The problem with claiming something is a 'fact' (as we know from our unhappy encounters with online social media 'fact-checkers', for example), is that it's a word easily open to abuse.

I am writing this as there are some who are challenging 1,700 years of consensus among ALL Christians/Messianics who accept the Protestant Canon of the Bible as common to all denominational traditions and canons. The criteria by which the New Testament books were selected were extremely robust and have not been improved upon since the Council of Carthage in 397 AD. These criteria were:

• 1. Apostolicity (authorship y an apostle of close associate);
• 2. Orthodoxy (consistent and orthodox doctrine);
• 3. Antiquity (written during the time of the apostles, i.e. 1st century AD); &
• 4. Ecclesiastical Usage (wide acceptance and use by the early messianic community/church).

These critics are marshaling 'facts' as they suppose. Here we must be very, very careful indeed. Hence this short presentation.

Think of truth as reality itself, but just in word form.

"I am 6'5". I am male. I live in Stockholm. It's sunny outside."

Simple truths, simple facts, that describe reality itself.

But there is one problem.

Reality changes.

The weather changes, my height changes, I might move, I might die, the sun might explode, and the city might change its boundaries, putting me outside Stockholm.

But reality changing doesn't necessarily mean that the facts were incorrect, let alone that there are no facts to begin with.

Think of facts as pictures. They're snapshots of a reality that existed when they were made. From that moment on, that photograph is its own entity. A fact is its own entity. We may open a shoe box and find a stack of photographs. That does not make any of the photos no longer photos, or fake or false photos. That does not make the reality they captured suddenly no longer a reality back when the picture was taken.

But what we could use are better facts. And what we need to do, is to keep track of facts over time. We should retake our pictures if we wish for them to be current. Even better, what we could use are better words to describe those photos. We could think in higher definition.

"It's sunny outside, right now."

That's a better fact.

"It's sunny outside at 13³C, as of 4:30 pm, 28th December, 2024"

That's an even better fact.

It's a better fact because it is more specific and more objective. But there is a trade off. It's unnecessarily specific and objective.

When we speak, we are not isolated. There is always a context, a place, and a time. Facts just need to be good enough.

The fact that facts change is a fact.

The fact that some facts are ambiguous or tied to the past is also a fact.

These are the facts about facts.

The key to understanding any fact truthfully for what it is can be boiled down to:

• 1. Where did it come from?
• 2. Who is saying it?
• 3. Why are they saying it?

A statement is a statement. Reality is reality. A statement about reality is a statement about reality. Statements can only be about reality, but never reality itself.

The limits of our knowledge, of expression, of articulation, of language, of time, of logic, of equation, and of abstraction are all limitations of our facts.

Facts are the product of a process. Scientific processes generate scientific facts. Non-scientific processes generate non-scientific facts. And these facts are their own 'thing'. I can put the word 'apple' next to an apple. They are separate. They are both real. One is a word, and the other is an apple.

A fact is it's own 'thing'. They are created, destroyed, altered, corrected, and changed.

Reality is it's own 'thing'. It too is created, destroyed, altered, corrected, and changed.

When a fact accurately describes a reality, we call it truth. This alignment requires effort, skill, and maintenance. For reality will go off and change on it's own. Leave it to the media or a community spreading rumours, and so will facts.

So be very careful when you start waving "facts" around as sure winners for an argument. And be even more careful of those who do this.

With the exception of the Book of Esther which is not to be found in the earliest known Old Testament collection - a text which has both undergone a number of redactions and is of uncertain provenance - the Protestant Canon of the Bible is RELIABLE and ESSENTIAL for unity among brethren.

(28 December 2024)

This page was created on 5 November 2025 Last updated on 5 November 2025

Copywrite © 1987-2025 NCAY - All Rights Reserved