A woman prays as Christ's hand reaches toward her, symbolizing divine comfort and Jesus Christ as the way, the truth, and the life.

December Book Club: Who Is Truth?

Truth as a Person, Jesus Christ, reshapes how we approach revelation, moving us beyond contemporary ideological frameworks.

Through the years, my co-author Edwin Gantt and I have witnessed many friends experience doubt about the Church and its teachings. In some cases, there were signs they were living their lives in ways that alienated them from the Spirit of God. But in many cases, the seeds of their doubt were intellectual in nature—specifically, they had adopted ideological frameworks or “-isms” through which they evaluated all prophetic counsel and divine truth. Across the spectrum, they asked, “How can prophets speak for God if they teach things that contradict what I know to be true?”

This pattern revealed something profound: Many of us have unconsciously elevated abstract systems of belief—whether political, philosophical, or theological—to the level of absolute truth. When we do this, we begin measuring prophetic teachings against these ideological frameworks rather than measuring our ideological frameworks against the words of God’s servants. We call this “ideolatry,” which happens when we prioritize abstract ideas over ongoing revelation from God—a worship of ideology.

Our modern conception of truth has been heavily influenced by Greek philosophical traditions.

This observation led us to write “Who Is Truth?” The book explores a simple but profound possibility: What if truth isn’t primarily a set of abstract ideas or principles at all? What if truth is, as Christ himself declared, a Person? What if this isn’t just a poetic metaphor—what happens when we take Christ’s declaration literally? Drawing on the distinction between ancient Greek and Hebrew ways of thinking, we show how our modern conception of truth has been heavily influenced by Greek philosophical traditions that emphasize the abstract, universal, and unchangeable. In contrast, Hebrew thought understood truth in more personal, concrete, and relational terms. Our modern conception of truth has been heavily influenced by Greek philosophical traditions.

When we see truth as a set of abstract ideas, we expect religious teachings to remain static and unchanging. We measure new revelations against our mental models of how things “must” be. But if truth is a Person—specifically, Jesus Christ—then we can understand why God might give different instructions to different people in different contexts while remaining perfectly reliable and trustworthy. We remain open to surprise, just as we do with people. Of course, the idea that “truth is a person rather than an idea” is itself a mental model that we should keep provisional and find useful only so long as it points us towards and keeps us connected with the Truth made Flesh.

This message feels particularly urgent in our current moment. We live in increasingly polarized times, where ideological divisions are hardening into what feels like unbridgeable chasms. Social media and partisan news sources make it easy to surround ourselves with voices that reinforce our existing views while dismissing or demonizing those who see things differently. These ideological echo chambers don’t just separate us from each other—they can separate us from God by making us increasingly resistant to any divine guidance that doesn’t align with our chosen framework.

We see this happening across the political and ideological spectrum. Progressives might dismiss prophetic counsel about gender, sexuality, or family as outdated cultural artifacts. Conservatives might resist Church teachings about refugees, immigration, or vaccine policies as compromises with worldly thinking. In each case, we risk letting abstract ideological commitments—our “-isms”—harden our hearts not just against our fellow Saints but against the voice of the Lord speaking through His servants. When this happens, we become less able to hear God’s voice, less willing to consider perspectives different from our own, and less capable of building Zion with those who see things differently than we do.

The book isn’t primarily about answering specific doctrinal questions. Rather, it’s an invitation to fundamentally reconsider how we think about truth itself. Instead of measuring prophetic counsel against our preferred ideological frameworks—whether conservative, progressive, libertarian, or otherwise—we invite readers to aside these “-isms” and place God at the center of their affections.

It’s an invitation to fundamentally reconsider how we think about truth itself.

This shift in perspective—from truth as abstract ideas to truth as the living Christ—has the power to transform how we approach both our faith and our relationships with others. When we truly embrace truth as a Person, we approach prophetic counsel differently, we listen to others differently, and we hold our own views more humbly. Rather than starting with our ideological framework and asking, “How can I reconcile prophetic counsel with what I know to be true?” we can start with our relationship with God and ask, “How can I draw nearer to Him, align my heart with His will, and enjoy His presence in my life?”

In short, the solution to our ideological divisions isn’t finding the right framework of ideas (although developing unity surrounding essential doctrines may be part of the project of building Zion)—it’s drawing closer to the Person who is Truth. 

What binds us together is not a shared system of abstract beliefs (an “ism”) but shared covenants with the divine person of God. Those covenants set forth a shared identity and a shared set of commitments and values that bind us to our Father in Heaven and make us Christ’s people. Ultimately, what will save us at the great and last day is not the ideas we claim to know but whether we know and are known by the good shepherd Himself—a fundamentally different sort of knowledge.

About the authors

Jeffrey Thayne

Jeffrey Thayne blogs at ldsphilosopher.com, and is the coauthor of “Who is Truth?” He has a Ph.D. from Utah State University in Learning Sciences

Edwin E. Gantt

Edwin E. Gantt is a Professor of Psychology at Brigham Young University. He is the author of numerous scholarly articles and books, including Taking Sides: Clashing Views on Psychological Issues and Who is Truth? Reframing Our Questions for a Richer Faith (co-authored with Dr. Jeffrey L. Thayne). He has a Ph.D. from Duquesne University.
On Key

You Might Also Like

Under the Banner of Heaven Episode 3 Discussion and What’s True?

