Where did I say any denomination is the “correct” one, much less mine? I never even said what denomination I am. I certainly reject your position that no person can ever understand scripture so we should just disregard it and follow made up always changing traditions. It breeds confusion and as we certainly see heresy. Biblical based congregations are much more consistent and unified.
The Catholic versus Protestant conflict seems contrary to Christianity. Catholics make some very good points, like who has authority to interpret scripture, but Protestants also make some good points, like how does one follow of teaching that directly contradicts scripture? Like the article discusses, what does a believer do when the church starts accepting active, non-repentant homosexuals or ordaining women? As others have posted, the Catholic Church itself might soon experience schism over these issues.
To me, there are both salvation and doctrinal related issues, and Christians of all stripes shouldn’t bash each other over the latter. However, none of us should compromise on salvation related facets of Christianity, such as Christ isn’t the only way to salvation or that it’s OK to continue sinning willfully.
An "always changing tradition" is an oxymoron, as I've previously explained to you. Things that are "always changing" are innovations. Innovations in religion are one step removed from heresy.
Chesterton called tradition the "democracy of the dead," by which he meant that paying careful attention to what our forefathers believed amounted to "giving them a vote". It seems obvious to me that, if we view Christian faith and doctrine as a gift received and passed on rather than something we construct ourselves (whether based on our reading of the Book or not), that is the only way for things to work.
Sola scriptura, unless restrained and governed by authentic tradition, doesn't get the job done. "Is it taught in the Bible?" is a fine test for doctrine, but if that doctrine flunks the test of "Did our forefathers in the faith believe this, or something that could reasonably evolve into it?" it's highly suspect. The Holy Spirit guided them, too. The Holy Spirit can guide them to believe "X", and us to believe "X, and X implies Y, means both X and Y". But He can't guide them to believe "X" and us to believe "not X". God is not the author of contradiction.
That's why even the "Bible Answer Man," back when he considered himself to be a sola scriptura Protestant, pointed to something he called the "historic Christian faith" as a test for doctrine.
Who are you to say which denominations are biblical? And which offshoot of Lutheran are you?
See my point?
If everyone has authority to interpret scripture then you can’t say one word about their beliefs because THEY are the ultimate arbitrator. You certainly can’t call their denomination unbiblical.