This civilization is sustained by those said to be in authority. For instance, to earn approval in a field of study, a student is expected to quote a renowned authority in that field. Some geniuses, like Steve Jobs, have achieved novel things without necessarily following the pattern of quoting an authority. The rise of Artificial Intelligence seems to be rapidly shattering the validation of authority-based traditions in our society.
Who can be trusted in the field of knowledge, where AI technology seems more efficient, even though human authorities have been trusted for ages? Even if one follows the traditional methods of study, God grants each individual the ability to evaluate. A normal person can choose what he considers correct, based on the survival information at hand. There is nothing wrong with evaluating one piece of information against another.
Credit is often given to new innovators, but Jesus was the first to invalidate authority-based traditions (Matthew 23:8–12). The courage to stand by what one believes to be true is virtuous; it describes integrity. Ordinary humans take comfort in endorsing what the majority believes without checking for themselves, since most of it is adopted without questioning its veracity. This portrays the deficiency Jesus highlighted in His renowned Sermon on the Mount.
“Enter through the narrow gate. For wide is the gate and broad is the road that leads to destruction, and many enter through it. But small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life, and only a few find it. Watch out for false prophets. They come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ferocious wolves” (Matthew 7:13–15 NIV).
This Scripture does not necessarily suggest that the majority opinion should always be discarded without evaluation. What is true should be adopted based on a proper evaluation of information. The conclusion that something is safe should rest on facts, not on majority consideration. Most people adopt information because of its popularity. Jesus advises evaluation before adoption, regardless of whether the majority agrees or not. The majority often enforces the invalidation of individual opinions, regardless of the facts presented.
Truth is reached after evaluating data of comparable magnitude—necessary before settling on correct information. An educated person chooses the truth after checking it against alternative data. Even belief in God should be compared with its opposite, who, in this case, is Satan. A truthful person is willing to examine opposing information and listen to critical information coming from the opposition.
An untruthful person is defensive, treating opponents as enemies, whereas a truthful person prefers listening to critics more than to supporters. Such a person holds reasons for taking a stand, as opposed to dogma. When settling on the truth, one must have adequately evaluated the supplied information to be convinced. Understanding requires scientific evaluation, rather than blindly accepting another person’s viewpoint. It is about what one has individually checked against the data of comparable magnitude before becoming convinced of its workability.
There ought to be reasons for settling on what is considered true. Politicians are mostly untruthful. They would rather compromise their integrity, as long as it is expedient, for political survival. Governor Pilate was convinced that Jesus had no case to answer, but he submitted to the vociferous Jewish crowd. He had the power to release or convict Jesus based on the accurate information put before him. The easiest way to manufacture falsehood is to mix truth and lies.
Jesus had declared that He was born to be King, but without openly rebelling against the established authority. Governor Pilate attempted to release Jesus based on his own truthful analysis. However, the vociferous crowd had something to cling to. Jesus had declared that He was born to be King, but not of this world. For the first time, the Jews threw their weight behind Caesar, only for the purpose of convicting Jesus. They suggested that Governor Pilate would have shown himself not to be Caesar’s friend if he refused to prosecute Jesus.
Jesus’ statement had nothing to do with ruling authorities, but with God’s Kingdom, which is not of this world. However, His detractors twisted the statement to mean that Jesus sought to topple the standing Roman government. Such fabricated information persuaded Governor Pilate to yield to the wishes of the Jewish community. Pilate’s decision to hand Jesus over for crucifixion was not based on principle, but on what the environment expected of him. Even among the Jews, there may have been those who did not agree with crucifying Jesus.
Probably the majority did not agree but were persuaded by the common view of those in leadership. There will always be room for rational thinking when humans are approached individually. However, the reasoning capacity seems to weaken when the viewpoint of the majority is taken into consideration. Information is commonly accepted when it is driven by one or two influential individuals with political influence.
This is what makes democracy questionable, especially among the less developed countries. Loudmouths are often considered ahead of reasonable opinion. The most brilliant idea could be rejected because of the poor profile of the person who proposes it. This world has only a few objective thinkers, whose ideas may be lost because of insufficient platforms. This necessitates extensive advertising, which also invites debate as to whether it is really necessary. From the marketer’s viewpoint, advertising could be necessary.
