Hi

I am having a discussion about the objective truth of the Scriptures.
I maintain that all of Scripture is objective truth and that it remains objective truth regardless of erroneous interpretation of people.

I believe it is possible that the person and I might be speaking past each other, so I thought before I reply to him, it might be best if I get someone else to look at what he is saying, just to make certain that I am not misunderstanding him.

Here is his take on the issue:


"What I’m basically saying that if you put a Bible in a room, all by itself with no one else reading it and no one interpreting it, then of course it’s objective….there is no argument there. The Bible on it’s own is completely objective in all the Bible claims.

However, as soon as humans interact with it, in any case whatsoever, we look at it subjectively.

Therefore, practically to hold a theology of objectivity towards the scriptures is unhelpful and useless if we also want to make claims that the Bible actually has a role in our lives. It is number 3 in what you pasted above that makes it subjective because obviously none of us have the corner on Scripture and know everything that it intends and means. So while the Holy Spirit helps us understand it’s meaning it doesn’t tell us what it means entirely, so until then, as long as humans are involved, what it means and intends for our lives today will in many cases (and some cases not) still be up for debate, and even what ones are up for debate will be up for debate.

I think you might be afraid of the word subjective, because it also implies relativism. So I understand your hesitancy, but I think to keep pushing for the work “objective” only pushes an authority that cannot full be known or experienced by anyone here and now."

Tom