Many words have several, even distinct meanings, it's all in the context of how they are used, Now for the sake of arguement, define TRUTH

@misright,

misright:

Now for the sake of arguement, define TRUTH

I hope you're not ordering people around like we live in a military cantonment!

Would it not help if you took the first step as the topic starter to give your own defence and then let others follow? I notice you've been raising topics and never seeking to actually discuss issues. Here's an appeal: please give us your own understanding of "truth" so others know what you're seeking!

Now, am going you a defination you may not be acquainted with.
Truth is the word of God, contrary to expectation, it's not always a statement of fact.
What do you think?

misright:

Many words have several, even distinct meanings, it's all in the context of how they are used, Now for the sake of arguement, define TRUTH

I would say Truth (capital "T" is that which remains unaffected by subjectivity and can be tested repeatedly, giving the same outcome, by anyone.

Truth is the spoken word of that which brings all things into birth. If truth can be defined by factuality, then nothing is more real than the reality that there is in existence one who has never been known to have spoken that which did not be.

Thus, when the physical manifestation of that word spoke himself to be the way, truth and life, a truism was in effect being realised in all the entire history of mankind.

In consequence, the lie becomes the deceiver and slanderer and all that negates the truth as expressed by Jehovah through his spoken word Jesus Christ

Jaguar1:

Now, am going you a defination you may not be acquainted with.
Truth is the word of God,

What is the word of God? Which God? How can it be determined that the word of that God or set of Gods is Truth (capital T)? Is it subjective?

contrary to expectation, it's not always a statement of fact.
What do you think?

I agree with this part.

ajadrage:

Truth is the spoken word of that which brings all things into birth. If truth can be defined by factuality, then nothing is more real than the reality that there is in existence one who has never been known to have spoken that which did not be. Thus, when the physical manifestation of that word spoke himself to be the way, truth and life, a truism was in effect being realised in all the entire history of mankind.

In consequence, the lie becomes the deceiver and slanderer and all that negates the truth as expressed by Jehovah through his spoken word Jesus Christ

[quote][/quote]

How so? For something to be defined as a reality there has to be unambiguous ways to show the validity of its existence. There has been no unambiguous and unsubjective presentation of any "speakers" who have brought existence to be, so for now that definition of Truth cannot be applied. Basically, not only are the claims you've made just empty rhetoric, it's widely accepted and peddled by Christian apologists that the existence of Jehovah relies on faith. Truth shouldn't depend on faith.

KAG:

I would say Truth (capital "T" is that which remains unaffected by subjectivity and can be tested repeatedly, giving the same outcome, by anyone.

Kag,

Your definition of Truth, is the Christian definition of Truth.

We believe: God is truth.
We believe: God can not be affected by anyone's subjectivity, even His followers.
We believe: God can be tested on this repeatedly, giving the same outcome, by anyone.

Anybody can test God for themselves. As the bible says: Taste and see that the Lord is good.

KAG:

How can it be determined that the word of that God or set of Gods is Truth (capital T)? Is it subjective?

Obviously, if it is subjective, it can't be absolute. No, it is not subjective. I'd come to your first question later.

How so? For something to be defined as a reality there has to be unambiguous ways to show the validity of its existence

the REALITY i assume he is referring to does not claim to be a physcial reality, so looking for physical means of verifying His existence, except for an understanding of the things that are created as being a product of that entity, is pointless. you can't look for a creator within the creation - at least in this case, you can't look for God within the physical, because he is above the physical. the only evidence in the physical is indirect; evidence of his handiwork and his qualities, rather than of He himself.
For those who understand the dimension in which his REALITY is manifest, they indeed make use of unambigous ways of verifying things in that reality and it works.

There has been no unambiguous and unsubjective presentation of any "speakers" who have brought existence to be, so for now that definition of Truth cannot be applied

says who? perhaps i don't understand

the existence of Jehovah relies on faith.

i'm assuming you're missing something here because that statement doesn't make sense. His existence does not rely on faith; his relationship and his dealings with his people relies on faith. those are two different things. if no one chooses to believe in Him, He will still exist, independent of and regardless of the absence of faith.

