Article

Theology
2018, Vol. 121(3) 180–187
God, post-truth ! The Author(s) 2018
Reprints and permissions:
sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav
Beverley Jameson DOI: 10.1177/0040571X17749145
journals.sagepub.com/home/tjx
Lymm, Cheshire

Abstract
In a world of fake news and post-truth, where objective facts are less influential in
shaping truth than opinions said with confidence and authority, where is God’s truth?
Where is the Good News of Jesus Christ amidst all the fake news? This is discussed
under three areas: God’s reality check (the truth of his word); our reality check (to
personally examine ourselves and our behaviours to remain in God’s truth); and arguing
God’s reality check (in a different form of apologetics based on conviction of belief).

Keywords
fake news, God’s truth, post-truth

Have you ever been in a meeting at work, socially with friends, with family or at
church when you have discussed various issues, reached various conclusions then
two days later, having heard other people’s versions of the outcome, you wondered
if you had been on the same planet as these people, never mind in the same room?
We live in a world of post-truth, where strands of reality are woven into a truth as
we would wish to see it or create it in order to support our own interests. The
Oxford Dictionaries chose ‘post-truth’ to be their international word of 2016.
Defined as an adjective ‘relating to or denoting circumstances in which objective
facts are less influential in shaping public opinion than appeals to emotion and
personal belief ’, editors said that use of the term ‘post-truth’ had increased by
around 2,000 per cent in 2016 compared with the previous year.1 This is hardly
surprising given the Brexit debates, the US presidential election campaign of 2016
and the subsequent assortment of tweets from President Trump. It seems that
Facebook and Twitter have more influence and are more generally believed than
traditional news reporting.
Post-truth is a recent phrase, but manipulation of the facts has been used by pol-
itical dictators for years. When truth is deliberately manipulated by those in power

Corresponding author:
Beverley Jameson
Email: bevjameson@live.co.uk
Jameson 181

it has terrible consequences. In the post-war communist states, truth was whatever
Stalin said it was and it hid genocide.
We as individuals are not immune. We all spin what we do, what our church
achieves. The leader of an Alpha course I was once involved in proclaimed that
there were 30 people on the course, but it did not take a mathematical genius to
count 25 people in the room and to subtract 12 group leaders or helpers, three
members of the vicar’s family and three clergy to work out the real number of
people actually on the course.2
So, in a world of fake news and half-truths, spin and social media, where object-
ive facts are less influential in shaping truth than opinions said with confidence and
authority, where is God’s truth? This can be considered in three areas: God’s reality
check; our reality check; and arguing the reality check.

God’s reality check

1
Help, O LORD, for there is no longer anyone who is godly;
the faithful have disappeared from humankind.
2
They utter lies to each other;
with flattering lips and a double heart they speak.
3
May the LORD cut off all flattering lips,
the tongue that makes great boasts,
4
those who say, ‘With our tongues we will prevail;
our lips are our own – who is our master?’
5
‘Because the poor are despoiled, because the needy groan,
I will now rise up,’ says the LORD;
‘I will place them in the safety for which they long.’
6
The promises of the LORD are promises that are pure,
silver refined in a furnace on the ground, purified seven times.
7
You, O LORD, will protect us;
you will guard us from this generation forever.
8
On every side the wicked prowl,
as vileness is exalted among humankind. (Psalm 12)3

Psalm 12 is a psalm of lament on the use and abuse of words. It follows the pattern
of prayer, promise, prayer, then an assurance of relief, but it ends with no change in
the circumstances. Verses 1–4 find the psalmist surrounded by empty talk, smooth
talk and double-talk, boasting with an arrogance that suggests people can deter-
mine their own destiny. For some, this is a deliberate deception for material or
personal gain. For others, a double heart is not only deliberate double-talk but
double delusion, as those who exclaim their version of reality truly begin to believe
it as truth4 and lose their sense of objectivity. Donald Trump probably truly
believes that his Twitter feed is more accurate than the FBI. However, we all
deceive ourselves in large and small ways inside and outside our Christian faith.
182 Theology 121(3)

