Perhaps you should cite the source of your apparent belief that the Pope is the infallible interpreter of Scripture. If we accept the conditions of your argument, you can't be allowed to cite Scripture as your source because that would mean that we would have to assume that your interpretation is infallible.
As you can see, you have argued yourself into a corner. The fact is that no earthly interpreter is infallible, not even the Pope. But Scripture itself, which is God-breathed, is infallible. The notion that Church authorities or a "Holy Father" are the only ones able to interpret Scripture is not only flawed on its surface, it's evil at its heart. History is all too clear that the Catholic Church and the Pope are anything but infallible.
Thank you for your opinions.
"Perhaps you should cite the source of your apparent belief that the Pope is the infallible interpreter of Scripture."
If I make that assertion, I'll back it up.
"If we accept the conditions of your argument, you can't be allowed to cite Scripture as your source because that would mean that we would have to assume that your interpretation is infallible."
If I were to offer any interpretation of Scripture of my own, it would be fallible. At least on this thread, I haven't offered any interpretation of Scripture. And on any thread, you will never find me knowingly offering my own interpretations at all. It would be worse than fallible. It would be worth less than cow chips.
But my interpretation wouldn't be any worse than anyone else's here.
"As you can see, you have argued yourself into a corner. The fact is that no earthly interpreter is infallible, not even the Pope. But Scripture itself, which is God-breathed, is infallible."
Well, the funny thing is, if I'm in a corner, it looks pretty un-corner-like over my shoulder. Of course Scripture is infallible, but you've now argued that no one can really know what it really means for certain, because there is no infallible interpreter. That there are disagreements in this very thread amongst non-Catholic believing professed Christians about the meaning of a single verse demonstrates that the Bible is not self-interpreting. Look over your own shoulder. You may find that it is you with two intersecting walls behind you. ;-)
"The notion that Church authorities or a 'Holy Father' are the only ones able to interpret Scripture is not only flawed on its surface, it's evil at its heart. History is all too clear that the Catholic Church and the Pope are anything but infallible."
So say you. At this point, this is a bald assertion, not even an argument. Get back to me when you have an argument.
Now, back to the question at hand, for those of you offering your own versions of Scripture interpretation, please cite your source of authority.
It's an important question. On this little thread alone, we see a disagreement on a point of Christian doctrine between two devout, sincere, faith-filled Christian gentlemen. At least one of these gentleman has implied that on this point, it is very, very important to be free from error. But at least one of these fine gentlemen is in error. Both quote Scripture, both believe that Scripture is authoritative. But each has his own interpretation. Which one is in error? And more importantly, by what authority do we decide?
Thank you for your assistance.
May the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ continue to bless you,
sitetest