KNOWING TRUTH WITH CERTAINTY

Differences of opinion do not mean that uncertainty is the final verdict. Some even take these differences to mean that there is no truth:

·       Everyone has a different opinion. Therefore, there is no truth.

I simply ask, is this statement true? If she says, “Yes,” then I point out that, “Evidently, you do believe in truth.”

There will always be differences. The guilty always proclaim their innocence, but we have more sure guides to truth. This is why we have juries, testimonies, and evidences. Without certainty, we cannot have any justice, love, or anything necessary for society to thrive. With uncertainty, we are left with the disaffected and apathetic, “I don’t know; who can know?”

If there is no certainty or truth, then Jesus is no better than Hitler; propaganda and lies are no better than honesty. If this is so, then just go to bed and await your last breathe.

But can we know truth? Certainly! In fact, any denial of truth requires a truth statement. Therefore, truth cannot be denied. Consequently, when someone tells me, “There is no way to know for sure,” I ask them, “Do you know that for sure?”

But can we truly know the truth? I enjoy the books called “Magic Eye.” They have computer generated markings that contain a hidden image. You can only see it if you let your eyes go out of focus, and sometimes the image appears. If you have any doubts about seeing it, you can go to the back of the book where the answers are revealed.

Do I know that I perceive reality? Yes! How? I see the image and then it is confirmed for me.

The same principle also pertains to spiritual truth. Although it might be difficult to attain, it is attainable, as Jesus had taught:

·       To the Jews who had believed him, Jesus 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)

Knowing the truth doesn’t just happen. It is a product of following Jesus. Why doesn’t it just happen? Don’t we all want it? Not at all! Instead, we have an aversion to the truth, even to the point of denying that it exists. Why? It reveals what we don’t want revealed, as Jesus had taught:

·       This is the verdict: Light has come into the world, but men loved darkness instead of light because their deeds were evil. Everyone who does evil hates the light, and will not come into the light for fear that his deeds will be exposed. (John 3:19-20)

Normally, we hate the light. It exposes our wrinkles and blemishes, even worse, it exposes what we truly have become. And we need not even believe in Jesus to know this. Winston S. Churchill, among many others, had observed:

·       Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing ever happened.

The truth about ourselves knocks us down. We cannot tolerate it. No wonder the differing opinions. They grow in the darkness like poisonous mushrooms. However, when you know the truth, you know it. How? It will set you free. It is like putting on a correct set of lens, which bring everything into sharp focus. This is what the truth will do.

However, we must desire truth above all else:

·       If you call out for insight and cry aloud for understanding, and if you look for it as for silver and search for it as for hidden treasure, then you will understand the fear of the LORD and find the knowledge of God. For the LORD gives wisdom, and from his mouth come knowledge and understanding. (Proverbs 2:3-6)

Islam and its Enabling West

Islam’s agenda is world domination, but why are the Western elites enabling them? In his “must-read” book, Raymond Ibrahim explains:

• Christian persecution is perhaps the most obvious example of a phenomenon the mainstream media wants to ignore out of existence – Islamic supremacism. Vastly outnumbered and politically marginalized, Christians in the Islamic world simply wish to worship in peace, and yet they still are hounded and attacked; their churches are burned and destroyed; their children are kidnapped, raped, and enslaved…they must be subjugated, according to Sharia’s position for all others, for all infidels…If the mainstream media were to report honestly on the persecution of Christians under Islam, the obvious implications that Islam is dangerously hostile to all non-Muslims would be inescapable. Hence, journalists develop an instinct – or make a deliberate choice – to ignore or minimize these uncomfortable facts. (Crucified Again, 232)

Some horrific stories are merely ignored or denied, like Saudi Arabia’s Grand Mufti’s statement that it is “necessary to destroy all the churches” in the Arabian Peninsula (223). Islamic acts of genocide are often described as “sectarian strife” (227).

