Humans can engage in denial to a startling degree. If the truth is against us, let the truth be damned! However, if we evade the law for long enough, the law may win out over us. Hence, the old song lyric, “I fought the law, and the law won.”⁸  Fighting reality is simply not a good idea. As the Wisdom of Proverbs warns,

For those who find me find life
and receive favor from the Lord.
 But those who fail to find me harm themselves;
all who hate me love death. (Proverbs 8:35-36 NIV)

It is one thing to deny that P is true when P is true (e.g., I am beyond middle aged); it is quite another to deny that truth exists and that it has its own logic. The statement, “There is no truth,” is a truth claim; therefore, it refutes itself, and thus must be false. I may deny a fact for the sake of self-interest or to harm someone, but I cannot — if I am in my right mind — deny that A is not non-A.

There is such a thing as intellectual vice, just as there is moral vice (such as adultery, theft, or plagiarism). We should be disciplined by the truth that we know and seek the truth that we need to know. That is the normative force of truth. One who recognizes this normative force of truth possesses intellectual virtue in that sense. We should follow the truth wherever it leads. Indifference to matters of great moment is sin — whether that be about our health, our finances, or (most importantly) about ultimate reality: God, the soul, salvation, the good life, and the afterlife. There is a better way than intellectual sloth. As Jesus promised: “Ask and it will be given to you; seek and you will find; knock and the door will be opened to you. For everyone who asks receives; the one who seeks finds; and to the one who knocks, the door will be opened” (Matthew 7:7–8).

Similarly, the Preacher of Ecclesiastes ardently sought knowledge, although it often escaped his grasp. “I, the Teacher, was king over Israel in Jerusalem. I applied my mind to study and to explore by wisdom all that is done under the heavens. What a heavy burden God has laid on mankind!” (Ecclesiastes 1:12–13). He continues: “Then I applied myself to the understanding of wisdom, and also of madness and folly, but I learned that this, too, is a chasing after the wind” (1:17). Nevertheless, he keeps seeking and his pursuit was not in vain.⁹

Wisdom, like an inheritance, is a good thing
and benefits those who see the sun.
Wisdom is a shelter
as money is a shelter,
but the advantage of knowledge is this:
Wisdom preserves those who have it. (Ecclesiastes 7:11–12)

Furthermore, there is great practical benefit to knowing the truth, since knowledge allows us to agree with reality and move with the grain of the universe instead of cutting against the grain. No one emphasized this more than Jesus, who said, “If you hold to my teaching, you are really my disciples. Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free” (John 8:31–32). Jesus is uniquely the conduit for liberating truth. J. P. Moreland captures this perfectly:

This is why truth is so powerful. It allows us to cooperate with reality, whether spiritual or physical, and tap into its power. As we learn to think correctly about God, specific scriptural teachings, the soul, or other important aspects of a Christian worldview, we are placed in touch with God and those realities. And we thereby gain access to the power available to us to live in the kingdom of God.¹⁰

Truth First and Always. Truth must have its way with us if we are to be intellectually virtuous and equipped to know reality and to defend the truth, especially the most important truths about God, salvation, and morality (John 8:31–32; 1 Peter 3:15). Truth works for us only when we let it work on us and when we let it shape us into truthful people. Since all truth is based on the perfect character of God and revealed by an utterly truthful God in nature, Scripture, and Christ, to be a man or woman of the deepest truth means to be a Christian, a follower of Him who is “the way and the truth and the life” (John 14:6). Let this be our cast of mind and core of our courage.

Douglas Groothuis, PhD, is the author of Christian Apologetics, 2nd ed. (InterVarsity-Academic, 2022) and, most recently, Beyond the Wager: The Christian Brilliance of Blaise Pascal (InterVarsity Academic, 2024).

​

NOTES:

1. Katherine Maher, “What Wikipedia Teaches Us about Balancing Truth and Beliefs,” TEDMonterey, August 2021, time mark 3:12, accessed June 27, 2024, https://www.ted.com/talks/katherine_maher_what_wikipedia_teaches_us_about_balancing_truth_and_beliefs/.
2. Scripture quotations are from the NIV, unless noted otherwise.
3. See Harry Frankfurt’s work on the origins and nature of B.S., titled On Bull—, published by Princeton University Press (2005).
4. See Douglas Groothuis, “An Argument for Traditional, Biblical Sexual Categories and against Gender Ideology,” June 9, 2023, https://www.douglasgroothuis.com/post/an-argument-for-traditional-biblical-sexual-categories-and-against-transgender-ideology.
5. See Douglas Groothuis, “The Ontological Argument,” Christian Apologetics, 2nd edition (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity-Academic, 2022).
6. See Stephen T. Davis and Eric T. Yang, “The Triune God,” in An Introduction to Christian Philosophical Theology: Faith Seeking Understanding (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Academic, 2020).
7. See Groothuis, Christian Apologetics, especially “God and the Problem of Evil.”
8. “I Fought the Law,” written by Sonny Curtis, originally recorded by The Crickets on Coral Records (New York), released 1960; later recorded with variation by many others.
9. See Douglas Groothuis, “Chasing Wisdom,” Touchstone, March-April 2020, https://www.touchstonemag.com/archives/article.php?id=33-02-050-f.
10. J. P. Moreland, Love Your God with All Your Mind: The Role of Reason in the Life of the Soul, rev. ed. (Colorado Springs, CO: NavPress, 2012), 60, Kindle Edition.