Recently I had a conversation with someone who embodied the postmodern sentiment of rejecting all universal truth claims. “There are no universal truths,” he stated plainly. “Is that a universal truth?” I asked. He stopped to think, and after a period of silence, he responded, “That’s a good point.”

This man recognized the problem with making a universal truth claim that there are no universal truth claims. In order to state his premise, he had to assume that which he intended to deny. This kind of argumentation is typical in our culture that has adopted the pragmatic theory of truth.

The pragmatic of theory of truth states that something is “true” if it works for you. It’s a deviation from the correspondence theory of truth that states that something is true if it corresponds to reality. In the pragmatic theory, everyone gets to decide what set of “truths” work for them. Truth becomes subjective instead of objective. But this doesn’t work in reality. Should each pilot decide which set of truths work for them? Or each surgeon? Or teacher? And what if “my truth” conflicts with “your truth?” What then?

We must have objective truth. In other words, there must be truth that it is what it is regardless of what anyone thinks. The question that must be asked is “who has the truth?” The Christians, Muslims, Buddhists, or atheists?

Jesus claimed to be the objective truth. “I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me” (John 14:16). He claims that the only way we can know the only true God is by knowing him (John 17:3).

Notice that Jesus doesn’t leave the door open for multiple Gods. “The only true God.” There is one true God, and the only way to know him is to know His Son. He alone offers us salvation, and with it infuses our life with meaning, value, and beauty.

What we believe about truth impacts our lives daily, because the nature of truth correlates with the nature of morality. Subjective truth leads to subjective morality, and objective truth naturally leads to objective morality. Everyone believes in some set of rights and wrongs. But who gets to decide what is right or wrong? My friend that I mentioned at the beginning suggested that whatever the consensus of the populace is should determine right or wrong. But what happens if the consensus is wrong? For example, if the consensus of 18^th century America was that slavery was morally acceptable, does that actually make it morally acceptable?

There must be some standard outside of ourselves to correct us, including our misguided consensuses. Jesus is that standard. He is the lawgiver and judge. “There is only one lawgiver and judge, he who is able to save and destroy. But who are you to judge your neighbor?” (James 4:12).

What we must do, then, is assess Jesus’ life and words and determine if he is who he says he is. Is he the truth? Is he the only way to the only true God? Is he the lawgiver and judge? I invite you to follow along as I blog through our life group series, Defending the Faith. I’ll post here weekly the week after we discuss a particular topic. I will also include a pdf of my notes as well. It’s my prayer that these posts will increase your confidence in the Christian faith and encourage you to share it!