It would be a wrong assumption that you are writing from a human perspective? That’s a very big claim to make, if you’ll forgive my saying so.
Even amongst Christians, we differ in our precise interpretations of Truth: and not everyone can be presumed to be a Catholic, or indeed a Christian, even here on FR. You may well have presuppositions concerning revelation, but others will have variant ones: often likewise held validity and honestly and in the belief and hope of salvation. It’s not my place, or yours, to be their ultimate Judge: each of us can only strive to defend and live up to what we believe, to the best of our ability, whilst praying for forgiveness for those areas in which we will inevitably err.
My original point was, and remains, that whilst you, I or anyone else posting here may have differing beliefs or interpretations as to the nature of God’s Revelation, how we choose to pursue and defend our beliefs should be defined by (or in time may itself define) the nature of the beliefs themselves.
This is not logical or Catholic. Logically, there can be, at most, only one true faith. All other faiths must be false to the extent they differ from that one true faith. It is the place of a Catholic to faithfully represent what the Church teaches, namely, that the Catholic religion is the one true faith and that its genuine teaching does not err.
No, we differ in our interpretations of revelation but that doesn't change the objective nature of the truth of revelation any more than scientists differing in their opinion of certain temporal matters changes the objective truth of the creation which underlies them. God said his word was truth - the fact some may get it wrong doesn't change this objective fact. The rest of your post has nothing to do with the inherent objectivity of revelation as truth, either general or specific. Thus, truth is not subjective.