Forensic Faith Pt. 1: The Gospel as Objective Truth
On October19th, Valley Bible Church hosted former LAPD homicide detective J. Warner Wallace, as he presented “Forensic Faith”—a reasoned approach to discussing the historical truths of the gospel. The following article is one of a series of reflections and applications of the contents of Wallace’s presentation.
For more resources visit the “Cold Case Christianity” website.
Two Kinds of Truth
There are only two kinds of truth claims. Subjective truth claims are grounded in a human subject. Objective truth claims are grounded in an object. Here are two easy ways to discover which kind of truth claim is being made:
If you can change a truth claim, it is subjective. If not, it’s objective.
Example: “Vanilla is the best flavor of ice cream” vs. “George Washington was a President.”If you can verify or falsify a claim, it is objective. If not, it’s subjective.
Example: “Mice are smaller than elephants” vs. “Superman is better than Batman.”
Since subjective truth claims are preferences that don’t universally apply, they are not usually worth arguing over. However, objective claims are worth investigating since they are true whether anyone wants them to be or not. The bigger the objective claim, the more important it is to come to terms with whether or not it is true and what it will mean for your life.
Why is this such an important arena for Christians to understand and discuss?
The Bible presents objective truth claims. If true, they are true for everyone, always. Knowing this, our Christian convictions are not “our truth” because they can be examined rationally. Since the events of the gospel are historical, they can be examined like any other historical claim. Since the gospels claim to be eyewitness testimony, they can be verified like all testimony.
Additionally, many of the objective claims of the Bible are in strong contrast with subjective claims by people. For example, the claim “I am a good person” has no power to change the judgment of God when he says “All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God.” Subjective assessment also has no power to change the statement “The wages of sin is death.” As I told someone in conversation once, “When we face God in judgment, He doesn’t judge us by our own standards but by His perfect standard.” Ignoring the reality and judgment of sin is like ignoring a wildfire headed for your house: you may not like the idea, but you need to face it.
As Paul notes, if Jesus did not actually rise from the dead, “our preaching is useless and so is your faith.” (1 Corinthians 15:14) In saying this, Paul is giving a way to falsify an objective truth claim. If Jesus did actually come to life again, then Christians don’t have just a comforting story to share, but the best news anyone could ever hear!
For Reflection:
Are you able to differentiate between subjective and objective truth claims in conversations with others?
Do you tend to think of your Christian hope in terms of subjective statements or objective statements?
Would you feel shaken if you were questioned on why you believe what you believe? Would your answers be based on objective reality or subjective truth?
Atheist Philosopher Peter Boghossian thinks most Christians don’t have objective grounds for their belief and that instead, they are guided by subjective reasons. How would you respond?
Who in your life may be open to hearing the “reason for the hope you have” but may confuse your Christian belief with subjective feelings?
Author: Nathan Baird, Pastor of Discipleship & Development