Is there objective Truth?

[Angrboda]

I think it's time OP got on with it.  Let's suppose there is objective truth.  Where does that leave us?

You'd probably see where is was going with this if you read everything. But 20+ pages fair enough. Pretty much i'd follow with asking how you can justify the use of objectivity. But from a naturalist world view would always end up being circular reasoning, requiring a trancendant cause.

Bollocks. The use of objectivity is neither justified or established by a transcendant cause, i.e. God, anymore than it is by naturalistic explanation. This seems to depend on an extreme form of the PSR, implying that everything must have an explanation. It's trivial to define God as a lawgiver. Such definitions come cheap. It does not follow from an inability of a naturalist to justify their use of the objective that objectivity requires a transcendant cause. That's an argument from ignorance. Let's call a spade a spade. You're arguing that the existence of objective facts requires God. That's the most ludicrous assertion I've heard lately and is not supported by an argument from ignorance.