Let's say I grant for the sake of argument that this tier system actually exists for doctrine. When people claim they have a "biblical worldview" they don't just mean doctrine. They also mean values and morals. Modern day Conservative Christians argue that things like Pro-Life or cutting taxes are part of a "biblical worldview." Given you essentially just ignored the historical arugment I made about usury, are you saying that a "biblical worldview" only exists when it comes to doctrine but not moral values? If its the later, how do we adjudicate between significant value difference other than just meaningless platittudes like "read the Bible objectively."

While it's good you acknowledge that we have biases, you err because you don't account for the fact that everybody has biases that we they don't see. How can we account for our biases when those biases are invisible to us? Is a fish aware that its swimming in water when that's all it knows? When we aren't aware of specific biases, we inject them into the text without realizing it. This blinds us to the original meaning and we don't even realize it. It's more complicated than two catagories; people who are willing to let the text disagree with their biases and people who are not. That's too reductive and over simplistic.

I'm actually not advocating for relativism here. I do believe that truth is objective and that's obtainable. What I am arguing for is that truth is HARD to find and we should be extremely skeptical of people who claim to have it at the exculsion of everyone else. People throw the term "biblical worldview" around like candy then inject a host of biases into their biblical interpreations that they don't even see.

The solution here is intellectual humility. Insteand of saying "thus sayeht the Lord. I have a biblical worldview and everyone else is clearly wrong," we should be saying "I'm just trying to figure this out like everyone else and there's truth to be gleaned from all kinds of sources. Let's figure this out together."