21/06/2026
WHAT IS TRUTH?
Many people claim to know, speak, defend and preach the truth without knowing what truth is.
Over two thousand years ago, Truth stood on trial before people devoted to lies. In less than one full day, Truth endured six trials—three religious and three legal. Few involved could truly answer Pilate’s famous question: “What is truth?”
After His arrest, Jesus (the embodiment of Truth) was first taken to Annas, a corrupt former high priest. Annas violated multiple Jewish laws: holding the trial at his house, attempting to force self-incrimination, and striking the unconvicted defendant. Next, Jesus was brought before Caiaphas, the reigning high priest and Annas’s son-in-law, along with the Sanhedrin. False witnesses testified, but no consistent evidence emerged. Caiaphas broke at least seven Jewish laws: conducting a secret night-time trial, using bribery, denying the defendant a defense, failing to meet the two-to-three witness requirement, relying on self-incriminating statements, and pronouncing the death penalty on the same day. Despite these violations, Caiaphas declared Jesus guilty of blasphemy for claiming to be God in the flesh.
In the morning, the Sanhedrin confirmed the death sentence but lacked authority to execute it under Roman rule. They delivered Jesus to Pontius Pilate, the Roman prefect of Judea (A.D. 26–36), who held the power of life and death. The Jewish leaders accused Jesus of misleading the nation, forbidding taxes to Caesar, and claiming kingship—charges that twisted His actual teachings (He had explicitly endorsed paying taxes).
Pilate questioned Jesus privately: “Are You the King of the Jews?” Jesus clarified that His kingdom was not of this world and explained His purpose: “For this I have been born... to testify to the truth. Everyone who is of the truth hears My voice.” Pilate famously replied, “What is truth?” (John 18:33–38). This question echoes through history—whether born of cynicism, melancholy, or indifference.
A Proposed Definition of Truth
In a postmodern age that often denies objective truth, the question remains urgent. Truth is best understood first by clarifying what it is not:
Truth is not merely “whatever works” (pragmatism). Lies can sometimes seem effective but remain false.
Truth is not just coherence or group agreement. A conspiracy of lies can be internally consistent yet untrue.
Truth is not what feels good; bad news can be true.
Truth is not determined by majority vote—51% can be wrong.
Truth is not defined by comprehensiveness or good intentions.
Truth is not merely belief or public proof; a privately known truth (like hidden treasure) is still true.
Truth is not simply the process of knowing; it is what is known.
The Greek word aletheia means “un-hide” or “hiding nothing”—truth is open and available. The Hebrew emeth conveys firmness, constancy, and reliability—something enduring and trustworthy.
Philosophically, truth can be defined simply in three complementary ways:
Truth corresponds to reality — it accurately reflects “what is.”
Truth matches its object — it fits the specific referent appropriately. For example, a teacher may correctly say the exit is on their right, even if it appears left to students facing them. Similarly, medication dosages must match individual needs precisely.
Truth is telling it like it is — it describes things as they really are. Any contrary view is error.
As Thomas Aquinas noted, philosophy’s task includes making distinctions between truth and error.
Modern culture often resists such distinctions. Relativism claims all truth is relative, with no absolutes. But this claim undermines itself: Is “all truth is relative” itself relative or absolute? If relative, it lacks force; if absolute, it concedes the point. Relativists also contradict themselves by labeling absolutism “wrong.”
Skepticism doubts everything but fails when asked if it doubts itself.
Agnosticism asserts “you can’t know truth,” yet claims to know at least that much—an absolute statement.
Postmodernism, echoing Nietzsche, views truth as shifting metaphors and illusions, yet affirms its own view as definitively true, revealing self-defeat.
Pluralism insists all truth claims are equally valid. This collapses under the law of non-contradiction: opposing statements (e.g., a woman is pregnant and not pregnant) cannot both be true in the same sense. Pluralism confuses equal human dignity with equal validity of ideas. As Mortimer Adler observed, pluralism suits matters of taste, not truth.
The Offensive Nature of Truth:
Claims to absolute truth often face accusations of narrow-mindedness, arrogance, exclusivity, and divisiveness. Yet truth is inherently narrow: 2 + 2 equals only 4. A math teacher insisting on one correct answer is not arrogant, nor is a locksmith stating only one key fits. Truth excludes falsehood by nature.
Sincerity cannot override truth—a wrong key still fails to open a door, and poison mistaken for lemonade remains deadly regardless of belief or desire.
Some limit absolute truth to science (logical positivism), dismissing religious claims as unverifiable. But science presupposes mathematics and logic, cannot prove other minds exist, cannot establish moral evil (e.g., condemning the N***s), and cannot judge beauty. The claim “science is the only source of truth” is itself a philosophical assertion, not scientifically testable. Morality also features absolutes: torturing an innocent child is universally wrong, and most people expect absolute fidelity from spouses.
Why Truth Matters:
Life’s consequences make truth essential. Wrong medication can kill, bad financial advice can ruin families, boarding the wrong flight leads to the wrong destination, and infidelity can destroy marriages and health. As Ravi Zacharias noted, truth especially matters when receiving a lie. This is most critical in faith and religion, where eternity hangs in the balance.
God and Truth:
Jesus’ trials starkly contrasted Truth (righteousness) with lies (unrighteousness). Jewish leaders violated laws meant to protect the innocent, resorted to false witnesses, and coerced self-incrimination. Before Pilate, they shifted accusations to fit Roman concerns. The righteous was judged by the unrighteous—a pattern seen from Cain and Abel onward.
Scripture links truth with righteousness and falsehood with wickedness:
God sends delusion to those who reject truth and delight in wickedness (2 Thessalonians 2:9–12).
God’s wrath targets those who suppress truth in unrighteousness (Romans 1:18).
Judgment falls on those who obey unrighteousness rather than truth (Romans 2:6–8).
Love rejoices in truth, not unrighteousness (1 Corinthians 13:6).
Conclusion
Pilate’s question “What is truth?” misses a deeper reality: many things have truth, but only one is the Truth. Jesus declared, “I am the way, the truth, and the life” (John 14:6).
This was no mere human claim; it was validated by His resurrection (Romans 1:4).
A story illustrates the reversal: A Parisian host showed a rural visitor the Louvre and a symphony. The visitor was unimpressed. The host replied, “They aren’t on trial—you are.” Pilate and the Jewish leaders thought they judged Christ; in reality, they stood judged. The One they condemned will one day judge all who suppress truth in unrighteousness.
Pilate never embraced the Truth.
Historical accounts suggest he later committed su***de under Caligula—a tragic reminder that ignoring truth leads to undesired consequences.
Truth originates in God, revealed supremely in Jesus Christ. Embracing it brings clarity, freedom, and eternal hope.
In a relativistic age, the call remains:
“Everyone who is of the truth hears My voice.”
Are you sure you now know what truth is?
What is the TRUTH?
How do you Know its the truth?
What's your source of truth?
Happy Sunday!
Dr. Success Nkongho
21st June, 2026