If we convince ourselves of the accuracy of our own world view then it is with
genuine conviction that we weave our truth into a facade of reality. Although the
psalmist’s request is to cut off all flattering lips, God promises only to protect the
oppressed, to rise and protect the weak. Presumably the weak cannot distinguish
between God’s truth and the truths boasted by others and are led astray. Although
the psalmist refers to the godly and the faithful, God takes care of the needy and
the weak, perhaps because in deceiving others they are genuinely deceiving them-
selves. They are gathered into his care not because of the way in which they behave
but because of their helplessness and need for a saviour.5 There is a striking con-
trast between God’s pure clean words and the vain, empty and deceitfully flattering
words of others, whether they are intentional or self-misleading. Whether trans-
mitted through speech, writing, television, Twitter or Facebook, words are precious
and can swiftly be used to corrupt, mislead and demean. God has made himself
known in many ways but significantly via speech. To a great extent, we respond to
and worship him through speech (written or oral). Just as God’s speech is pure and
free from falseness, so should our speech be. Surrounded by so much false truth, we
need to make sure that we are dedicated to the truth of God. Psalm 12 ends with
hope and confidence. The way to God’s truth is via prayer; the energy to continue
in God’s truth is via faith. For those assailed by evil speech, the response is not to
return bad words for bad words but to trust and have confidence in the word of
God, which cannot be overwhelmed.
The New Testament takes up this theme, urging followers of Christ not to stray
from the purity of the Christian truth with the weasel words of post-truth.
James focuses heavily on the use, misuse and abuse of words. Chapter 3 sets out
the context of the influence of the Christian teacher. In the first century, much of
the teaching, instruction and wisdom were imparted via the spoken word, so it is
not surprising that James focuses on the tongue’s use for goodness, not
unscrupulousness.6
5
So also the tongue is a small member, yet it boasts of great exploits. How great a
forest is set ablaze by a small fire! 6And the tongue is a fire. The tongue is placed
among our members as a world of iniquity; it stains the whole body, sets on fire the
cycle of nature, and is itself set on fire by hell. 7For every species of beast and bird, of
reptile and sea creature, can be tamed and has been tamed by the human species, 8but
no one can tame the tongue – a restless evil, full of deadly poison. 9With it we bless the
Lord and Father, and with it we curse those who are made in the likeness of God.
10
From the same mouth come blessing and cursing. (James 3.5–10)

The tongue (for the spoken word – in contemporary society we could include
fingers and thumbs for tweets) is to be controlled and watched lest it run
away with abusive language, self-importance, speech-making rhetoric, misleading
assertions and opinions expressed so forcefully that no one would dare contradict
them. It is like a bush fire that from a small flame suddenly becomes an inferno of
Jameson 183

post-truth. It is so easy for a slip of the tongue, an unguarded moan or a bragging

exaggeration to run like wildfire through our congregations and communities and
to go viral in social media. Psalm 141 gives sound advice:

Set a guard over my mouth, O LORD; keep watch over the door of my lips. (Psalm
141.3)

How do we control our tongue? How can we not be drawn into the abiding culture
of post-truth and fake news that is more real than reality? James suggests that we
go forward not in our words, not in our own power, but in God’s wisdom:

13
Who is wise and understanding among you? Show by your good life that your
works are done with gentleness born of wisdom. 14But if you have bitter envy and
selfish ambition in your hearts, do not be boastful and false to the truth. 15Such
wisdom does not come down from above, but is earthly, unspiritual, devilish. 16For
where there is envy and selfish ambition, there will also be disorder and wickedness of
every kind. 17But the wisdom from above is first pure, then peaceable, gentle, willing
to yield, full of mercy and good fruits, without a trace of partiality or hypocrisy.
18
And a harvest of righteousness is sown in peace for those who make peace.
(James 3.13–18)

In language reminiscent of the Old Testament (especially the wisdom teachings),

James suggests that our credibility stands by what we do and how we behave.
Conversely, envy, selfish ambition and political posturing surround those who
claim a truth of their own making.
God not only requires personal integrity but a social integrity too. Throughout
the centuries the Church has had a social conscience. It is our duty to speak the
truth for those who have no voice. We seek justice for those who are oppressed and
hidden by the political manipulation of dictators: the camps in Siberia, the Killing
Fields in Cambodia, the genocide in Bosnia, the genocide in Syria.
15
When Jesus became aware of this, he departed. Many crowds followed him, and he
cured all of them, 16and he ordered them not to make him known. 17This was to fulfil
what had been spoken through the prophet Isaiah:
18
‘Here is my servant, whom I have chosen, my beloved, with whom my soul is well
pleased. I will put my Spirit upon him, and he will proclaim justice to the Gentiles.
19
He will not wrangle or cry aloud, nor will anyone hear his voice in the streets.
20
He will not break a bruised reed or quench a smouldering wick until he brings justice
to victory. 21And in his name the Gentiles will hope.’ (Matthew 12.15–21)