The general public is often clouded with too much information, making it difficult to select what would be workable, which then necessitates extensive advertising. However, from an objective consumer’s viewpoint, advertising may be unnecessary. An informed consumer takes responsibility to verify information before settling on a product. An informed buyer does not need to be sold to. He may buy the advertised product or find a better, unadvertised product.
Independent investigation to find the right commodity is always advisable. Most people prefer adopting what others have adopted, through trendsetters who may also not always be adequately informed about the commodity in question. The preferred product is often considered according to trendsetters or salesmanship. However, individual evaluation gives the latitude to evaluate based on facts, using data of comparable magnitude.
Choices should be based on reason, rather than personalities, or the whims of the majority. Human beings prefer following recommendations commonly based on personality profiles, or how fashionable the product would be. Casual analysis suggests that choosing according to preferred personalities would be healthy. However, truth cannot be found in personalities, which are susceptible to change; it is based on an unchangeable divine quality.
Anything truthful remains, as opposed to the approval or no approval by authoritative personalities, who may be here today but gone tomorrow. The tendency is to defend individual authoritative personalities, who may also trust those following them. However, following what is right is different from following personalities. The apostle Paul attempted to educate the Corinthian Christians on this fundamental principle.
“I appeal to you, brothers and sisters, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that all of you agree with one another in what you say and that there be no divisions among you, but that you be perfectly united in mind and thought. Some of my brothers and sisters from Chloe’s household have informed me that there are quarrels among you. What I mean is this: One of you says, ‘I follow Paul’; another, ‘I follow Apollos’; another, ‘I follow Cephas’; still another, ‘I follow Christ.’
“Is Christ divided? Was Paul crucified for you? Were you baptized in the name of Paul? I thank God that I did not baptize any of you except Crispus and Gaius, so no one can say that you were baptized in my name. (Yes, I also baptized the household of Stephanas; beyond that, I don’t remember if I baptized anyone else.) For Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel—not with wisdom and eloquence, lest the cross of Christ be emptied of its power” (1 Corinthians 1:10–17 NIV).
The apostle Paul intended to enlighten those Corinthian believers on the dangers of being stuck on personalities. Of importance was that the reason for favouring a personality did not matter, except whether the content presented agreed with Jesus or not. The ability to evaluate information, rather than personalities, distinguished a person’s maturity. A Christian believer cannot be stuck on personalities in their Christian endeavours.
The common tendency is to invalidate the minority by giving credence to the majority or to prominent personalities. Although there is no record of Jesus ever suggesting that some believers should exercise oversight over others, the hardest thing is to convince Christians that no such arrangement exists in Christianity. If Jesus, as the Way, the Truth, and the Life, was not supervised by anyone, His followers should do likewise, individually evaluating the information presented to them, regardless of its source.
The story of the Israelites is captured with reasons for their remaining outside the Promised Land for forty years. Their stable datum had been the Ten Commandments, and the pivotal commandment was that they ought to have had no other gods before their Lord. This means avoiding trusting anything said by anyone, regardless of how popular the opinion might be, against the word of God. However, they easily became intimidated by the Canaanite giants, thereby invalidating God’s commandment to have no other gods before Him.
The story is vividly captured in Numbers 14. The entire community concluded that God had sold them a dummy, persuaded by ten spies out of twelve, thereby concluding that the Promised Land had more obstacles than facilities. This was based on the report presented by the majority of the twelve spies sent to Canaan. Only two out of the twelve, Caleb and Joshua, gave a positive report, as they reported that the land had been as good as God had promised.
The other ten spies agreed that the land was good, but they reversed that with the consideration of the giants stalking the Promised Land, who appeared indomitable. The opinion of the majority was more convincing than that of the minority. However, the stable datum of the Israelites had been the Ten Commandments, rather than the opinion of the majority. God had miraculously led them out of Egypt toward the Promised Land. They had miraculously crossed the Red Sea, showing that God was undoubtedly greater than any other god.
