Truth- Absolute or Relative?

@dj2becker said
You don’t have to make a claim for it to be true. If it is true it’s true regardless of the claims you happen to make and whether you think it’s subjective or not.

The key word in your post is "if"

@dj2becker said
You don’t have to make a claim for it to be true. If it is true it’s true regardless of the claims you happen to make and whether you think it’s subjective or not.

Your current personal opinions about unknowable and unprovable supernatural things are not "objective" and will not be rendered "objective"...

[1] by how certain you are that you are right or how certain you are that you will be proved right when [or I] you die;

[2] by events after you die... even if, from heaven, you declare "I was right all along", it won't mean that your opinions while alive were anything other than subjective;

[3] by you adding adjectives to big-up your take on what you feel the truth is by labelling your opinions as "absolute", universal", "immutable", "self-evident" etc. etc.

@dj2becker said
And if it turns out to be true it would have been objectively true all along.

With supernatural matters and divine law and the like, you are unable to say anything "objectively true". Same goes for me.

@dj2becker said
You don’t have to make a claim for it to be true. If it is true it’s true regardless of the claims you happen to make and whether you think it’s subjective or not.

Whether something is "subjectively true" or "objectively true" is about human perceptions of reality and what can and cannot be proven and demonstrated to other people. We can agree that certain claims about gravity and 'the temperature outside now' are "objectively true" because they are knowable and provable things.

But anything you claim about everlasting life or that sonship claims about eternal torture or that Dasa claims about reincarnation ~ or that I claim about any of those things ~ can only be "subjectively true".

@divegeester said
No it isn't.

Your childlike example of the earth being a sphere but "objectively" appearing flat to persons 1000s of years ago demonstrates this.

It’s not surprising then that you side with the atheists most of the times since you seemingly believe truth is not absolute.

@fmf said
With supernatural matters and divine law and the like, you are unable to say anything "objectively true". Same goes for me.

If what you’re saying is true then none of us can be right about the existence of God. But that’s not logically possible since God either exists or He doesn’t. You are being illogical.

@dj2becker said
If what you’re saying is true then none of us can be right about the existence of God. But that’s not logically possible since God either exists or He doesn’t. You are being illogical.

It doesn't matter to me whether or not you believe God exists. All you are able to tell me about your God figure is a set of "subjective" opinions that together comprise your "faith" on which you base your conjecture regarding the supernatural realm.

@dj2becker said
If what you’re saying is true then none of us can be right about the existence of God.

Nonsense. Please read my posts. I am saying that your opinion about the existence of a god or gods cannot be "objective" for the reasons I have given.

What you think may or may not be proved after you and I are dead does nor affect the sujectivity of what you claim while you are alive.

@dj2becker said
the question ‘does God exist’ there has to be a universally correct answer even if you want to label someone’s opinion on the matter as subjective.

Neither of knows for sure if the God figure you describe exists, so all we can do is share our opinions and speculations and perspectives. Neither of us knows what the "universally correct answer" is. That's why the answers or perspectives we believe in are "objective".

@dj2becker said
You can talk about how my conjecture and belief in supernatural things are "relative " till the cows come home, it doesn't make a difference to the fact that they are either true or false. One day we will all know the truth.

But you don't now, and neither do I. That's the point.That's why all we have to offer each other on this matter are our opinions.

@dj2becker said
It’s not surprising then that you side with the atheists most of the times since you seemingly believe truth is not absolute.

To divegeester: It’s not surprising then that you side with the atheists most of the times since you seemingly believe truth is not absolute.

diveegester does not need to add adjectives like "absolute" or "universal" or "objective" to what he believes is the truth in order to bolster the certainty he feels about his faith or what he sees as the reality of Jesus in his life.

divegeester's faith and dj2becker's faith seem to be different.

@dj2becker said
It’s not surprising then that you side with the atheists most of the times since you seemingly believe truth is not absolute.

When you think everything that is really true is only true because you say so, you tend to find some reason, any reason to attack the absolute. The lie at the beginning is still spread today.

@fmf said
Neither of knows for sure if the God figure you describe exists, so all we can do is share our opinions and speculations and perspectives. Neither of us knows what the "universally correct answer" is. That's why the answers or perspectives we believe in are "objective".

And you know all this with absolute certainty? Who could have guessed.

@kellyjay said
When you think everything that is really true is only true because you say so, you tend to find some reason, any reason to attack the absolute. The lie at the beginning is still spread today.

Your repeated assertion that the "truth" you believe in is "absolute" and that personal opinions about that "truth" that are different from what, in your personal opinion, is "absolute" are a "lie" - and your belief that disagreement with you is an "attack" on your personal opinion - is industrial grade subjectivity mixed with industrial grade narcissism.