Thank you.
In my view, "truths about God" are by definition unknowable, and in this context not particularly important, because the purpose of the text (again, in my view) is to reveal truths about ourselves.
What then is the definition to which you refer? It would appear to be "knowing something true about God" (assuming you will aver that "God is unknowable"). It seems logical then that whether God is or is not, knowable or unknowable, you are asserting that he/she/it is incapable of communicating with any part of the existant universe? Is that not "knowledge" that you claim is impossible to possess?
And is not the issue important in the context of determining the purpose of the text, granting that one of us or both of us together may well be mistaken in our "view"?
Is it not the case that if scripture is not (even a bit) truth about God, then it's just another self-help book by some chaps who had the delusion that they were saying something true about God?
Again, I do not disagree with your final paragraph as to the utility of those words in exploring our own relationship to self, to each other and to the world as we grow in wisdom and in stature (hopefully)
For Christianity, by identifying truth with faith, must teach-and, properly understood, does teach-that any interference with the truth is immoral. A Christian with faith has nothing to fear from the facts