Maybe runner or Gibo or one under God will want to answer those questions (will repeat here and offer what i think are the actual answers)

q. Where does it say they are open to interpretation?
a: It doesn't. It's God's Word.

q. Was it declared by God or Jesus as subject to interpretation?
a: No.

q. And why do followers think they have the authority to interpret God's Word? Furthermore, why do they think their interpretation is correct and say, anyone else's would be incorrect?
a: It's inexplicable... unless it's because they can't follow the rules laid down in it and it's easier to interpret it to fit their materialistic, sinful way of life than it is to follow God's Word. They think their interpretation is correct for the same reasons.

Hi Wobbly.. I didn't mean 'you' :) in the 'enemies' list.. in any case that was tongue in cheek... think "periscopes and see saws" :)

Now.. you showed an assumption there in your last post. Where you were raising the issue of 'Ayatollah's etc.. and sectarianism.

You mentioned 'judge' and 'legal terms' for what is in scripture.

But... consider this. If scripture (Bible) is not MEAN'T to be subject to court rulings.. and the Kingdom of God is not 'of' this world....then the idea of a judicial ruling on the meaning of a text is not relevant.
The reason is.. there is no 'Christian' State to be established :)
The hierachy in 'The Church' is one of honour..and nobility of heart and service..not of "power" in the worldly sense. As Jesus said "He would be first among you must become the slave of all"

EVO.. I have a few clues.. took me 3 yrs formal study and a lifetime to get there :)

TOPIC.. I'm simply arguing that words, sentences etc.. all have a context and fundamental objective meaning.... and from this, we often derive a subjective meaning.

The subjective meaning is fine as long as it is benign and peaceful.
"play with your train however you like, but don't crash it into mine"

ONLY...when the objective words have serious implications for the State and it's laws, and for those in it in legal terms.. must we pay microscopic scrutiny 'to' that objective meaning.

I wonder if we can agree on this ? :)... without mentioning anything specific. For example.. "Mein Kampf" had very real implications for Jews in Germany..it had 'objective meaning'.

OBJECTIVE meaning..

example: (Mein Kampf Ch11)

It is certain that the first stages of human
civilization were not based so much on the use of tame animals as on the employment of human beings who were members of an inferior race.

COMMENT. You don't have to be brilliant to know that SOMEthing bad is in store for the 'inferior' races, based on the plain objective meaning of this.

Boazy,

I hope you have merely people in opposition not enemies.

Trigulation of disciplines is important in interpreting data, religious or non-relogious. If the genaeologies in the Bible suggest the Earth is 6,000 years old, one can test said claim by the discoveries others and also documents of the time.

Humans are said to havereached Australia circa. 60,ooo BP. Fossils support this claim. There was a huge decline in animal species at that time suggesting a preditor far superior than any other suddenly hit on the scene. And plate tectonics suggest a land bridge at that time too. Science cross-checks claims with its counsin disciplines. The cosmologists and the quanum physicists are trying unify their differences, which will likely mean someone yeilding to some errors made.

Belief in god does not work like that. In Christianity, there are retort againsts knowledge, since at least the time of Constantine. I think I am correct in saying before the KJ Bible, attempts to translate the Bible to English were met a quick trip to one's personal BBQ.

Some doucments I have such that some people [Essenes?] in first century thought the Earth 12,000 years old; i.e., 14,000 BP. My guess is, this statement would be a regression, from superior Greek knowledge of 300 years beforehand.

The Bible is a valid and valuable document, but, it needs to seen as a document of the period, written by humans for the authors' purposes.

Cheers.

Dear Oly..of course my 'enemies' was tongue in cheek :) uuuu know.. just poking a bit of fun.

You have wandered a bit from the reason for the topic. Its not about 'truth' of the documents, it's about 'how to interpret' written language.

I'm seeking to build a concensus on this important matter.

An example from your Old Testament reference. The 'Generations' were often lumped as '40' when there were more people.. that's a cultural thing one needs to know :) its a round figure... if there were 42..its not a lie...its cultural. Technically and pedantically "42 generations is not 40..thus it is false"..but 'as a round figure.. approximately 40.. is not untrue.

Give me your thoughts on the 'objective' interpretation of the crimes act..and the Bible.. choose a passage :)

or.. just see if you concur with my reasoning in the previous post about 'deny/cross/follow' etc

We must distinguish between 'outright commands with eternal validity' and 'picture stories of a heavenly truth' which while having relevance for all time, do not portray a stictly analoguous relationship to all aspects of what is being communicated.

"Parable of the Sower" is close to an allegory.. "many type of people.. many attitudes.. many responses to the Gospel"

BUT.. "God did not go around dropping literal seeds..now did He? :) no.. of course not.
In the case of that parable... Jesus himself interprets it.

Mark 4:1-8 is the parable.(of the sower)

Mark 4:10-20 is..THE interpretation...there is no other possible, because Jesus explains his own words.

What IS a bit debatable.. is verse 12.... are..that seems unreasonable and out of character with the purpose of Jesus USING parables... quite deep that bit :)

Any thoughts ?

Speaking of "deep" and "thoughts" -

<< The 'Generations' were often lumped as '40' when there were more people.. that's a cultural thing one needs to know :) its a round figure... if there were 42..its not a lie...its cultural. Technically and pedantically "42 generations is not 40..thus it is false"..but 'as a round figure.. approximately 40.. is not untrue. >>

Boazy seems unaware of the enormous significance of the number 42 itself, which is of course the ultimate answer to Life, the Universe and Everything, as calculated over 7.5 million years by the supercomputer Deep Thought, in the sacred text "The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy". That is a critical hermeneutic point in the interpretation of the Old Testament - if nothing else, it brings the OT's postulated age of the earth (i.e. 6000 years) into some doubt.

Also, given that Boazy's only taken 3 posts in his own thread to mention Hitler, I'm going to invoke Godwin's Law :) Hitler isn't integral to the ostensible topic of the thread, which is undoubtedly another of Boazy's Islamophobic 'bait and switch' exercises.

Under Godwin's Law, Boazy's argument (whatever it is) is therefore declared lost. Interpret that :)

David, I am not sure what you are trying to argue (in fact I am not sure why I am here on another religious thread after promising myself to avoid them) :)

Legal Acts don't only include definitions but are based on precedents and sometimes this can mean delving into the various Courts either in Australia or sometimes in the UK or Canada, for example. Even the law can be interpreted in different ways depending on the particular nuances and circumstances. Sometimes Judges can set new precedents where variations to the existing 'rules' are demonstrated in a new or more complex context.

As far as biblical texts there is no comparison, they will always be subjective and at the mercy of the whims and prejudices of the would-be interpreter. That is why there is much discussion and dissection in bible classes despite the widely accepted 'given' meanings in some parables etc.