Truth Matters in a “My Truth Culture”

 

 

My Truth

Have you ever been in a conversation with someone, maybe a discussion about some social issue or some moral or religious question and get to the point where your respondent just looks at you and says, “Well, I know we disagree, but you have your truth and I have my truth.”

It’s a popular expression these days, this idea of one having his own truth. Usually, that statement is offered to shut down discussion or debate over a divisive question. It is intended to elevate one’s personal experience and subjective interpretations above anyone else’s, whether subjective or objective, standard that disagrees with their own interpretation. To affirm my truth is seen as authentic self-expression of one’s values and perceptions. However, my truth embraces only what pleases self while rejecting the need to please anyone else. It is an affirmation of living life openly without pretense, shame, or conformity. Portuguese José Teixeira expressed it best:

“My truth does not need to convince. It does not need to explain itself. It does not need to defend itself. It is enough.”

In a Nutshell

My truth, in a nutshell, is a declaration of authenticity. It’s admirable that someone desires to live in harmony with his own convictions. Frankly, to live otherwise is hypocrisy. But being authentic doesn’t make one right. Authenticity does not determine truth. Reality determines truth. By the same token, the disapproval of others does not necessarily negate one’s conviction. Even the majority does not establish the truth.

Galileo, in proposing his sun‑centered theory of the universe was opposed by all of the credible authorities of his day, even the Pope, and was banished for simply saying what everyone today believes and knows: the earth revolves around the sun. Later, the Catholic Church reversed itself. Did it become truth then, or was it not always the truth?

My truth is a cry for self-preservation. Those who cling to my truth as opposed to your truth or the truth are looking for personal peace and escape from conflict. They put up boundaries and cut off relationships in order to eliminate controversy and elevate their own personal choice above everything else.

As an online participant on Reddit (OC Poetry) put it, “When the world says I’m wrong, I will say that I am just living life how it was meant to be. I’m simply preserving my truth.”

There Are Consequences

What does one do in his declaration of my truth? He denies it needs to prove anything or be confirmed by anyone. He stifles his own conscience. This is my truth. I don’t want to hear anything else. He resists reason. Following my truth – the way I feel about it, what makes me happy – reduces all discussion about morals, social issues, or religious questions to relativism.

It is a simple retreat to the erroneous opinion where there are no absolutes. Everything is relative or changeable, rather than conforming to a constant reality.

That is not to say there’s no room for opinion in some things. We all possess opinions. About politics – some of us are Republicans, some are Democrats, some are Independents. Some of us are just fed up. We have opinions about aesthetics – some like neutral beige throughout their house, some have gone for the neutral gray. And then there’s that fellow who paints his house SFA purple and lives across the street from me. He likes it. I don’t. Then my neighbor cut down the hedge between us, and now I have to see it. But that’s beside the point. It’s a matter of opinion. It’s aesthetics. That doesn’t make it true. It just makes it debatable.

There are interpretations and judgments we all have to make, assessments based on analysis rather than fact. When I go to the doctor and he runs some tests and gives me his analysis, I then say to him, “Well, maybe I’d like a second opinion.” I want someone else to look at the data. Maybe I want someone else to run the test so I can have as much information as possible and determine if there is some fact to be found. But after two, three, four tests and it comes back and says, I have this, then I have to accept reality.

It’s Illogical

The fallacy of my truth is that it is illogical. It is an untenable worldview. And this is easily demonstrated. If you say, “I have my truth and you have your truth,” I will ask, “Is it true that there is no truth?” How is the “my truth affirmant” going to answer that? He can’t. If he says, “Yes, there’s no truth,” he must give up my truth. If he says, “No, there is truth,” he’s forcing “my truth” on the rest of us as the truth. It is an absurd position. You cannot answer the question without repudiating your own truth. Everyone recognizes that there must be some things that are reasonably true and certain.

It’s Non–Scientific and Amoral

The my truth culture is non-scientific and therefore unreasonable. It is based on feelings and personal experiences. We recognize that trying to determine facts requires evidence. Feelings are not evidence. Feelings are unobservable; they are non-testable. Feelings cannot sustain a hypothesis.

And the my truth culture is, of necessity, amoral. If my truth justifies what others regard as immoral, then for consistency’s sake, I cannot object to any moral conduct. By objecting to what I think you’re doing as immoral, I affirm a moral truth or standard. To argue that my truth and your truth exist at the same time is to say there is no right or wrong, that the world is ruled only by might and desire. We’re forced to accept the law of the jungle. You cannot insist someone respect your truth over their own truth.

Why Reject the Idea of “My Truth”

The my truth culture ought to be rejected because it is destined to produce despair and ruin. My truth advocates seek self–preservation, escape from criticism, and peace of mind. My truth destroys all these, bringing isolation amid criticism and challenges. That which is fled is that which it delivers.