What then is the agenda – the cultural bias – of the Western media? The liberal bias that we can all live peacefully together under secularism! Ibrahim’s book is partially an expose’ of this faulty, insupportable narrative:

• The abuse of Christians where Muslims are in power has the capacity to completely undermine the liberal narrative that has dominated politics for decades. Muslim violence in Europe or against Israel poses no challenge to that narrative: in both cases, Muslims are seen as the underdogs, who may be sympathized with no matter how much they lash out. They may be screaming and rioting, firing rockets, and destroying property – all while calling for the death and destruction of the “infidel” West or Israel’s Jews to cries of “Allahu Akbar!” Still the bloodlust can be portrayed as a natural byproduct of the frustration Muslims feel as an oppressed minority, “rightfully” angry with the “colonial” West and its Israeli proxy.

Sadly, many well-meaning Christians are reluctantly complying with the liberal narrative in hope of not stirring up more genocidal attacks. Robert McManus, the Roman Catholic Bishop of Worcester, Massachusetts, stated on February 8, 2013:

• "Talk about extreme, militant Islamists and the atrocities that they have perpetrated globally might undercut the positive achievements that we Catholics have attained in our inter-religious dialogue with devout Muslims."

However, this is reminiscent of the Pope’s misguided Concordant with Hitler. He had been ignorant of Hitler’s ultimate plans and thought that he could placate the idealistic Hitler. However, there is no placating the designs for world domination, especially when it is fueled by a racism or chauvinism that regards the infidel as worthy of death. This is something that liberalism refuses to see, as Ibrahim points out in many areas:

• As far as former U.S. president Bill Clinton is concerned, “inequality” and “poverty” are “what’s fueling all this stuff” – a reference to Boko Haram’s jihad to enforce Sharia and eliminate Christians. Clinton further called on Nigerians to “embrace the similarities,” adding, “It is almost impossible to cure a problem based on violence with violence” – apparently a suggestion that Nigeria’s government not retaliate with any severity in response to Boko Haram’s mass murderers. (241)

Denial is not a good way to deal with reality. Denial had been the solution of Neville Chamberlain. Fortunately, there was also a Churchill!

Confessions of a Recovering Anglophile

I believe that Winston Churchill played the greatest role in the 20^th century. Almost single-handedly, he opposed Hitler. Chills still go up and down my spine when I see movies about how he and the nation he was leading bravely resisted the National Socialist onslaught. I am still profoundly moved as I watch documentaries of how common British boats-men raced to Dunkirk to save their stranded British army from certain destruction, allowing them to fight another day.

I am equally moved when I read about the 30 year quest of William Wilberforce to lead his nation in abolishing the slave trade and how he won the right for missionaries to be sent into the British colonies to counteract the effect of the exploitation of the traders.

However, I am a recovering Anglophile. Two articles in the latest Salvo Magazine will help to explain my evolution:

• Some elementary schools in Britain have taken sex ed to a new level by showing students as young as eight a DVD called Living and Growing. Computer-generated images show a man and woman having sex in a variety of positions, while the narrator describes explicitly what’s happening. The DVD also give information about masturbation and orgasms (with an animated sequence depicting ejaculation). (Salvo, Summer 2012, 33)

I don’t wish to pick on the UK. The entire secular West is doing-it! However, Britain is playing the role of our Big Brother – our role model – leading the way. It reminds me of a movie in which sweaty youth jumped out of their clothing ASAP to jump into the ocean. However, in this case, the West is shedding its spiritual clothing – Christianity – to jump into the sexualized unknown. But in the case of the youth, they subsequently and happily retrieved their clothing after their swim. However, in the case of the West, Britain is rejecting its spiritual clothing entirely and is now parading naked.

The next article also demonstrates how secularism has usurped the role of “parent” and “spiritual guide”:

• In Britain, news broke that girls as young as 13 were given contraceptive implants or injections at their schools as part of a government effort to decrease teenage pregnancy rates. Parental consent was apparently not required, and many parents were upset. One columnist summed it up like this: “School nurses aren’t allowed to apply even a sticking plaster (band-aid) to children in case they have a dangerous allergic reaction, but pumping school-girls full of hormones so they can get at it like brood mares is just dandy” (33)

Why the hypocrisy? Secularism not only wants to bypass parents, it also wants to bypass its Christian roots. Even more, it has buried its clothing as it rushes headlong into the ocean.

I may remain an Anglophile, but my love will not be for what Britain has become, but for what it had been.