I have heard a number of times that one of the case-breakers for Christianity is the multiple interpretations of the Bible. If you bring together a dozen Christians, representative of the Church, you will find disagreements on polity, baptism, charismatic gifts, predestination, role of women, etc. It is argued that if the Bible was truly the Word of God, it would all be clear and there would be no disagreements.
Really? If there is an objective truth, there cannot be a subjective interpretation?
Let us look at science. Presumably science is an objective truth. Either there was a beginning of the universe or there wasn’t. There is an actual age to the earth. Life began at a certain stage in some way. There are thousands and thousands of scientific facts. Since science is an objective source of knowledge, you would assume that all scientists would agree on their interpretations. The truth is there are a wide range of interpretations and as our scientific knowledge increases, so do the theories.
What about history? There have been major events that involved certain people all throughout civilization. So everyone agrees on what actually happened. Or not. The range of historical interpretations is worse than the scientific interpretations. I am not just talking about ancient history where our evidence is limited. Even events within the last two centuries have difficulty finding a historical consensus.
It is true that Christians have differing interpretations. But that has never been a requirement for truth. All that it means is that we are human beings and just like in every other area of knowledge, our interpretation of objective truth will be subjective.