Summary – The episode opens with Detective Pyre leading a group of officers up the mountain to rescue Taba, who is completely fine and sitting on the ground outside one of the cabins. (The episode doesn’t explain how he got there after having a gun pointed at his face at the end of episode 2.) Pyre calls for more backup and finds a little girl wandering in the woods, lost and scared. The officers apprehend her and she tells Pyre about how things function up at the “fort” and about “Uncle Allen and Auntie Brenda” when her mother Sara arrives. Pyre questions Sara about Brenda’s experiences in the temple. The episode then depicts the beginning of an endowment session in a pretty good imitation of the garden room in the Salt Lake Temple. Brenda shares with her sisters-in-law her worries about making a covenant to “surrender” to her husband. One of the signs is shown as well as the penalty motion. Sara claims the end of the world is nigh, that her husband Sam’s job is to separate the wheat from the tares, and that Brenda was subject to the doctrine of blood atonement. A large squadron of police officers prepares to storm the Lafferty “fort,” when Pyre realizes that the situation resembles the Haun’s Mill Massacre and decides to instead approach unarmed. A wild-looking Sam and his family are taken into custody while one man escapes into the woods.  Meanwhile, Pyre’s mother with dementia is recovered after she wandered out during the twin’s birthday party. We see a flashback to Father Lafferty confronting Dan about refusing to pay taxes and beating him with his belt. The next day, Dan receives a “revelation” that he is the rightful leader of the family. In the present, Pyre and his wife take the girls to their baptismal interview with their bishop, and Pyre stays behind to discuss his mother’s health with the bishop. He also brings up how his current case ties into difficult church history topics, which the bishop encourages him to “put on a shelf.” At home later, Pyre and his wife fight about whether to postpone the girls’ baptism until after the case is closed.  At the police station, Sam Lafferty is ranting and raving. Pyre corners Allen about his criminal record due to unpaid parking tickets. He shares how his brothers pressured him into it, and as a result, he was arrested and missed Brenda’s graduation from BYU. Brenda’s anger about this led her to confront Dan about his beliefs (which involve a lot of strange reasoning about the constitution and separation of powers), and during the confrontation, Dan reveals his plan to run for sheriff and eventually pull down most government institutions from the inside. Allen ties this story to Brigham Young encouraging Joseph Smith to fight persecution, but Allen says he made a deal with Brenda that he would leave their influence if she gave up her career to start a family.  Pyre and Tab interrogate Sam Lafferty, who claims to be the Lord’s destroying angel, murdering those who are on his “holy list.” Robin Lafferty, still in custody, overhears Sam’s rants and demands to know if Brenda and her daughter are okay. Pyre shows him pictures of their deaths and Robin breaks, revealing that the Lafferty’s are likely also planning an attack on their bishop and stake president, who tried to stop their apostasy. Flashback to Brenda finding out she is pregnant and deciding to try to help the Lafferty family back onto the path of the mainstream church. Church History – This episode has a violent depiction of the Haun’s Mill Massacre, which most members will readily recognize. Less well known is the obscure early church concept of blood atonement, which the Lafferty’s appear to believe is still in force and to be enacted by them. Allen also pins violence in the early church on Brigham Young’s influence on Joseph Smith, with Emma Smith being against it. This neatly parallels the Lafferty situation, but it’s a significant simplification of the complex web of influences and responses to constant violence against the early Saints. We also get a mention of Joseph Smith running for president, which from my understanding he mostly did to draw attention to the plight of the church rather than expecting to win and reform the government. The show also alludes to the alleged assassination attempt on Governor Boggs by Porter Rockwell. Shibboleths – Sara Lafferty asks Pyre if he “follows his covenants.” This phrasing is off: LDS members would say “keep your covenants” or “honor your covenants.” (A search for the phrase “follow the covenants” on the church website yields only one result.) In the temple, Robin’s wife remarks on the importance of “keeping our agency strong,” another formulation that makes no sense. To Latter-day Saints, agency means the God-given ability to choose. This isn’t something we can strengthen, but an inherent condition of mortality. During their fight, Sister Pyre worries that delaying the baptism will shame her in front of their “congregation.” Members would never use this word, especially in private. We exclusively refer to our congregation as a “ward.” Her concern about people wondering if her daughters “failed” their interview seems off as well. Finally, let’s talk about LDS family size. Several times in this episode we get references to “at least 10” or “dozens” of kids as though this is the typical size of an LDS family. But in actuality, in 1980, only 12% of Utahns had a family of 6 people or more, and only a fraction of that 12% would have 10+ children. The wards I have lived in have maybe one family that has more than 5 kids. It’s just not that typical. I Don’t Love to See the Temple – Alright, here we are at the biggest controversy of the series: the decision to portray sacred temple ordinances. The temple scene takes place from timestamp 14:00 to 17:00. Only three minutes long, yet

An Ode to the Old Testament

The word “old” isn’t exactly the most exciting word in the English language. And it’s easy to miss out on the beauties of ancient prophetic witness if we allow that word to encapsulate our feelings about the Old Testament.

Subscribe To Our Weekly Newsletter

Stay up to date on the intersection of faith in the public square.

You have Successfully Subscribed!

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This