Replies

The answer to that is given in the post following that

I'm not equating, but, as I said, this is an analogy describing the flaws of personal interpretation -- whether it be personal interpretation of history or personal interpretation of scripture. Wmfights did not mean to lie about Ambrose, but he erred due to fault, incompletely understood, personal interpretation. To call HIM a liar would be a false, statement, to say that he made an incorrect interpretation based on incomplete text rings true.

The Holy Spirit guides the community that is The CHurch as a whole. It does not and did not guide John SMith or the Reverend Moon or Charles Taze Russell - individuals who claimed to be led by it. Individual interpretation is necessarily flawed as we are flawed beings, we only understand God through community -- the community of saints stretching back 2000 years.

Those sola interpretura folks reading the bible alone do not, cannot read it with an unbiased purity of mind, free from influence by certain doctrinal presuppositions. Luther said of the Church "We concede -- as we must -- that so much of what they (the Church) say is true: that the papacy has God's word and the office of the apostles. and that we ahve received Holy Scriptures, Baptism, the Sacrament and the pulpit from them. what woudl we know of these if ti were not for them?: from this "Sermons on the Gospel of John", chaps 14-16.

that is why the reformers: CAlvin, Luther, etc. wanted to have synods as they found the preponderence of sects, each many with his own interpretation foul.

To quote Luther from HEinrich Denifle, Luther and Lutherdom

The world by this teaching becomes only the worse, the longer it exists... the people are more avaricious, less merciful... and worse than before under the Papacy

And another great one from Luther said (as cited in Bible quizzes to a Street Preacher by Leslie Rumble

There are almost as many sects and beliefs as there are heads, this one will not admit Baptis; that one rejects the Sacrament of the altar; another places another world between the present one and the day of judgement; some teach that Jesus Christ is not god. There is not an individual, however clowneish he may be, who does not claim to be inspired by the Holy Ghost and who does nto put forth as prophecies his ravings and dreams

If you check Luther's Epistle to Zwingli, in a letter to Heinrich Zwingli, Martin Luther conceded that the reformers woudl again have to take refuge in the Church councils in order to preserve the unity of the faith on account of the many interpretations that were given to scritpure

that so much of what they (the Church) say is true:

Much and I don't doubt that one bit, not all, much of what the Catholic Church says is based on its tradition. When Catholics claim inerrancy for something that isn't the inspired Word of God and then base doctrine on it, it remains error.

The question is where does one turn for the unvarnished Word of God? The proper course is to use Scripture to check what you are being taught, ala Bereans.