Christians,
Here are two sets of statements:
A statements:
B statements:
4. God created the universe.
5. Jesus died for our sins.
6. We were all born with original sin.
I’m wondering whether you differentiate between the type of “truth” represented by the A statements, vs. the B statements. Do all 6 statements represent immutable facts of reality, or does subjective opinion enter into any of this?
There is an important difference between fact and truth, I beleive.
Consider the folk tale about the boy who cried wolf - it contains truths (chiefly: don’t wear out the trust of others), but it isn’t factual at all.
“2+2=4” is factual, but doesn’t contain any moral or metaphysical truth whatever.
“the Earth revolves around the sun” is neither factual nor true (they orbit the solar system’s centre of mass, which happens to be close to the sun) 
Would you say, then, Mangetout, that truth are facts inside a theory? Would that be the key to understanding the relationship between the two?
As Dr. Jones once said: “Archeology is the search for fact, not truth. If it’s truth you want, the Philosophy class is right down the hall.”
I would say that your A statements are facts, while you B statements are truths.
I don’t know (and I don’t claim that my personal defintions of ‘truth’ and ‘fact’ are universal.
Truth is an idea; fact is a phenomenon. (IMO).
No, Mangetout, I would agree with you if my summary is accurate. I think it is often important to realize that facts are “just” that without a larger structure to appeal to, be it a small corner of a scientific theory, a set of mathematical axioms, or a larger worldview.
Still…don’t truths have to be true to be truths? What if the B list isn’t true? (Original Sin is not a universal Christian doctrine, btw)
I’d hazard to think that truths pertain to the individual while facts are universal.
For example, one can speak about truths, and then debate about universal truth, absolute truth etc. But facts are facts in that they are absolute, unchanged, and most importantly, of the same meaning to everyone.
Lemme give an example:
2 boys are arguing. A says to B, i’m hungrier than you. B says exactly the same thing back to A. Both statements can be truths.
Now, if A says “Hah! I have more hydrocholoric acid in my stomach than you do, B.” (Or the other way around) That would be a fact.
Truth depends on the individual but facts do not. ie. when one boy thinks that he is hungrier than the other, he then naturally is, because he thought so. To give an analogy, truth is to fact as idea is to concept. OK. Now i just hope i didn’t make you more confused than ever.
You want the truth? You can’t handle the truth. 
That is a complete corruption and degradation of the concept of truth.
At most, only one of the boys’ two statements can be true.
Really? Is that true?
I disagree. Both of the boys’ statements can be true.
Say each feels that he is hungrier than the other. That’s what matters. To each them, that they are hungrier than the other is true, because only their perspectives are limited.
In this case, only they can know how hungry they are and hence, realise the truth of what they are saying. In this case, the truth is not falsifiable. The fact (amt of HCl) is, though.
That is why truth may be relative, and absolute truth is debatable.
(I apologise to the OP if this constitutes a hijack)
But the boys did not say, “I feel hungrier than I imagine that you feel.” They made sstatements of fact.
Rather, their statements resemble those to which the English language assigns values of “true” or “false”, robertliguori. It is not necessary for us to perceive the color green in the same way, only that when we encounter something we agree on its description (to wit: “green”).
This thread hits very close to home. As a Christian, I have had to deal with the difference between fact and truth all of my life.
In my opinion, a fact is something that can be proven to be true, whereas a truth is something that is believed to be true until proven false.
For example, I believe the the only way to the Father is through belief in Christ. This is a truth to me, but I can never prove it. It will never be a fact (at least while I’m alive).
On the other hand, I had always been raised to believe that the Bible is perfect and contains no errors – a truth. The fact is, however, that the Bible is filled with errors and contradictions.
What was once a truth is no longer a truth, due to the facts.
So, fact always equals truth, but truth does not always equal fact.
Simple, eh?
But they weren’t making claims about what they felt, or what they thought the other felt. If they’d made the statements as robertliguori suggested, they’d be both completely justified (assuming they weren’t actually lying), and both could be correct.
When they instead speak of how hungry they are, and each claims to be hungrier than the other, they cannot both be correct.
Incredible. You’ve gotten the definitions completely wrong!
A fact isn’t necessarily true or false: it’s a statement that must be either true or false. A false statement can still be a fact, technically speaking.
A true statement is one that accurately reflects the state or condition of the world. All true statements are facts, while not all facts are true statements.
Many of you are using the word “truth” in place of “opinion” or “conviction”. Get it right.
Trivial if we assume a land of perfect information. I do not live in that world, and I feel it is pretty factual that you do not, either.
Everyday English frequently takes liberties with the formal definitions of words. That doesn’t mean that we should treat idiomatic usage as valid when we’re using logic.
It’s not at all trivial. If two individuals are arguing about who is taller, and they both claim to be taller than the other, one is wrong. It’s just that simple.
Prove one wrong about being more hungry than the other.
Possibility #1: Person A is hungrier than Person B.
Possiiblity #2: Person B is hungrier than Person A.
Possibility #3: Person A is just as hungry as Person B.
If Person A and Person B each claim to be hungrier than the other, then one is necessarily incorrect. The given information is not sufficient to determine which one is incorrect (duh).