Absolute truth is an issue that has been debated throughout the centuries. Many groups and individuals have claimed to possess knowledge of the absolute truth. In the Apr. 7th issue of the Daily, Charlie Rohwer called into question the Christian belief that a holy and loving God created and now controls our universe, and that his son Jesus Christ died for US, God’s beloved creation, and came back to life to conquer death.

Mr. Rohwer argues that Christians are wrong to claim that their beliefs are the absolute truth. To support this statement, he cites as examples four other religions who believe THEY hold the truth. “What about the some 1,000,000,000 Muslims?” Rohwer asks. “They seem to think the Koran is the book of ultimate knowledge, not the Bible. What about the 750,000,000 Hindus, or the 20,000,000 Sikhs, or the 18,000,000 Jews, or the countless others who believe in religions other than Christianity? Could they all be wrong?”

My question to Mr. Rohwer is: Could they all be RIGHT?

If anyone believes that their religion and its claims are actually, physically TRUE, they cannot then turn and believe that a contradictory claim by another religion may be true as well. One philosophy commonly heard in today’s intellectual world is the idea of relativism. “I believe in my philosophy,” people say. “My philosophy is absolutely true for ME. But it’s all right if you don’t believe what I believe. Your philosophy can be absolutely true for YOU.” People in this mindframe, believing themselves to be quite intellectual and socially proper, are in reality overlooking the flaw in their logic.

A religion, by nature, claims to apply not just to the individual believing it, but to the world, whether it believes or not. And if an individual were to identify with a religion, and to genuinely consider its claims to be the truth, that individual would be unable to logically say that a conflicting religion was also true.

To illustrate this point: I believe that the moon is made of rock. For me, this is absolutely true. If a person were to come along and say to me, “I believe the moon is made of cheese,” would it be logical for me, for the sake of social correctness, to say to myself, “This person may be right. I believe the moon is rock, but I cannot discount this person’s idea. It may be equally true that the moon is made of cheese”? Obviously, this is not logical. Two conflicting versions of the absolute truth cannot coexist.

If I am willing to compromise some of the truth of my religion in order to accommodate ideas that conflict with my own, that shows that I do not genuinely trust that my religion is absolutely true. And if I do not trust that my religion is absolutely true, am I really a follower of that religion, or is it simply a label with which I identify when it is convenient for me?

I have chosen to put my faith in the Christian God, who I believe to have created the Earth and everything in it (including the laws of physics, Mr. Rohwer). As a follower of Christianity, I am unwilling to compromise my beliefs for the sake of blind, illogical tolerance.

If there is an absolute truth, which I believe there is, it cannot come from a politically correct blending of all the major religions, which contradict one another by nature. Instead, it must come from one cohesive doctrine which claims to be the truth and discredits any other alternatives.

“Jesus answered, ‘I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.'” John 14:6

Melanie Van Hoeck

Sophomore

Pre-Journalism and Mass

Communication