Truth is that which corresponds to reality. Truth is something we should all seek. It can be discovered or known. Unlike the Postmodern worldview, the Christian worldview holds that reality is out there, and that truth is not simply relative to the person and that it is knowable.
Before you start your search for Truth, you should ask yourself whether or not you are willing to follow the evidence wherever it leads. If your biases are such that you will reject the evidence or refuse to give honest consideration to the facts, then you might as well not bother. Regardless of your starting worldview, the truth seeker will at least consider the evidence from the viewpoint of those holding opposing views. Willful ignorance or stubborn insistence on being "right" will be a stumbling block to the search for truth.
When seeking the truth, if there are multiple independent sources of information supporting claims, then we have a higher confidence in our conclusions. From investigating the reliability of the New Testament accounts and the Resurrection, to claims in a highly-charged political environment, there are some principles to apply:
- Eye-witness testimony (both friendly and hostile) of conversations, events, experiences, and actions are valuable.
- The truth-seeker considers historical records, financial documents, email/text trails, business associates' testimony, and contemporaneous recorded or documented conversations.
- Statements from experts or officials with firsthand information should be given more weight than uninformed opinions of commentators.
- Public statements, whether inconsistent, deliberate, or incidental, are all part of the puzzle to give serious consideration.
- Consideration of motives and biases of the participants is often used during investigations.
- Is there evidence of a coverup or conspiracy? Are the participants holding together, or is it falling apart with defectors or leaks?
- Allegations and opinions can be considered, but need to be given appropriate weight compared to the evidence. These are either consistent with the evidence, or they may not be consistent.
In the end, we are looking for the best explanation of all the evidence (abductive reasoning). Explanations which are coherent and consistent with the evidence should be given more credence.
Also, don't forget the Golden Rule of Apologetics, "Treat other's ideas and arguments in the same way you would like yours to be treated."
