I'm asking based on my answer to a question about people being saved after the rapture.
After I posted my answer (I think), the question was put on hold as being a "truth" question and therefore off topic. I hadn't recognized it as such, and had given an answer. I got a comment welcoming me to the forum, and inviting me to review the guidelines, particularly the section on "we can't handle the truth".
I had read it before, but I guess I needed a refresher. I still do. My own handle on the truth about the truth (quod est veritas?) is best summarized by my response to a different question here in meta. (see response)
Basically, I don't think programming forums can handle the truth either. Instead, they settle for something that meets a lower standard: is the response seen as useful by the questioner? for programming questions, this boils down to a suggestions that the asking programmer can turn into a test program to find out what the machine actually does. And this provides the questioner with a solution to the problem, unless the answer gets falsified by the test. If the test program tends to verify the answer, and if the answer is responsive to the question, the questioner is out of the woods.
I'm trying to refine that understanding so as to guide myself as to how to answer questions in Christianity.SE or when to refrain from answering. It's possible that in the rapture case, the only good answer is no answer at all. It's possible that there is a good answer, but I didn't find it.
How do the regulars here deal with this kind of situation? Do you just vote to close the question? do you make comments the might help with rephrasing the question? do you do something else?
And last but not least, what do questions that are not "truth questions" look like?