Its Not Truth if its Not Subjective

Absent self-representation by LBGTQ+ persons there is no Christian knowledge of human sexuality.

There is a modernist fiction that you can obtain an objective knowledge of what it means to be human without actually listening to the subjective self-representation of actual humans. This is particularly true among Christians who believe that with the supposedly objective facts about humans revealed by their Creator in scripture, reasonably assessed and presented, one knows all one needs to know about the basic aspects of their humanity. 

In reality all true knowledge of humanity is rooted in an understanding of the subjective experiences of being human. And this is particularly true with the kind of knowledge obtained through God's Word.

Enlightenment philosophers sought a means to obtain true knowledge of the world, which they believed was obtained through objectivity.  They recognized the individuals would have a subjective view and experience. So to overcome individual subjectivity they developed the idea that publicly observable facts, discussed rationally, could overcome subjectivity and allow objective knowledge to emerge.

20th century American evangelics largely accepted this, even if they rejected theological liberalism. From the Princeton Fundamentalists to Fuller (The Logical Seminary) they emphasized that rational knowledge of God, God‘s will, and human persons could be obtained through the objective study of the facts. 

The Bible, treated as a book of facts, provided the fundamental resource. So any group of rational minds could come to accurate conclusions about God, God‘s plan, and God’s people. If you were a traditionalist, you could extend this by bringing the voices of the tradition, of the church from the past, into the conversation. 

And this is how we get to the place where we are today in which evangelicals can report that they know the truth about God’s understanding of human sexuality without actually consulting people about their experience as sexual beings. Because what matters is not personal, subjective experience. What matters is the rational, disembodied mind thinking in concert with other such minds about objective facts presented in the Bible.

The problem with this approach to finding out the truth, particularly about anything related to humans, is that it is wrong. It doesn’t accord with human experience and it is not biblical. 

In the Bible God is attentive to, and takes into account, the subjective experience of his people and other individuals. God cares about how people feel, what motivates them, what inspires them, and their struggles in the midst of oppression. And while some of God's purposes are clearly unchanging, scripture is primarily an account of how God listens to the subjective cries of God's people and acts on what he hears.

It only seems reasonable that if God takes into account the subjective experience of individual humans, and even nations, that cry out to him, then we should take that same experience into account as we seek the truth.   

What sets Jesus apart from the teachers of the Law is that Jesus takes into account the subjective experience of those to whom he ministers. His opponents look at people as objects to be forced into conformity with an objective law of God.

In short, in scripture the subjective experience, particularly of the marginalized and oppressed, presents real information, real facts, that help us understand who God is, what God’s plan is, and who we are as humans.

This is deeply problematic for those who are seeking certainty.  Subjective experience is most real when it is idiosyncratic, and not when it’s objectified as data collected and plotted in a statistical analysis. And certainly not when presented as anecdotes about what has been heard from others. 

Individuals should represent themselves in giving this subjective account of what it means to be human. Groups of individuals should collectively represent themselves with regard to what it means to be human. People either come to the table and we listen or we know nothing about them. Or at least we haven't sought the kind of knowledge sought by the Triune God.

In short, subjective experience cannot be objectified to make it amenable to the desire to obtain objective truth. 

As a result, the only way to seek the truth is through continual and, let us be honest, messy dialogue. The desire to quit talking and build one’s life on certain, objective truth, ultimately means that we build our lives on less than the truth. 

Put another way, the key characteristic of truth seeking in the church is maintaining the dialogue rather than coming to conclusions. As a practical matter it may be necessary to call the question, but vote must always be provisional.

So truth seeking will always be an unfinished business, which is quite unsatisfactory for some. It will be unfinished because there will always be subjective experiences that have not been accounted for, and the reality that our subjective experiences change both with age and through socialization, and in the cultures in which we live in the relationship we enjoy. 

Truth will always be an emergent property of our human relationship with God and the world. Just as the One who is the Truth is not dead, but lives.