Is That a Fact?
North Rim of Grand Canyon
Discerning the difference between what is actually fact and what is interpretation of fact is key to processing the deluge of information flooding our senses every day.
I was standing at the rim of Grand Canyon with a group of our guests discussing the relationship between the sedimentary layers in Grand Canyon and the Genesis flood. As often happens, a gentleman standing nearby was listening to our conversation. When there was a break in the conversation, he asked a good question.
“How can you say that these rocks are related to the flood when they are proven to pre-date man by millions of years?”
I responded by stating that if the rocks have, in fact, been proven to pre-date man by millions of years then it doesn’t work. I followed that up with a question of my own. “What if the rocks are not proven to pre-date man by millions of years? What if that is just a theory?” He looked a bit perplexed and asked, “What do you mean?” I continued by explaining the myriad of assumptions that are inherent in the dating process. I concluded by stating that if he was to determine that it is a fact the rocks are millions (to billions) of years old then he would have to be willing to agree with and embrace those assumptions. He was unaware that those assumptions were required and was suddenly uncertain he was willing to embrace them. He said,
“I need to rethink a lot of things. It appears I may be basing many of my beliefs on a faulty beginning.”
That conversation is a powerful illustration to the necessity of discerning what is fact and what is theory (interpretation of fact). We all speak and hear according to our interpretation of the facts. However, that is not the same as simply presenting the facts. When we read material or listen to someone speaking we must be careful to discern the lens through which the information is being presented. Carefully identifying the true facts is a critical skill when reading and listening.
Example:
The information provided by the National Park about the formation of Grand Canyon includes the comment that the Colorado River functions like a giant conveyor belt removing the debris from the Grand Canyon, carving the canyon wider and deeper the width of a piece of paper every year. It is written (and intended to be read) as a fact. However, it is not a fact, but a theory. Nobody has measured the entire length of the bottom and sides of the Grand Canyon to determine objectively that it has deepened and widened by the width of a piece of paper. This idea is nothing other than a theory based upon the assumption that the river carved the canyon over a period of about 70 million years.
The Bereans were praised for their ability to do this. Acts 17:11 identifies them as more noble than others because they checked everything they heard against the authority of God’s Word. We are called to do the same. This is required when watching the news, reading material, listening to a sermon, listening to a politician, and any other time information is being processed.
“Love the Lord your God with all your mind.” (Matthew 22:37)
“Do not conform any longer to the patterns of this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind.” (Romans 12:2)
“Do not be held captive by the shallow philosophies of this world that depend on human traditions rather than on Christ.” (Collisions 2:8)
Be a Berean! Discern the difference between fact and interpretation.
Praiseallujiah!
Jon
