Is it possible to interpret the Bible objectively, to know what God has said?

G’day everyone, Dave Deane here, and our question for the week is: Is it possible to interpret the Bible objectively, to know what God has said?

Have you ever being in a class room or a bible study, reading a text, and had the teacher or leader go around the room asking ‘what does this mean to you’? And then you hear one person say, ‘well, for me this means…’  and another ‘well, FOR ME it means…’ and you end up, sometimes, with wildly different personal opinions on the same text you’ve read making you wonder what the text even means?

I know I have… and while I don’t want to diminish the way certain texts speak to certain people in specific ways, I think it’s important that we not confuse the Objective meaning of a text with what it signifies to or for the reader, that is, a subjective or personal meaning.

The objective meaning of a text is the truth of what it says in itself, open and accessible for all people, in all places, for all times. The subjective meaning of a text is how it is ‘taken in’ by the reader; what the text implies or how it applies to the reader subject to it.

Now, when Christians go to church and hear a pastor teaching the bible, or when we read books and commentaries, the goal – I hope – is that we learn about what God’s word says in itself, not simply what it means to the preacher or author. 

But is this even possible? I mean, don’t we all come from unique backgrounds, with different personalities, preunderstandings, presuppositions and assumptions – all of which affect the way we read and interpret written texts? How can we realistically expect any preacher or biblical commentator to separate themselves from their backgrounds and presuppositions? And if they can’t – it we can’t – then in what sense can we say it is possible to interpret the Bible – the word of God – objectively?

For many people, the answer is simply ‘no.’ Objective interpretation is a pipedream, and indeed the whole idea of ‘truth’ itself is just relative to every persons subjective understandings.

But I reject that… and I’ll give three reasons why.

First, objectivity in interpretation is unavoidable.

If the statement ‘there is no objective interpretation’ is true, then it must be applicable to all such statements, including the statement ‘there is no objective interpretation’ itself.

You see, it’s not so easy to get around the issue of objectivity. Should we interpret the statement ‘there is no objective interpretation’ subjectively or objectively? If objectively, then it is false; if subjectively, then it is not applicable to all interpretations and the door is open to objectivity!

In his book ‘Objectivity in Biblical Interpretation’, Thomas Howe explains the situation like this: “The fact of the matter is, objectivity is not only possible, but it is also unavoidable. Even the critics of objectivity think that you, as a reader, can objectively understand their objections to objectivity. The reason it is important to establish that objectivity is possible is that without it there could be no communication. There would be no way to know whether we had correctly understood what was said or whether our preunderstanding had entirely distorted it.”

I like the way Howe puts it – if you can hear and understanding the words I am speaking right now, then objectivity in interpretation is demonstrably “unavoidable”… if there were no objectivity, there would be no communication at all! No rules for speaking and comprehending…

What this tells us is, that despite our differences which make each one of us unique, we also have things in common which united us together, which make us, collectively, ‘human’.

One example of what we have in common is our rational faculties, which allow us to think the way we do. One basic principle of reason is what philosophers call ‘the law of non-contradiction’ – A is not non A. For example, if an animal is a dog, then that same animal cannot be a chicken. In other words, when we identify something we are limiting it, excluding it, from being something else. A dog is not a chicken. See? Logic is fun!

So that’s the first thing to say. But it leads to a second:

Second, subjective interpretation can be controlled.

The academic field concerned with methods of interpretation is known as ‘hermeneutics,’ a word which derives from the Greek hermeneuo, which means ‘translate’ or ‘interpret’. Hermeneutics is a fascinating field of study, and when it comes to interpreting the Bible, what hermeneutics does is help hedge or control our subjective inclinations that want to read into the words meaning that is not necessarily there.

When I think of hermeneutics, I think of a pin ball machine: when you get an idea that starts rolling on one direction, we have hermeneutical leavers which flick us back into the centre. How so?

Well, the most obvious lever or control we have when interpreting the Bible is the text itself. If we want to interpret what the Bible says, then we need to start with … what the Bible says! The substance, the syntax, the grammar of the words in their immediate context of whatever book of the Bible we’re reading, and their overall context of the Bible as a whole.

But sometimes studying the words isn’t enough, because words are used in times and places and languages and cultures in history and over time and in different places and different ways, the usage can vary. So we need another historical lever that controls our interpretation of the text to who, when, where and how the text was originally written.

So, together, this hermeneutic is known as the grammatical-historical method of interpretation.

And if I may provide just one example to tie them together. In Revelation 2:17 we read “To the one who is victorious, I will give some of the hidden manna. I will also give that person a white stone with a new name written on it, known only to the one who receives it…” Just looking at the white stones – what’s that all about? Well, the words say – ‘white stone’. What’s that? It’s a white stone. We know what a white stone is… but what is the significance of a white stone? Is God giving us white stones to skip across a lake, to put in our garden? Significance gives us the meaning and therefore full orbed interpretation of this passage, and in this case, we must look to the historical context, which tells us of an ancient Roman custom of awarding white stones to the victors of athletic games. The white stone had the athletes name on it, which served as a ticket to a victory banquet. So when Jesus says we will receive white stones, it’s a promise that we, too, will receive a ticket, an entrance, into the victory celebration in heaven.

Third, subjectivity is a necessary part of objective interpretation.

If objective interpretation is unavoidable, but each interpreter of a text – like you and I – are subjects, with, again, different personalities, preunderstandings, presuppositions and assumptions, then it is in some sense necessary – if not sufficient – that subjects are capable of objective interpretation, despite all of our differences.

We all have faculties which enable us to grasp the objective truth of things and going about that process each bringing our unique backgrounds to the text, means we often, collectively, come to a fuller orbed interpretation, even appreciation, of what the text says.

You know, I’m a qualified engineer, and when I prepare a sermon I tend to engineer my message by looking for problems to solve with an A B C kind of structure. But I have friends who are psychologists and counsellors who bring their expertise to the Bible and draw things out of the text I would never see; same, too, with my artistic friends who can anecdotally paint word-pictures in the moment that would take me a long time to try and figure out.

So ‘Is it possible to interpret the Bible objectively and know what God has said?’ I say yes. God can draw a straight line with a crooked stick; He can use all of our idiosyncrasies and experiences to accurately reflect the truth of His word, a word which stands as objectively true for all people in all times and all places as that which has been revealed to us that we may observe them and take heed.