Hi
Dyonisius the Areopagite
That's going to depend on the fellowship that one belongs to, as to the answer for that question. I believe that the individual has the final word on scriptural interpretation. Now, we can certainly cull through the many commentaries and written defenses of various theologians, but ultimately, what one believes as to the interpretation of any particular piece of Scripture is up to the reader.
If all interpretations are valid, then NO interpretation is valid, because there is NO actual definition of Christianity. There is no DEFINED GOSPEL, because it is up to the individual to determine just what exactly the Gospel is via interpretation of Scripture.
There is only ONE TRUTH. Thus, there can only be ONE true interpretation of Holy Scripture. All other varying interpretations are a lie, and NOT the truth. All other Gospels are a LIE and anathema.
The true enemy here is Sola Scriptura. This is what compels sincere believers such as yourself to proclaim yourself THE authority on Scriptural interpretation. And make no mistake. That IS what you are claiming
And of course, 85% of Scripture doesn't need any kind of special interpretation because it is not difficult to understand. Most Scripture is pretty straightforward in its meaning and context. The places where most look for interpretations outside of the Scriptures themselves is in the prophetic writings. When it is written that Jesus and his disciples walked into Jerusalem there is no need of any kind of 'special' interpretation. But when Daniel writes of the beasts that he saw in his visions, then yes, we often look to others who may have more knowledge on the matter for interpretation. But even then, one reads the commentary and then reads the Scriptures and perhaps reads a few other commentaries and then the Scriptures. At some point they decide on what it is that they believe is the proper interpretation and that's what they go with. So, in the end, it's still the individual that chooses what they will believe about the matters written of in the Scriptures.
Now, as to the matter of the 'whole' church, that's going to depend on what that particular fellowship of the church believes.
Again, this principle should be obvious to you to be self-contradictory. Jesus founded ONE Church, not ten million. There is only one; all others are pretenders, no matter how well meaning. Now, as individual human beings we must all decide for ourselves which Church is the true Church; but that there is a true Church with the true interpretation of Holy Scripture, there is no doubt.
I do see the irony, however, and I understand where you are at, for I was once there and it really was not long ago that I was there.
Ironically, it was the principle of sola scriptura which drove me away from the Protestant Churches and to the Orthodox Church. When I was twelve, I was introduced to serious Biblical study and I attended a plethora of various Churches through my family. I have pretty much been exposed to every major Church that there is, at one point or another. But, when I was young, I was taught to always bring my Bible to Church and to check for myself each and every Scripture that was quoted at the Church I was attending by the Pastor or anyone else. Now, I was always very theologically minded and when the pastor would begin to preach on a Scripture and I had made sure the scripture was as he said, and he would begin to preach, I would pretty much see where he was going with his sermon and so I would simply read Scripture. By the time I was 16 or so I had read most of the Bible. I saw many things in Scripture that seemed very contrary to what I was hearing from the pulpits; but I respected authority and did not openly say anything. It was these various contrary things which eventually led me to Orthodoxy. I found that every question I had; every contrary understanding, was actually affirmed through the ancient Church; even about topics like Tongues.
The main point I am trying to convey here is that Christians have, for too long, been divided; and it is time for us to UNIFY, because the end is drawing nigh and we are all going to need one another as persecution begins.
The AUTHORITY of the Church must be respected and all of us must submit to the Authority of the Holy Spirit and His Order of the Church. That Authority is in the ancient Succession of the Apostles and the rulings of the Ecumenical Councils which derived from that Authority.
Many Catholics believe that the ultimate determiner of interpretation for the Scriptures is the Pope, or some other great saint person. But generally the Pope in matters of debate. With the Baptist fellowships, we have a basic set of beliefs about the validity of the Scriptures and the person of the trinity and what the Scriptures say about salvation and the reward of heaven for our faith. But one will find in any fellowship where reading of the Scriptures is encouraged that there will always be some disagreement on points. Even Paul wrote about it.
I believe that God, through His Holy Spirit, has cobbled together for us the books that God expects us to recognize as 'the Scriptures'.
Why would God stop at guiding the Church in the authentic Scriptures? Why would He leave her blind to the right understanding of those same Scriptures? Why would God ONLY inspire Scripture? It was NEVER THUS in the ancient Church. the WHOLE CHURCH, her entire structure and life, were inspired by God. Do you know that there are many writings that are KNOWN to have been written by an Apostle or close associate of an Apostle but which were never canonized? There are even some which ARE canonized in LOCAL Church canons (for example, the Ethiopian Canon has 81 books, including 1st and 2nd Clement and the Book of Enoch). The Didache was written by the Apostolic Community, we just don't know by whom or from where. What makes these books of lesser spiritual authority, when they were written by Apostles or their close students? The Church NEVER ruled them uninspired. Such concepts are uniquely Protestant and have only existed for 500 years AND only in the West. Such concepts are foreign to the much wider Christian world. Western Christians tend to think that the world revolves around their perceptions, but the reality is much different.
I believe that book is the one that most closely matches the Hebrew old covenant and the books that have been canonized as the new covenant by a group of people who were a lot closer to the days of their accounting than we are today.
If that is what you believe, then you should trust the Septuagint over the Masoretic text, because the APOSTLES passed the Septuagint to the Church; and that in its entirety, including the so called "Deuterocanon" or "Apocrypha". The post Christian Jews who REJECTED Jesus are the foundation of the Masoretic text that came a thousand years later, and while Christians should always respect the unbelieving Jews, they are NOT our Authority. Jesus Christ, through the Apostles (the original Church) is our Authority.
I have to trust that for the last 2,000 years or so they got it right, because that's now become the most widely accepted form of the new covenant.
But each one of us has the responsibility before God to know and understand what God is doing in this realm of His creating. Whether they belong to a formal fellowship of believers or not. In the end, what we did because of our knowledge of the Scriptures will be what we are judged on. We either trusted and followed after Jesus... or we didn't.