Truth shouldn't depend on faith.

Again, Truth, in itself, does not depend on faith. the working of truth in the life of a person however depends on faith. this is obvious for the very same reason you stated in your first line;
"How can it be determined that the word of that God or set of Gods is Truth (capital T)?"
that is not a new question and even servants of God have asked (and perhaps do ask) that question. For example ""How can I be sure of this?" (Luke 1;18) (WEB) or as put by weymouth "By what proof," asked Zechariah, "shall I know this?" This is obviously the same questions you guys ask. This is where the proper biblical definition of faith comes in Heb. 11;1 "being sure of what we hope for, and certain of what we do not see".  For one to accept a certain word, eg the one spoken by the angel to zechariah, as truth, there has to be faith. Faith is being sure of something even when all other occurences seem to point to the other way. Faith has its pressuppositions; that God exists and that He rewards the seeker heb. 11;6. thus for one who ab initio rejects God, there is no point in faith.
the physical reality exists many times contrary to God's will and purposes. to have God's reality (will) prevail over the natural course of events in a man's life, there has to be faith - in other words, a way of aligning one's reality with that of God.
The question then should be since faith is 'being sure', how are we sure? why do we have faith? the answer is obvious in the presuppositions.
First, God's existence. If he is God and he made all things, then with Him there should be no impossibility. as He cannot be subject to the laws of his own creation. the natural mind works based on what obtains, what goes, what has been observed. that is why Zechariah did not believe; becuase what obtained was; 'old women don't give birth'; thus his statement "For I am an old man, and my wife is far advanced in years." that is a fact; but it is not TRUTH. because truth can override facts, because truth is of GOd, with whom there is no impossibility. the issue then is; will you side with the seeming facts ('seeming' because it no longer remains a fact when it is broken) or with the potential for unimaginable possiblities (as exemplified in God's omnipotence)

the second reason why it is expedient to have faith is because God is faithful ie He is faith-worthy. the one who has exhibited faith at a prior time and has observed a seeming impossibilty come to pass finds it easier to believe again; for there is a foundation for faith and thus his faith grows. For the first-time believer it is much harder. the experienced believer however finds it easy, because he has known his God to be faith[i]ful[/i]. The tilting point however is that young believer who, like a little child, does easily commit himself to his Father in child-like trust and is thus able to exhibit great, child-like faith.

the third reason which i wont go into much, is that spiritual realities (the realm to which belongs the word of God) are not about probabilties, which is the way our mind works, but about certainties.  Biblical christians beleive that a man has three dimensions. the spirit is the seat of true knowledge. In this faculty, when you KNOW something, ie when a certain truth is revealed to you, you are sure of it. the very nature of spiritual knowledge and spiritual truth is certainty and infallibility. that is why a believer who is 'saved' cannot be easily influenced by any amount of contrary arguments and reasoning, even when or if he is not competent intellectually to argue and defend his faith, because he KNOWS who he has believed in. This does not mean he cannot stray though; for he still has the power to choose to reject God. For the one who has not experienced the same thing, however, he would keep asking 'how can you be sure'. And even then, the one who has had the experience perhaps might not know how to explain it; he just KNOWs it and he is certain of it. However, even though his spirit is sure of it, he lives in the physical realm, wherein pertains the body. and because he does not live in the spirit realm but in the physical where everything appears contrary, then faith is employed as the protector, or defender of what he is SURE or CERTAIN of in his spirit; that is why the bible talks about the SHEILD of faith in Eph. 6;16 because he is constantly assaulted as regards this certainty but his faith, as a shield, guards the truth he has within him. this is the trial of faith 1Pet.1;7,  1Pet4;12, 1Tim.1;12.

My arguments were about why faith has to be the mode for the relationship between a deity (who is spirit) and a man. There are reasons why we can be sure of one particular account as being the TRUTH. I refer to the truth of Jesus Christ. i didn't bother to go into that because our presuppositions or terms of reference would have to agree before that can be argued upon.
cheers.