This is a great post about interpreting the Bible. I hear Catholics and Protestants say often that if just anyone was allowed to interpret the Bible you would have chaos, and point to the chaotic mix of denominations as proof. The only problem with that is, a.) it is unbiblical as the Bible is of no private interpretation; and b.) the chaos is caused by denominational politics and flawed men jockeying for position. Churches that believe the Bible as sole authority are very consistent in their basic beliefs, and have been ever since the Bible was written.
To which Candy replied
Sarah Joy, you are right, and you explained it quite clearly. :-)
So maybe you all can help me, but what does this sentence mean?
The only problem with that is, a.) it is unbiblical as the Bible is of no private interpretation;
"is of no private interpretation?" Does she mean that the bible is not to be privately interpreted? But if it means that why would Candy be for it? Her whole understanding is based on her private interpretation or someone else's private interpretation.
And then this part:
the chaos is caused by denominational politics and flawed men jockeying for position.
While I think many denominations split for political and personality reasons, I don't think you can say unequivocally that ALL splits were just for those reasons and that theology and biblical interpretation had nothing to do with it!
It sure doesn't sound like it from this article from Religious Tolerance
It seems to me that about the only think sola scriptura Christians agree on is sola scriptura!
And of course the last statement about "since the bible was written" is just foolish and betrays an ignorance of bible history!