This passage alludes to Jesus as God’s servant as outlined in Isaiah 42. The weak
and the vulnerable are a special object of his mission. Far from letting them be
broken, he will lead them to victory for in him they will find justice (mispat), the
184 Theology 121(3)

setting right of whatever is wrong. But mispat means something greater than what
is normally considered ‘justice’ – it is God’s order into the world, his creation and
his sovereignty over everything. It is the special relationship he has with his people.7
God’s reality check is also demanding justice for those who have no voice.
Despite the strands of reality weaving and interweaving to create a desired truth,
in our secular world God’s truth remains firm. God’s reality check is to be honest
to ourselves and to others. It comes via faith, in the way we behave towards one
another and in fighting for social justice.
However, everyone is influenced by a post-truth culture. Whether aware of it or
not, we are susceptible to applying God’s truth to fit our personal opinions. There
is a need to challenge whether personal decision making, personal truth, is guided
by God’s will or if it derives from an individual’s will, fuelled consciously or sub-
consciously by personal desires and ambition.

Our reality check

Those who have been through a discernment or selection process for lay or
ordained ministry have had to examine their motives to see if their calling is
from God or from personal ambition, desires or hopes. Whether we have been
through this process or not, we all still need a check and balance on our attitudes at
home, at work, in church. Are we weaving God’s truth into a truth that we like and
that promotes our ideas, our calling, our theology, our spirituality? I was once at a
PCC meeting during an interregnum where an ambitious member felt frustrated at
not being allowed to lead services (due to a lack of training). He cried: ‘You are
stopping God from fulfilling my ministry.’ Heartfelt, but perhaps a little awry.
Every day and in every way we are bombarded with half-truths and fake truths,
so it becomes unclear what truth really is. It becomes unclear where God is in this
plethora of ‘truth’. It is increasingly difficult to discern his word, his work, and to
recognize his truth amidst the circus of fake news.
It is perhaps not unusual towards the end of the day to mull, fret or fume over
the day’s events. It is easy to leap to conclusions, regret actions or deeds without
trying to discern where God’s truth is in all that has happened. In the sixteenth
century, St Ignatius provided ways of living life prayerfully, spiritually and reflect-
ively. His Daily Examen has been adapted over the years as a method of reviewing
each day, and it is still a very popular way of praying today. It encourages listening
to God and avoiding automatic judgements. In stillness and quietness, uninter-
rupted by the busyness of home, the following five steps are followed:

1. Understanding: in quietness and stillness, reflect upon the day and pray to try to
understand where God was with us throughout our day.
2. Gratitude: be thankful for the good things that have occurred in our day.
3. Reflection: consider what caused strength of feeling within us, both positive (e.g.
encouraged, fulfilled) and negative (e.g. anger, frustration). Try to explore why
that was and pray about it.
Jameson 185

4. Dig deeper: choose one of these feelings and pray over it in depth. Perhaps ask
forgiveness for those things we regret. Ask God to be with us as we face similar
situations.
5. Tomorrow: as the reflection on the day draws to a close, consider the following
day and ask God to be with us. End with a standard prayer such as the Lord’s
Prayer.8

At the end of a busy day, the Examen provides a few minutes of silence and stillness
to ask God into the day to see his truth clearly in all that has occurred. It helps us
to be honest with ourselves, with God and with our emotions. It encourages us to
be grateful for what we did well in the day and lets us reflect on where we strayed
from God’s truth and Christ’s teaching. It gives us hope and a better start for
tomorrow.
This is only one of many prayerful ways of reviewing each day that is more than
just a general sweep of events; rather, it looks for one or two significant occurrences
when deeper emotions were stirred or a decision had to be made, and seeks God
within that reality (fake or otherwise).
Personal prayer is a good check and balance on attitudes and behaviours, but
public prayer itself is not immune to post-truth. Throughout the centuries the
pulpit has been used to promote political and secular policies, and so has prayer.
How often has John 15.13 (‘No one has greater love than this, to lay down one’s
life for one’s friends’) been taken out of its biblical context to justify war casualties?
Public prayer is open to manipulation by those in power, whether to promote a
political situation, a church policy or a specific theology. It is also exposed to
speech making, misleading assertions and opinions. Public prayer requires God’s
reality check on the use and abuse of words just as much as the Twitter feed.
Building personal integrity through the reality of God’s truth is important.
Yet in the slippery-tongued post-truth world, where Twitter and Facebook
create a fake truth, there are times when God’s truth needs to be expounded.

