In response to 'On Subjectivity' I received this comment:

First - can we objectively prove God's existence? To say yes, would mean that God is scientifically measurable as an apple is. So, in that sense, certainly not. But, there are arguments for God's existence that are rational and objective in a philosophical sense. Not, that we prove God's existence beyond a shadow of a doubt or that we prove it in the way science proves the existence of the apple, but rather we can show that a belief in God's existence is rational and true. To scientifically prove God would make God into less than God.

Second - is our concept of God subjective? In a certain sense it is and in a certain sense it is not. Each of us experiences life as an individual subject. But, this subjectivism does not mean that there can therefore be no objective knowledge. If this is the case, then there is no universal truth. Yet, for Christians, we believe that God objectively reveals Himself to us through His Son Jesus Christ - who is The Truth.

Truth is independent of our conceptualization of it or our experience/knowledge of it. Truth is.

It seems your friend has been reading quite a bit of Kant or Hume. The problem with there agnosticism is that they deny truth or our ability to know it. But, for a Christian, we would argue for the simple law of non-contradiction. Not all religions can be true if they contradict one another. How can Christianity / Islam / Judaism all be the same when we have exclusive claims about the nature of God. Jesus is or isn't divine. The truth about Him cannot be both. In examining the evidence surrounding Christ, I believe Him to be the Truth itself - a divine truth revaled to us objectively.

-----------------------------------------------------------

So, I will respond in kind. Only without any tact whatsoever. So, not really in kind at all.

First - There are arguments for God's non-existence which are rational and objective, too. I think you are dead wrong about objective confirmation of God's real existence lessening God. That's simply not possible, first of all. If God really exists, then he exists as the same thing whether his existence is shown or not. Second, relativity theory is not less for being objectively confirmed through experiment and observation. Is God less reliable than Science? Of course you can show that people actually believe in God (which, I assume, is what you mean by true belief). But that's not interesting or meaningful. You cannot show that the belief is true. Nor can you show that faith is rational. If I am wrong, please correct me, because I would rather not go on perpetuating a lie. Perhaps I am mistaken on what Faith and Rationality are. Perhaps, you can teach me?

Second - Oh No!!! No universal truth!? I wouldn't EVER want that, would I!? Either you expect me to think that there is such a thing as universal truth or you expect that I want universal truth to be the case. In both cases, you are wrong. I do not. So, the threat that if what I say is true, then universal truth is a myth is empty. What is truth? What does it mean for a statement to be true. If you know, I'd like to learn, because it's something I have struggled with lately.

How do you decide if proposition P is true? P = "The sky is blue." Is P true? How do you know P is true? What does it mean to know Q = "P is true."? Do you know Q? Any ideas?

You mean the problem with agnosticism is that agnostics believe that we cannot know? Wow, and all along I thought the problem with atheists and theists was that they believe that we can know (and each knows the truth, of course). What makes you think you know or that you can know? What makes an agnostic think that we cannot?

You really want to argue for non-contradiction!? The bible contains more than a few contradictions. (Go wild, here's a list I found).

Have you REALLY examined the evidence regarding Jesus? I mean, honestly? Because I have, too. And we have come to quite opposing positions on the matter. I may be wrong. Might you be wrong? If you've done the research, can you point me to the sources I missed? What evidence did I fail to consider?

You believe Jesus was The Truth objectively revealed to us? O RLY? Just tell me how this truth is objectively revealed to us, today. Let me guess, subjective experience.

I wish I had been reading Hume or Kant lately… sadly, I have not been. I make it up as I go along, a sort of divine inspiration, if you will. But, I have read them, so of course you’ll find traces of both in my thinking, especially Hume. Like most people, I can’t think on Kant’s level.