Epistemology

It's been a while since I've thought about the nature of truth, but a conversation with Carson regarding it the other day got me thinking.
After my paradigm of the Bible being the perfect "handbook for life" was shattered, I began to scrabble for something, anything to be a standard of sorts for truth. Indeed, when I mention that I don't believe in the Inerrancy of Scripture to most people at school, I get funny looks and the same question every time: "what do you base your faith on?" I don't really think in those terms anymore, so I usually can't give much of an answer, at least not one to satisfy the Evangelical mind.
Most Evangelicals tend toward the other extreme to describe people that don't view the Bible as absolutely authoritative, saying that they just go with how they feel all the time. What does that even mean? That if you don't have something that can be seen, read and heard to tell you what you should do, then you'll just make emotional decisions? If that's so, then why is Christianity split into at least three major branches, one of which divides into thousands of denominations? Sounds like a bunch of "emotional" decision making to me.
Of course they all think what they believe is true. But why? If you go to any denomination, branch, or type of church (or any religious service really) and you get people that share a certain trait. Something about their beliefs resonates with who they are. In most Christian denominations, people say that their Church "just teaches the Bible." Do they really? I mean, if it's a Christian Church, it's pretty much assured that the Bible is there. But what does "just teaches the Bible" mean? What does it mean that their brand of Christianity is "Biblical?"
This extends into other religions as well. They all have writings. The Book of Mormon, the
Quran, the Watchtower. Some don't have a central writing, but many writings. One thing they all have in common though, is that they attempt to base their religion on their writings, most of which are accompanied by claims to divine inspiration.
Practically, nothing sets Christianity apart. And with people breathing down my throat telling me if I'm really a Christian I should believe the Bible is Inerrant, the question that Pilate asked Christ has become central in my quest for knowledge.
What is truth?
Christians usually try to make the claim that their religion, and thus their claim to truth, is superior to others. This usually begins with the Bible. Ignoring apparent contradictions, the claim is that the teachings never contradict, and that the Bible itself proves its' own Inerrancy with hermeneutical interpretations, based on the presuppositions that one must come to the Bible with. There's no getting away from presupposition really, we always suppose something without proving it. I'm a Christian based on things that I can't prove, except to myself based on subjective knowledge. But I'm getting ahead of myself.
The point is, I don't buy proofs for inerrancy. If the Holy Spirit really does bring Christianity to consensus on major doctrines, then inerrancy is not a major doctrine. Many well-respected Christians do not affirm inerrancy, and the easiest example of this offhand is C.S. Lewis. The hermeneutics of inerrancy rely heavily upon believing that any reference in Scripture is equivalent to "God's word" or "the word of God." I don't buy this either, for reasons I will elaborate on momentarily.
The one thing that I have been convinced of is that the Bible is a historically reliable book, a product of the Early Apostolic Church, started by the Apostles who knew Christ. Based on this, we can presume that the four gospels give the most accurate picture of who Jesus was, and based on Jewish society, we can presume that the Old Testament is accurate, for the most part. I make no claims regarding epistles, and perspicuity (the Bible being clear on all essential doctrine) has thrown itself out of a 100th story window a long time ago. The real issue here is whether the Bible conveys the Character of God. My completely subjective answer is an emphatic yes, because I know God, and know that He's the same one written about in Scripture, which I believe is reliable enough to read and understand God better through.
The disturbing thing about all of this for most intellectually inclined people (like myself) is that knowing God, a completely experiential and subjective thing, precedes belief in Scripture, something that is supposedly objective, and a measure for truth.
But there's something else I've always relied on to distinguish what is true from what is not, and it is not the Bible. In light of the apparent inability of the church at large to agree on just what is Biblical and the ridiculous insistence of everyone upon their faith being the Biblical one, this makes me think that Truth itself is something far more abstract.
The question still remains: what is truth? And the further nagging one has now attached itself to the end, the central question to epistemology...how do we know what is true, or that which corresponds to reality? Further, how do we know we know?
With this in mind...let's look at John 1. In the beginning was the Word. The Word was then equated with God. What did this mean to the Jews that would be reading this, and what did it mean to John? The concept of God speaking creation into existence Ex Nihilo (out of nothing) wasn't a knew one, and the key here becomes that God spoke it into existence. To speak...you use words. In the beginning was the Word.
The Ancient Jews believed that the Word was more than just something uttered by God, but something through which all things were created. Furthermore, the Word became flesh and dwelt among us. Meaning that Jesus is the Word, or what God spoke creation into existence with. If truth is that which pertains to reality, and reality was created through Christ pre-incarnation, in essence, then Christ is Truth embodied, and reality is all something that has flowed and continually flows from him.
Yes, for all of this to work, I must presuppose that Jesus is an extension of God. A manifestation if you will, or as Christians love to call him, the second person of the Holy Trinity. To sum it up, Jesus is God. I have no way of proving that, it is a presupposition based on my personal experience with God.
So when we read of the word of the Lord in Scripture, what does it mean, when used abstractly? Does it mean a book that everyone interprets differently, and requires a ton of historical context to understand its' subjective and occasionally objective message, or does it mean the mystical concept of the Word, the Logos in Greek, or the thing from which the universe has flowed?
I'll go for the second one, and only the second one. The first simply makes no sense to me, especially since when it was written there was no Bible.
So what is truth? Truth is Christ, or the Word of God, and truth is that which corresponds to reality.
If we then conclude that truth is that which corresponds to Truth, the ultimate reality, then we're seeing the words of the Word everywhere, as creation was created through the Word, or Christ.
Confused yet?
How do I know I know something? I don't, but I believe, because someone greater has given me ways of perceiving it, and walks with me.
What do I base my faith on? I base it on my subjective experience with God. The God I believe in is so infinite, that I have no way of telling you what His Salvation is, other than the outpouring of His love.
What is truth, and how do I discern it? I discern it based on my relationship with Truth, while recognizing that because I am human, I cloud it a lot of times. I am subjective, but that doesn't keep my relationship with God from guiding me.
It's a tougher answer than the whole "I believe what is Biblical" answer, but it is honest, from my heart, and it's a faith in a God that is alive, like the faith of many that try to have a Biblical one.
It is also a faith that hopes that people of all religions, faiths, or beliefs can be saved, and can spend eternity with God. The God I believe in is big enough to do that, is present in this universe enough so that everyone knows of Him, and loves people enough to allow them to reject Him if they so choose.
I also admit that I may not have the whole picture. Due to my subjectivity, I must admit to something I've hated admitting ever since becoming a Christian: I am just a man, and one that doesn't know everything. Someone else may know more about Truth than I do. Hence, I want to learn as much as I can from everyone I meet.
After all, Truth is infinite.