Objective? Subjective? Or, both?

[Steve Burnhope]

Abstract:

For the theologian, interpretation tends to focus on the meaning of Scripture. For the practitioner, however — aka, the ‘ordinary’ Christian — far greater emphasis falls on what she finds meaningful in or through Scripture. Typically these are contrasted as an ‘objective’ approach versus a ‘subjective’ approach. Even while the theologian is acknowledging the implausibility of a presupposition-free objective reading, to get as close as possible to it remains an implicit goal. In how these relate to each other, the meaning of Scripture is typically seen as being at one end of a spectrum and what the practitioner finds meaningful is positioned at the other. In pneumatological terms, this may be characterized as distinguishing between the role of the Spirit ‘then’ — in breathing Scripture itself (or, breathing into Scripture) — and the Spirit’s role ‘now,’ breathing out of (or, through) Scripture. Evangelical biblical interpretation is wary of the subjective turn in postmodernity, especially with regard to reader-response hermeneutics. Hence, subjective readings that find meaningfulness in or through a text 'now' are positioned in a subservient relationship to the objective meaning in a text ‘then.’ But are both, equally, Spirit-inspired? What is their appropriate collaboration? Should the nature of the relationship be pictured in alternative imagery? This paper proposes a reconsideration of the relationship between Spirit-inspired meaning, in the sense of embedded information, and Spirit-inspired meaningfulness, in the sense of dynamic revelation, in God's intended modus operandi for Holy Scripture under the auspices of the Holy Spirit in the life of his Church.

The full paper is attached to this post.