REDISCOVERING TRUTH
By John Stonestreet and David Carlson
In February [ of 2020 ], the Alliance Defending Freedom filed suit on behalf of three female high school track athletes who are being forced to compete against biological males . During the oral arguments , the presiding judge demanded that ADF attorneys refer to the biologically male athletes as females , and to do otherwise would not be “ consistent with science ” or “ human decency .” 1
Of course , as ADF attorneys noted , the entire case is based on whether it ’ s a fact that biological males are males , and whether a chosen gender identity is consistent with science or reality . ADF has called for the judge ’ s recusal , and rightly so since , at least in this case , he ’ s not capable of adjudication , only activism .
Francis Schaeffer and Chuck Colson were among the loudest prophetic voices of decades past , warning of the loss of what Schaeffer often called “ true truth ,” the idea that truth is objective and , to a large degree , knowable .
When a federal judge announces that affirming observable biological reality is “ indecent ,” it demonstrates that more than our views about gender have changed . The basic definition of truth has changed . In other words , the most basic conflict in our culture is not just what is considered to be truth and what is not , but what we mean by truth in the first place .
The classic definition is that truth refers to that which corresponds to reality . For decades now , beginning among intellectual elites and then shaping the academy and now various segments of culture , the correspondence theory of truth has been challenged by another definition : that truth is nothing more than a social construct or views imposed on us by previous generations and those in power .
As the comments of this judge make clear , this new definition of truth is now largely taken for granted , not just in universities but across different segments of our culture . How this happened is important to understand .
At a very simple but hopefully not simplistic level , humans can look to three resources in seeking knowledge : revelation , reason , and experience . By revelation , I mean we can know something because “ God said it .” By reason , I mean that through our intellects and logic , we can arrive at truth . By experience , I mean we can know because of what we ’ ve been through , or what we feel or know to be true .
Throughout history , different religions and philosophies would emphasize one or more of these over the others . For example , religions that believed in God would prioritize revelation . Classic Greek thought often prioritized reason , as did the ideas of the secular Enlightenment .
The Christian worldview teaches that God has revealed Himself through His creation , in His Word , and ultimately in Jesus Christ . By revelation , we know that as Image Bearers of God living in His orderly universe , our reason and intellect can grasp certain truths about the universe . In this view , knowledge is nothing less than what astronomer Johannes Kepler described as “. . . thinking God ’ s thoughts after Him .”
In the decades since the Enlightenment , and especially into the 20th century , as scientific discovery and technological innovation exploded , reason became elevated as the central and definitive means of knowing truth . Skepticism about the supernatural led to a cynical distrust of revelation .
There ’ s so much more to this story than I have space for here , but the violence and bloodshed of the twentieth century , especially among those nations and cultures considered most scientifically advanced , damaged trust in reason . If revelation was a myth and pure reason a catastrophe , what ’ s left ? Experience .
20