John Franke, in his new and exciting book Manifold Witness: The Plurality of Truth (Living Theology)
takes on the central issue of our age: the plurality of truth.It doesn't take long in this world to realize that most people in this world don't believe what "I"/"We" believe.
Some, of course, opt for cultural relativism, that "you have your truth and I have mine." Truth is, in other words, purely local, and irreconciliable, and pluralistic and this is the postmodern condition. Furthermore, many would say all truth claims are interpretation -- and we can't penetrate behind the veil of interpretation. That is, the truth is that there is no Truth.
Franke, though, argues with many that cultural relativism is not the result of the interpretive nature of knowledge but from the assumption that there is no comprehensive knower whose knowledge is the truth. In fact,
"From the perspective of the Christian faith, with its conviction that God has been revealed in the person of Jesus Christ, we can affirm the reality of ultimate or transcendent truth even as we acknowledge the interpretive character of human knowledge" (15). Because of God's grace, we can know things truly even though not exhaustively. Only God can do that. Christians cannot fall prey to cultural relativism.
Others, though, don't recognize any interpretation or any context. My way or the highway is the approach. God must accommodate to speak to us because God is that transcendent. God's means of revelation "bear inherent limitations in spite of the use God makes of them in revelation" (17). This leads to Christian plurality -- it reminds of us our limitation.
Plurality arises out of God. God is triune. That is, the Truth is characterized by plurality.
"Truth is a reality to which we must continually aspire through the commitment of our entire being to the love of the triune God revealed in Jesus Christ through the power of the Spirit" (18). This leads to a bold humility or what Newbigin called a proper confidence.
Add to Del.icio.us
Add to Technorati
Add to Digg
Add to Newsvine
Add to Facebook
Add to StumbleUpon
Subscribe
Scott, give Scot a chance to get to the rest of the book. Franke addresses the unity in plurality, plurality in unity motive within the trinity relationship.
Scott, Rob, and Scot (did I get everyone?),
I had the same reaction Scott (2 t's) had: the statement "Plurality arises out of God. God is triune. That is, the Truth is characterized by plurality" impressed me as unwise.
I just got Franke's book and will hunt this down, mindful as Rob noted and I somewhat expected, with the expectation that some amplification and clarification lies within.
From what I've gleaned though, this book does a good job of describing reality, i.e., it's not just that observation that socially truth is characterized in plural ways, we also have to account for a multiplicity of Christian communities declaring truth, living by it, observing the same texts: and yet also coming up with different constructs of truth. There are missional and ecclesial questions awaiting! :)
"Plurality arises out of God. God is triune. That is, the Truth is characterized by plurality."
What does this actually mean? I get what he is saying about that there is truth and because of Christ Jesus we can know that truth about God. How does God being triune give rise to plurality?
Is he saying that the different persons of the trinity have different views of what is true? Do different traditions interact with the Trinity differently which leads to a plurality of belief?
Would God lead certain traditions to know false things about Himself and themselves for the sake of plurality?
Christian Plurality resulting from our brokenness, inability to follow the Spirit, and finite limitations seems to make more sense to sense to me.
I'm not sure I see the connection with the Trinity, but I'll wait for further exposition. There's a great little book by Merold Westphal that just hit the shelves (or at least just hit Amazon). It's titled "Whose Community? Which Interpretation?" or something like that. I'm only about a third of the way through it, but he makes a pretty good case, so far, for a plurality with respect to truth.
While I'm also not sure about the connection to the Trinity (is there plurality to geometry because a triangle has 3 sides?), the other statements here make good sense.
we can affirm the reality of ultimate or transcendent truth even as we acknowledge the interpretive character of human knowledge
Truth is absolute, but our human knowledge can't be, because we do not have a God's-eye view. This seems to be very much a position of "critical realism" (Scot, does Franke use that term?), which has also been lifted up by NT Wright, John Polkinghorne, and others (it comes up in philsophy of science as well).
As mentioned, problems come when people claim their own situated views as absolute objective God's-eye truth, with no recognition that their view may be distorted and that other perspectives may have value in contributing to the web of things that we trust to be true.
Man, I'll be glad when we can get rid of the Capcha. Yes, the text (but not your name) is saved when you refresh, but then it all disappears if you click in the box to edit it ...
Post a Comment
By submitting these comments, I agree to the beliefnet.com terms of service, rules of conduct and privacy policy (the "agreements"). I understand and agree that any content I post is licensed to beliefnet.com and may be used by beliefnet.com in accordance with the agreements.