My truth denies the admission of evidence in rebuttal or cross-examination. If there is such a thing as my truth, the court system and medical exploration fail. There’s absolutely nothing that we can do except go into the abyss of sickness and sadness, despair, ruin, and death. It’s absurd.

“What Is Truth?”

Consider John 18:37. Pilate asked Jesus, “Are you a king then?” The Jews had accused him of falsely claiming this. Jesus answered: “Thou sayest that I am a king. To this end I was born and for this cause came I into the world that I should bear witness unto the truth. Everyone that is of the truth heareth my voice.” Pilate responded, “What is truth?”

Pilate put that famous question to Jesus. It was rhetorical. He wasn’t looking for an answer. Jesus already told him what truth was. But are we to make of Pilate’s question? Some have suggested he expresses cynicism, implying there is no truth. I don’t think so. He’s too far in government and the military to take an absurd position like that. He follows commands; he executes policy. He knew there must be some truth.

Others have suggested he is lamenting the questions of religion. He’s a pagan or at least influenced by paganism. There is a pantheon of Roman gods from which you can choose to patronize or reject. The truly superstitious (ie. the Athenians) tried to please them all. In Athens, Paul saw altars on every corner, including one to the unknown God (Acts 17:23). Not the God of Heaven, but if there’s a god of this place, and we don’t know who you are, this is your altar. That was the idea. They didn’t want to miss anybody. And perhaps Pilate thought that was rather absurd. To him, the Jews and their religion just become one more among many religions that are contradictory and confusing. He is skeptical of religion.

Or I think there’s merit to this – he’s skeptical of the whole situation before him. What is truth? The Jews say one thing, you say one thing, how am I going to come to any decision about this? So Pilate tries several different things. First, he tries to release Jesus, saying, “I do not find any fault in Him.” He hasn’t violated any laws; he hasn’t done anything contradictory to the established truth that the government of Rome accepts. But they said, “Oh no, crucify him, crucify him!” He said, “What wrong hath he done?” And that’s when they accused Jesus of blasphemy. They said, “He hath made himself a god, and our law says he must die.” That disturbed Pilate, and he continued to examine Jesus. He returns saying, “I find no fault in the man.”

Seeking to get Jesus off his hands, he beats him and brings him out saying, “Behold the man!” In other words, I’ve humiliated him. He’s not a god. He’s not a king. He’s just a man over whom I have authority. Maybe that’ll suffice. They said: “No, crucify him, crucify him. He made himself a king, and we have no king but Caesar.” Pilate’s solution to the whole problem is to wash his hands of the whole thing. Pilate chose political expediency. Pilate believed a lie as the truth because he didn’t want to find out what truth really was.

Jesus affirms the truth in verse 37, “Thou sayest, I am a king.” Jesus doesn’t deny the truth. He says: “You’ve said truly, I am a king. And to this end I was born. And for this cause came I into the world that I should bear witness unto the truth. Everyone that is of the truth heareth my voice.”

Three Kinds of Truth

There are three kinds of truth. There is discoverable truth, found via the scientific method or the legal method. The law of gravity, the Pythagorean theorem, the first law of thermodynamics – all these are examples of the scientific method. Newton postulated what goes up must come down, and others have built on that. You have the question, then the hypothesis, and then experimentation and the collection and analysis of the data. After repeated experimentation and observation and cataloging of analysis, we come to “the law of gravity.” But it’s not revealed anywhere. It’s not written down. It wasn’t passed by a legislature. It wasn’t spoken from the mouth of God. It is an observable, discoverable truth.

Then there’s undiscoverable truth. Moses said the secret things belong to God (Deuteronomy 29:29). It’s a truth that there are some things in this universe do not know and many never know. Consider light – we know it exists, we know it travels, but what is it? Is it a wave or a particle? We really do not know what light is. We cannot explain how light of stars millions and billions of miles away is seen here or understand how it all works. There are theories but nobody knows. There are things about God that men cannot know unless God reveals His mind, 1 Corinthians 2:9,

“It is written, eye have not seen nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man the things which God hath prepared for them that love him, but God hath revealed them unto us by his Spirit, for the Spirit searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God.”

That brings us to the third kind of truth: revealed truth or essential truth.

Essential Truth

Everything that is necessary for us to please God has been revealed. We often refer to the Scriptures as containing the truth, but the Bible is not all the truth of all time about everything. However, the Bible is the source of revealed essential truth – what is necessary for us to be right with God. This revelation is intended to appeal to the rational mind. The Bible, despite being subjected to extreme scrutiny, has withstood all the criticism leveled against it for millennia. No satisfactory explanation has ever been given to deny the truths put forth in the Gospel.

