People will cite their religion's scriptures in discussions or disputes over differences in beliefs to settle the debate in their favor. You will hear claims, "The Bible says...", "God says....", "The Holy Koran says....", etc., but in all of these cases such beliefs in external authorities such as this completely ignores the person interpreting the words. It ignore themselves. It presumes that what they are understanding by reading something outside themselves qualifies as objective truth. It completely ignores the processes involved in how we perceive and interpret truth and reality, and in effect absolves themselves of any responsibility in absolutist thought. It denies that they say what they say God says.
It is impossible to say "God's word says....", because what they are reading is completely filtered through their own mind's interpretive frameworks; language, culture, personality, developmental stages, cognitive abilities, fears, anxieties, hopes, expectations, needs, desires, and a long list of such filters through which the whole of reality is mediated, including their religion's sacred scriptures. "God's word says...", is in reality, what their culture and personality is capable of seeing, and nothing more. Therefore, as one grows and develops, and their consciousness is expanded through various types of awareness that changes over time, what "God's word says...", will become different. It is therefore impossible to cite something you read as an authority, because it has the individual's mind and culture completely embedded within that interpretation.
I have yet to hear any literalist deal with this reality. How can they cite scripture as authoritative, when they are the interpreters? I will even add, that to cite scholars, also has that problem. Even at best, the scholar is still embedded within his own set of presumptions. Is objective truth ever truly objective?
It is impossible to say "God's word says....", because what they are reading is completely filtered through their own mind's interpretive frameworks; language, culture, personality, developmental stages, cognitive abilities, fears, anxieties, hopes, expectations, needs, desires, and a long list of such filters through which the whole of reality is mediated, including their religion's sacred scriptures. "God's word says...", is in reality, what their culture and personality is capable of seeing, and nothing more. Therefore, as one grows and develops, and their consciousness is expanded through various types of awareness that changes over time, what "God's word says...", will become different. It is therefore impossible to cite something you read as an authority, because it has the individual's mind and culture completely embedded within that interpretation.
I have yet to hear any literalist deal with this reality. How can they cite scripture as authoritative, when they are the interpreters? I will even add, that to cite scholars, also has that problem. Even at best, the scholar is still embedded within his own set of presumptions. Is objective truth ever truly objective?