I agree. Everyone should and does have access to it. I believe at one time in Roman Catholicism it was forbidden to be read in any other language than Latin etc.

I don't know if that's a strength or a weakness. Sure, we can arrive at our own meaning but then if that own private interpretation is false then how do we count that as a benefit? Are Westboro Baptists and JWs and Mormons and Universalists and Unitarians a Sola Scriptura perk?

Not at all. I often learn a lot when people offer their perspective. There is rarely a time when I don't partially agree with things that are said.

Well, sure. However, getting a denomination to admit that they are born out of a certain region or individual's (Darby, Wesley, Luther, Calvin etc.) private experiences that are then juxtaposed onto scripture which then colors and offers up an entirely different doctrine from that of the other denoms/individuals/regions is quite difficult.

However, to say that they have pretty much the same beliefs where it counts is difficult to stand up when you look at (and you posted this in a different thread) what was considered Christianity 101 in Hebrews 5-6. To say that Baptists and Methodists have a common interpretation where it counts is to disregard all the sub-denominations of those two major branches. Baptism, charismatic gifts* like laying on of hands (there are several Baptist flavors that totally reject charismatic Baptists) , etc.

It's like saying, we disagree on presence being in the communion and on Baptism and on Church government and worship style and differing teachings on predestination, the depravity of man, and what gifts mean and how to apply and teach on all these things despite the fact that these basic teachings were clearly transmitted as evidenced in Hebrews. But! In regards to the Jesus being Lord, on this we can agree.

Still, I'm not sure which denominations you are referring to. I was a free-Methodist. Though the free-Methodists didn't know the difference between their origins and that of the United Methodists. Only point I'm making is that we still wind up with a divided body, otherwise these 5 would become 1, as Christ intends. No?


I agree. Papal supremacy/infallibility. However, many of the apostles were bishops at various churches and if you do a study of the vestments etc., despite their street attire (in which many were martyred) you'll find that within a generation many of these "fancy" doo rags were worn. Hard to judge someone that wore what they wore in front of St. John, the disciple, and yet they didn't say a word against him. Might be because they too wore what was worn. I don't know much about the vestments that the Pope wears, however.

I agree that if it conflicts with Holy Scripture then a red flag ought to pop up. However, I would say that private interpretation is not any different than Papal supremacy and wherein those private interpretations become dogmas, it's not unlike Papal infallibility. We should never follow an individuals teachings blindly. Test everything, as Paul says. Still, it presents quite the pickle when we say that the corporate body of followers is the Church, when that body is presented as divided. We know that Christ's body is not divided.


I am not aware of any case wherein the Orthodox conflict with the teachings mentioned in Hebrews 5-6. Neither am I aware of the RCCs position on these matters, but that's not to say that those traditions have not changed.

If the disciple John came to you and said, let me explain to you what to do and also take these writings in order to help you to do them and then a man named Luther showed up later and said, ignore John, believe my teachings, my personal instructions... what can we do?

The common reaction to much of this is, "well, I'll just ignore what was said to me and take the writings for what I am able to make of them.".

To me, it is not unlike the cult of personality or of the self.

I don't know. Soooo many options. Such a narrow road.

Thanks, Mahogany

God bless.