Bible Question:
How can the Bible be "objective" truth when good intelligent people with godly intentions, study and prayed over the Bible their entire lives, disagree on even the most basic tenets such as: what it takes to be saved?, once saved always saved?, free will, grace vs. works etc. Even the most simplest of questions (Who did Christ die on the cross for?) are not consistently answered. If the Bible was objective, wouldn't these basic (milk) questions be clear to the above Christians who are so earnest and dedicated in their pursuit of really knowing Christ? To be clear, I'm not arguing the truth part , its the "objective" part I have a problem with |
Bible Answer: wak: "Objective" truth is something that reflects reality. It does not depend on the opnion of an individual to make it true or false. A non-Biblical example would be Chicago. What state is Chicago in? That is an example of objective truth. If I were to insist until my dying breath that Chicago is the capital of Iowa, that doesn't change the objectivity of the truth; it just means I am in error about that truth. Going back to the Bible now, you are absolutely correct that people disagree on what the Bible teaches. First of all, godly, prayerful people can be wrong, despite all of their prayers and their godliness and their study. Who knows? I might even be wrong on one or two things, myself! ;) However, the fact that some misinterpret the Bible, for whatever reason (and a big reason for many is not careful study, but a desire to make it say what one wants it to say), does not mean that the Bible isn't objectively true. If there is disagreement among people, then at least one of those people is in error, but the Bible's contents themselves remain as objectively true as the location of Chicago. --Joe! |