An example of such « universal » truth you found with that method ?

Don’t feed the troll. We had reached a nirvana where he was the only one responding to his posts.

Well no doubt you are the mvp of this thread but let’s see if he can provide any “evidences” to support his claims of “real truth”.

Getting the best of me on this forum doesn’t stop the serpent from continuing to bite your heels.

He's not trolling.

He is not answering either as always when ask anything tangible ….
Pretty close to trolling ain’t it ?

Trolling is more like demanding an answer to a question which the person has already addressed in that very same thread.

Understand what Jesus is teaching you to do about these seeds of remembering. The hidden treasure is associated with these seeds. The field is your inner world. To sell all you have is to detach from the counterfeit meaning associated with your external world.

After you’ve done this, then you become inwardly focused on caring for these seeds so that they grow and bear fruit.

Again, something that means nothing and can’t be proven .
Just an unfounded idea that you like .
There is absolutely no universal proofs of what u just said , at all .

But it’s ok .
It’s the game u play .

But you're the one asking for « universal » truth. Craig didn't suggest universality, nor did he make any claims that conflict with physical reality as we understand it. You guys are on different planes. He's talking about the inner life; the soul; one's heart of hearts. If you're asking for demonstrable evidence of God or for him to justify his faith in an objective and purely rational way, you're asking the wrong questions.

Earlier in this thread, you responded how convenient it was when I suggested that there may be serval paths leading to the Divine, but it's a position I've held for quite some time. Think of a moral belief that you have. At a certain point, you're going to hit a wall where the justification for that belief relies on your own subjectivity, and you won't be able to justify it with rationalism. The logical starting point then—is subjectivity.

What do you value most? Do you ever consciously contemplate what you want to value most?

A long time ago, when I did this, I determined that I wanted to value meaning most because I wanted more meaning in my life.

Once I committed to this and consciously held the desire for more meaning, then rational truth was no longer sufficient. Without this overlapping experience, then none of what I talk about on this subforum will land with you. I view this desire for more meaning as universal in adults, but it gets suppressed.

When you decide to value meaning most, then meaning becomes associated with truth and rational / empirical / scientific truth becomes a lower level truth.

Ultimately, the fundamental disagreement is over which should be valued highest - rational truth or meaning?

Yeah, and a disconnect when it comes to the conception of God and the nature of religion.

Rational truth is associated with the head and with propositions.

The truth of meaning is associated with the body, with the self, and with narrative / symbols.

Rational truth is associated with the known and the comfort zone. Meaning is associated with the chaotic unknown and the hero’s journey.

This reminded of an answer that Jordan Peterson gave during the Q&A section of his debate with Matt Dillahunty. They were asked to explain, respectively, why the language and values of secular humanism and religion were better than the other. Peterson's response was illuminating. There's a lot that could be expanded on, but given that this was live, it was a really good answer.

The discussion gets further confused because theists are mostly rationalists as well in how they (consciously) view truth. At least the theists who are having discussions are.

This is a good point. It's difficult to converse with atheists/rationalists because they often make their arguments based on preconceived notions about religion that come from preachers a la Joel Osteen and Pat Robertson. Even more philosophical theists like William Lane Craig and Bishop Barron often fall into that category.

As Peterson mentions, the truth of meaning is associated with action. Trial and error through the maze. I would want to challenge the idea of staying on the midpoint, but it’s a helpful entry level idea.

How so? I don't know a ton about Taoism, but from a Catholic perspective, it seems like that midpoint could be associated with the Holy Spirit. When one's life story comes into alignment with religious truth and God, that's when they feel the presence of the Holy Spirit. To quote Belinda Carlisle, "Ooh, Heaven is a place on Earth."

Once the truth seeker values meaning highest and identifies with it, then he must sacrifice it up (sell off his possessions) and fall into nihilism (meaninglessness, chaos).

The HS wants to stretch and test your faith. It wants your full trust.

Imagine being in a dark forest and the HS is calling you further out from your illuminated home (comfort zone). The HS will keep drawing you out until you can no longer see the light.

The Christian story is far more extreme and radical than the eastern religions. In the parable, Jesus describes the son as lost and dead because that is what the HS requires of us. The Christian story, which is the story of reality, is very dramatic.

What was reality in the 300,000 years of human history before Jesus and the Holy Spirit came?

Do you think I don’t have an answer for this? Have you considered the scenario where you stump, expose, and humiliate me is solely a fantasy in your mind?

I answered this question on July 21st, but I’m not going to link the post because you’re not actually seeking wisdom.

The Holy Spirit / conscience is anti-status-quo. As a default, your survival instinct will suppress the HS and rationalize on behalf of the status quo. If you’re a Christian, and you hold the same beliefs + live the same life for years, then my criticisms of rationalism apply to you too.