Arguing the reality check

There have been apologetics defending the reality of the Christian faith since
Christ’s death and resurrection in the first century. In the twenty-first century,
we are in the midst of a secular world of pick-and-mix reality and pick-and-
choose truth. We are rational human beings, and so for centuries reason has
been part of Christian belief and has influenced theology. The idea of a divine
‘illumination’ in the mind occurs in both philosophical and religious contexts. In
Christian thought, it is in the work of St Augustine of Hippo, who stresses the role
of divine illumination in human thought and as an influence that we receive
throughout our lives. Thomas Aquinas worked on the assumption that the
Christian faith is fundamentally rational and that it can be supported and explored
by reason, but he also believed that faith goes beyond reason, having access
to truths and insights that reason could not discern without the aid of
186 Theology 121(3)

God’s revelation. Reason builds upon what is known through revelation, exploring
what its implications may be.
By the middle of the eighteenth century, a new approach was taking shape in
England and Germany. Modernity – which is more accurately defined as an out-
look rather than a specific time period – introduced Enlightenment rationalism in
the first half of the eighteenth century. It argued that Christian belief was rational
and so should be robust enough for rational and critical examination. Thus began a
series of arguments based on logic and reason to justify and/or refute the existence
of a God.9 For example, evidence was used to support Jesus as Christ via the
various miracles. Many, notably Hume, argued that there was no supporting his-
torical evidence of miracles outside the Bible. Miracles were based on human tes-
timony; and as human testimony was prone to inadequacy and contradiction, there
was no real evidence for them. So the debate raged through modernity and post-
modernity, taking in Darwin and Dawkins and John Lennox’s response to Stephen
Hawking’s The Grand Design. In the late twentieth century, we were described as
living in a post-modern age that was characterized by the rejection of absolutes and
of objective attempts to define reality.10
In the twenty-first century, this has morphed into an era of post-truth, where
there is not only unrestrained rejection of objectivity but truth is whatever public
opinion is persuaded by. Yet for all the argument and counterargument over the
centuries, the discussion still seems to rest on that original fundamental principle of
how much faith is based on reason and how much on revelation or illumination. In
an age when post-truth dictates that objective facts are less influential in shaping
public opinion than appeals to emotion and personal belief, there is an opportunity
for a different approach to apologetics – one based on Christian beliefs and a
confidence to display in words and deeds the certainty of those beliefs. This in
itself is an appeal to the emotions of others. The ability to shape public opinion is
based on a real truth, a divine truth. Could post-truth be an insurgence of God’s
truth?

Conclusion
Reality is woven to form the picture of a truth that internationally, nationally,
locally and personally fits specific desires, ambitions, hopes and dreams. Rather
than being woven out of this picture, there is an opportunity for God’s truth to
stand out among the interweaving realities. Applying God’s reality check
through faith, behaviours and self-examination and in fighting for social justice
is a means to weigh authenticity in an increasingly fake world. This is relevant
to personal viewpoints as well as to national politicking. In a world dismissive
of objective proof, apologetics are still valid; now, however, it is perhaps
the strength of conviction that holds sway over what others believe. Christian
belief proclaimed with authority, confidence and the power of social media
may persuade people to believe the reality of God’s truth in this post-truth
world.
Jameson 187

Notes
1. Alison Flood, ‘‘‘Post-truth’’ named word of the year by Oxford Dictionaries’, Guardian
(15 November 2016), https://www.theguardian.com/books/2016/nov/15/post-truth-
named-word-of-the-year-by-oxford-dictionaries (accessed 22 April 2017).
2. Seven!
3. All Bible quotations are from New Revised Standard Version Anglicised.
4. D. Kidner, Psalms 1–72: an introduction and commentary on Books I and II of the
Psalms, Tyndale Old Testament Commentaries (London: Inter-Varsity Press, 2008
[1973]), pp. 91–2.
5. C. C. Broyles, Psalms, New International Biblical Commentary: Old Testament Series
11 (Carlisle: Paternoster Press, 1999), pp. 83–4.
6. R. P. Martin, James, Word Biblical Commentary 48 (Waco, TX: Word Books, 1988),
p. 122.
7. R. T. France, Matthew, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries (Leicester: Inter-Varsity
Press, 1985), pp. 206–7.
8. T. Muldoon, The Ignatian Workout: daily spiritual exercises for a healthy faith (Chicago:
Loyola Press, 2010), pp. 33–5.
9. A. E. McGrath, Christian Theology (Oxford: Blackwell Publishing, 2007), pp. 65–77,
141–7.
10. McGrath, Christian Theology, p. 492.

Author Biography
Beverley Jameson is Rector of St Mary the Virgin, Lymm, in the Diocese of
Chester. Prior to ordination she was a corporate director and Deputy Chief
Executive of a local authority. She has a master’s degree in theology, having trained
at St John’s Theological College in Nottingham.