Is truth really dead?

As I was dumping paper in the local recycling bin, I saw a discarded TIME magazine with “IS TRUTH DEAD?” on the cover. It caught me enough for me to stick my arm in the bin (not my first dumpster dive) for that April 3rd issue. I thought a history of truth with its relevance to modern times would be explored; that intolerance and exclusivity – two hated words of political correctness today – of non-truth would be exposed; that an ultimate source of truth, a divine intelligence (God to some) would be the subject. I thought it might explore why people say they love truth, but often lie. I pondered that if secular humanism can advocate situational ethics, why do people go to prison for doing something that is right according to their personal standards? If engineers and contractors skimp on cement to save money, as seen in China, and the bridge collapses and kills multitudes, why do Chinese courts sentence the builders to death? Their social philosophy, communism, is based on lies, and builders are merely following in the footsteps of their leaders.

You’ve seen this: In studying evidence in their fields, philosophers, sociologists, theologists, environmentalists, Egyptologists, archeologists and psychologists decide to arrive at the truth together once and for all. They gather in a convention hall and pose questions, facts and missing data related to their subjects, and then vote on possible answers.After votes are tallied, what’s true is settled. What arrogance and buffoonery! When new evidence appears, they reject it so they won’t have to admit their majority vote was useless.

Truth is that which conforms to reality, but they cannot decide what reality is. Reality is that which works. If it works it has to be true. I thought the TIME article might discuss the fact that reality is often ignored in favor of what people want to believe, eg. government programs like Head Start which don’t work yet continue to be funded.

I thought they might explore policies related to secular humanism, which goes back to Darwin’s “Origin of the Species” and advocates that God is nonexistent and unnecessary. And it follows that mankind is inherently good and given enough time can solve all the world’s problems. How’s that working out for you?

Truth is opposite to unrepented sin. 1John:10 says if we say we have no sin we make God out to be a liar and His word is not in us. Imagine then as you must, that humanism calls God a liar. How could one possibly accuse the Creator of this magnificent universe, Author of all things, including truth, to be a liar? Judgment is upon them, and in the end there will be abject sorrow as a reward.

So … how deep does TIME go into truth? Sadly, true to their political agenda their essay is merely dedicated to calling Trump a liar, exploring his exaggerations, and belittling him. True, there’s a lot to belittle, but in Washington he’s in good company. Such a nano facet of TRUTH. I cannot but call it a mere iota of the subject, thousands of time less than they could’ve said if they were serious about their cover catch phrase.

I was hoping for a rib eye but they gave me Raman noodles.

The issue was worth less than I paid for it.

This column is a part of “Two Friend in Search of Truth.” See Tutta’s Take here.

Comment on this Article

About Author

Comments are closed.