# Absolute Truth and God **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [March 29, 2015, 1:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/absolute-truth-and-god/716250 "2015-03-29T01:11:04Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 6\ **Page:** 5
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [April 2, 2015, 4:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/absolute-truth-and-god/716250/81 "2015-04-02T16:08:04Z")
> [@kanicbird](#): > > Again without some transcendence of this world, either to God or to inner self, which is God, there is no knowing truth. From where did you acquire this knowledge? ---
**Author:** ![Boyo\_Jim](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/87869e/32.png) [@Boyo\_Jim](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Boyo_Jim)\ **Post date:** [April 2, 2015, 4:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/absolute-truth-and-god/716250/82 "2015-04-02T16:52:48Z")
If there is a God, he apparently overuses the term “yadayadayada” to explain himself. ---
**Author:** ![Apollon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/e47774/32.png) [@Apollon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Apollon)\ **Post date:** [April 6, 2015, 6:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/absolute-truth-and-god/716250/83 "2015-04-06T18:42:40Z")
You will never get through to kanicbird, because he operates on the assumption that the unknowable is known to him. He knows that god exists (how?), he knows that the definition of “truth” is dependent on the existence of god (why?), and he knows what that definition is (what?). He has failed to provide any explanation for these assertions, but that doesn’t seem to be a problem for him. It’s pointless to argue with someone who goes around saying “you’re wrong because of reasons only I understand, and I’m not going to explain them”. ---
**Author:** ![panache45](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/panache45/32/64_2.png) [@panache45](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/panache45)\ **Post date:** [April 7, 2015, 2:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/absolute-truth-and-god/716250/84 "2015-04-07T02:43:29Z")
> [@The\_Hamster\_King](#): > > “Truth” is a useless concept. > > All of our knowledge of the world is functional. We know (to a limited degree) what the world DOES. We do not know what it IS. And, in fact, knowing what the world IS is impossible. That’s not how knowledge works. > > A lot of silly theological wrangling is merely the product of faulty epistemological assumptions. I don’t think that’s true. ---
**Author:** ![Contemporary\_Logic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/b38774/32.png) [@Contemporary\_Logic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Contemporary_Logic)\ **Post date:** [April 7, 2015, 3:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/absolute-truth-and-god/716250/85 "2015-04-07T03:04:32Z")
This discussion seems to have taken all kinds of odd branches (philosophy- am I right?), so I’m going to attempt answer the OP questions directly, but from my own beliefs. > [@Budget\_Player\_Cadet](#): > > So in a facebook conversation the other day about truth, science, and the like, I had this exchange: > > (Yes, it’s _that_ kind of discussion.) > > But this is actually getting under my skin. I’m curious of two things, mainly: > > 1. Is the existence of absolute truth a widely accepted philosophical position? Right out of the gate people were led astray by this term: “absolute”. “Absolute” can have these three separate meanings: 1. not qualified or diminished in any way; total. 2. viewed or existing independently and not in relation to other things; not relative or comparative. 3. a value or principle that is regarded as universally valid or that may be viewed without relation to other things. [https://www.google.com/search?q=absolute+definition&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&channel=fs&trackid=sp-006&gws\_rd=ssl#q=absolute+definition](https://www.google.com/search?q=absolute+definition&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&channel=fs&trackid=sp-006&gws_rd=ssl#q=absolute+definition) If 1 then: All philosophical truths are absolute truths relative to their subjective frames of reference (axioms). This is similar to absolute truths in mathematics, since all mathematics are based on starting subjective axioms. If 2 then: No philosophical truths are absolute truths since all philosophy stems from subjective axioms conceived by the mind. They are, therefore, dependent on the subjective axioms and cannot be independent from all other things. if 3 then: No philosophical truths are absolute truths because no philosophy’s subjective axioms are held universally either by all minds or all places. > [@](#): > > 1. Is the claim that absolute truth can only be defined by a god tenable? Or even coherent? > > My response was something along the lines of “Why call that ‘god’ if your sole defining characteristic is ‘defines absolute truth’?” But I’m not sure if I’m satisfied with that. I may not understand the question, but a dictionary seems to go a lot further towards defining absolute truth than a god does. ---
**Author:** ![Clothahump](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/51bf81/32.png) [@Clothahump](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Clothahump)\ **Post date:** [April 7, 2015, 3:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/absolute-truth-and-god/716250/86 "2015-04-07T03:30:55Z")
> [@Slow\_Moving\_Vehicle](#): > > It’s a circular argument. What proves the existence of God? The existence of absolute truth. What defines absolute truth? God. Your friend is begging the question. > > Or you could just ask him or her the question that lead me, and so many other skeptics, into nonbelief: “Do you have any evidence?” This. Until someone can show conclusive proof of the existence of a god, any discussion involving a god becomes moot. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/absolute-truth-and-god/716250.md?page=4)