However, their reasoning capacity deteriorated after considering the intimidating giants seen in Canaan. The report had come from the ten spies, who were considered intelligent. As is common with humanity, the rest of the Israelites assumed wisdom in listening to the opinion of the majority. They forgot about the Ten Commandments, their stable datum. The common reasoning was that Caleb and Joshua were an inconvenience because they opposed what the majority supported.
The first of the Ten Commandments insisted that they should have no other gods before their Lord. But they ignored the idea of applying the significance of those commandments. This suggests that it may even have been unnecessary to send spies to Canaan when truly believing God like Abraham. They resolved to stone the two leaders with opposing views instead. Before shedding innocent blood, God intervened and punished them. The entirety of those involved in the rebellion would not enter Canaan because of their failure to trust God, whose power had been manifested in their deliverance from Egypt and the miracle of crossing the Red Sea.
God would not allow those with double standards to experience the beauty of the Promised Land. They pretended to believe in God, when the opposite was true. That story portrays the common behaviour of humanity on matters of choosing between right and wrong. The stable datum is God. What does God say about the chosen path? When considering the views of the majority, democracy is assumed to be noble. But for a believer, the most important question ought to be: What does God say about it? Any reasoning driven by fear is ungodly.
“This is how love is made complete among us so that we will have confidence on the Day of Judgment: In this world, we are like Jesus. There is no fear in love. But perfect love drives out fear, because fear has to do with punishment. The one who fears is not made perfect in love” (1 John 4:17–18 NIV).
When settling on truthful information, one considers God’s will, which seeks to benefit the greatest number of humanity. This is how Jesus decided to die as an individual, rather than all of us dying because of our sinfulness. The principle is doing unto others as one desires the same. Anything that seeks to benefit oneself at the expense of the majority is obviously misguided. That reasoning comes from a corrupt mind, which, to most people, may appear innocent. Some people may benefit from corruption, assuming God loves them more than the rest of others.
Regardless of how admired or pompous a person might be, corruption is evil. What is true to one comes from a candid evaluation of one’s conduct. The right thing should always be to consider one’s conduct, whether based on a corrupt viewpoint or not. All human beings are basically good, as created in God’s image. Even the most corrupt character would know, at the bottom of his heart, that their conduct would not be right.
They can judge others and yet fail to judge their own conduct. One’s failure to judge one’s conduct is the inability to confront one’s identity. This comes from not knowing one’s origin, thereby doing what their Father would not be persuaded to do. In other words, the most difficult thing for most people is to know themselves. The spiritual ignorance of oneself is the only gigantic obstacle to the survival of humanity.
The knowledge of oneself enables a person to overcome any obstacle along the way. This is what Jesus meant by stating that if one has faith as little as a mustard seed, nothing would be impossible. Everything else that may appear troublesome to an individual becomes nothing to worry about. Who are you? Where are you from? And why were you born? These are the fundamental questions for anyone to begin to know oneself.
The answers to these questions can be obtained from the individual, without necessarily considering the opinions of others. If Jesus is the way, the life, and the truth, it becomes necessary to copy Jesus’ behaviour. Jesus never sought other people’s opinions to be convinced about His identity, that He was the Son of God.
He knew the purpose for which He existed because He was in communion with His Father. The same applies to any person, as long as one appreciates one’s identity and the reason for one’s existence. This type of confronting, for purposes of knowing one’s identity, listening to that small voice directly from one’s Creator, is vital. From that point, one can discover one’s true identity and why one exists in this world.
Andrew Masuku is the author of Dimensions of a New Civilisation, which lays out standards for lifting Zimbabwe out of its current economic depression and into a model for other nations worldwide. A decaying tree provides an opportunity for a blossoming sprout. Written from a Christian perspective, the book is a product of inspiration, offering relief to those who have witnessed the strings of unworkable solutions leading to the current economic and social decay. Most Zimbabweans should find the book to be a long-awaited providential oasis of hope, in a simple conversational tone.
The Print copy is now available at Amazon.com for $13.99
Also available as an e-copy at Lulu.com for $6.99