Back to John 18:37 – Jesus says essential truth is found in Him. He says, I am a King, and to this end and for this cause I was born and came into the world, and I bear witness to the truth. Jesus is saying that the things I have taught and the lessons that I have lived, these are the truth, and everyone that is of the truth heareth my voice. Jesus invites the scrutiny of investigation and examination. Jesus presents Himself to a rational mind with rational evidence. Jesus is either a King or He’s not. He has authority or He does not. Jesus is the Savior of the world or He is not. The claims, the teachings, the record of Jesus is either true or they are not. Those who complete a fair and thorough examination of Jesus, He says, will follow him.

The Challenge of Essential Truth

When Jesus says, those who are of the truth hear My voice, He’s saying, examine the evidence.

In John 4, He says that God is seeking the “true worshipers.” He’s talking about people of a certain character. Remember in John 1, Jesus says of Nathanael, “Behold, an Israelite in whom is no guile, no deceit.” Nathanael was an Israelite who wanted the truth. Consider Martha in John 11. After her brother’s death, Jesus said to Martha, “I am the resurrection and the life. He that believeth on me, though he were dead, yet shall he live. And whosoever liveth and believeth in me shall never die. Believest thou this?” (verse 25). She immediately declared her faith in Him as the Christ, the Son of God. She’d seen the evidence, heard him teach, watched him heal. Those who are of the truth are willing to openly and honestly investigate.

This may surprise some, but the existence of truth does not eliminate faith. If I never understand the first and second laws of thermodynamics, if I never see the ark dug up on Mount Ararat, I’m still going to believe that God created the heavens and the earth out of nothing, that he saved the world by Noah through a flood. But that’s based on evidence and the credibility of that evidence. Evidence and truth do not eliminate faith. All truth is accepted on the basis of some faith.

Truth & Faith Are Not Mutually Exclusive

The scientific method requires faith. What we observe is our interpretation of the evidence. We need to be open to all possibilities with regard to our scientific inquiry. There are no absolute certainties, but there are reasonable certainties. And reasonable men who consider the evidence come to the same conclusion.

The same thing is true with a court of law. This to me is the best illustration of faith. Guilt is determined beyond a reasonable doubt, not by absolute certainty. O.J. Simpson was found not guilty of murder because there was reasonable doubt. We all remember it: “If the glove does not fit, you must acquit.” And the jury acquitted him. Later, he was sued in a civil court. There the standard was the preponderance of the evidence. That is, when all the evidence is considered, 51% or more leans toward this conclusion or that. In a civil court, he was found liable and was assessed damages for the evidence indicated it was very likely O.J. murdered his wife and her lover. But we don’t take a man’s life unless it’s beyond a reasonable doubt.

This is the standard to which Jesus subjects himself. Be reasonable. Figure it out. Decide whether or not I am who I claim to be. If we conclude beyond a reasonable doubt that Jesus is the King of kings and the Lord of lords, then we accept his teachings and do what he says. Some people are not convinced. I understand that. But we have witnesses. Are they credible? We have a trial transcript. Is it accurate?

When someone appeals a verdict in a trial, the evidence that was introduced is placed before the court of appeal. They read the transcript. They look at the testimony and determine whether the transcript is accurate, and the testimony was indeed what it should have been.

Was there any perjury? If the evidence stands, they just determine whether there was a correctable error committed. And oftentimes that’s all that comes before an appellate judge. The evidence stands. Were they absolutely certain? No. But they were certain beyond a reasonable doubt.

Faith requires that. But when someone says my truth, they’re rejecting evidence. They’re rejecting scrutiny. They’re living in an echo chamber, unwilling to consider discoverable truth or even revealed truth. And when it’s about matters of salvation, we’re talking about heaven and hell – eternal destiny. Will one risk their soul by refusing to consider whether or not Jesus is the Christ?

In Acts 2:36, Peter concluded, “Let the whole house of Israel know assuredly that this same Jesus whom you crucified hath God made both Lord and Christ.” He made the case for Jesus. He presented their eyewitness testimony. He showed what the Old Testament said about the coming Christ. All of that together proves Jesus of Nazareth is indeed Lord and Christ.

“And when they heard this, they were pricked in their heart.” The evidence was sufficient to bring them to conviction. They said, “Men and brethren, what shall we do?” Peter said, “Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ.” Those who were of the truth heard his voice and obeyed. Acts 2:40 says, “As many as gladly received His word were baptized.”

I plead with you to recognize there is truth. Truth that’s discoverable, and more importantly, with respect to your salvation. Truth that has been revealed. Believing the truth beyond a reasonable doubt, be baptized into Christ.

 

_____________________________
GROW magazine | April 2026 PDF
a work of the Limestone Church of Christ
Study Links: YouVersion | Bible Gateway | Blue Letter Bible