[HarleyD]

What I find difficult to understand is how people can accept views that are modern to church theology unless they're RCCers (with all due respects). They, after all, base their faith primarily on traditions of the Church and can legitimately argue (albeit wrongly) that the Bible is only one source.

But Protestants rejected this approach. The Reformation was to go BACK to the original interpretations of the scriptures. If the church traditionally said the "blue view" was right and condemned as heresy the "red view", why would the "red view" now be correct?

Some just don't know what the historical teachings were. Others completely reject the historical teachings in favor of 18th century teachings no matter if it was built on heresy. When confronted with the historical context of scripture, it's difficult for me to understand why people would favor a heretical interpretation over a historical interpretation no matter how unappealing it may seem.

[Buggman]

So that there's no misunderstanding, which view are you claiming did not arise until the 18th Century?