2Pet.1:20 Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.
This verse alone proves soul liberty. The Bible is of no private interpretation, and consequently there is soul liberty. That is the obvious conclusion. When you don't have "private interpretation," you do have "soul liberty." That is the plain teaching of this verse, and it is what you fail to see and understand. The Catholic Church has its own private interpretation, that of the Magesterium; you cannot disagree with it. The Bible condemns this. In fact it gives us an example of this in 1Timothy:
I do not understand this concept of soul liberty. The way we understand private interpretation is just as it reads, no one person has the right of private interpretation. The interpretation of the Catholic church is by the church and therefore public. Also we feel that Jesus gave this authority to Peter who in turned passed this on to the succession of popes.
The way I understand what you are saying is that you have the personal right to interpret scripture, is this soul liberty? If so then why is this not private interpretation, I do not see the difference. I know many protestants believe that the holy spirit will guide you in the interpretation but this is obviously not infalliable since there are thousands of different protestant religions, all beliving different interpretations about scripture.
I really do not think Jesus would want this, we are warned again and again about division.Jesus wants us united in one truth. Jesus promised the apostles that he would not let the gates if hell prevail against the church the he established and the only church that was formed and lasted for over 2000 years is the Catholic church. The Catholic faith is the largest of all religions in the world
4:1 Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils;
2 Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron;
3 Forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats, which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving of them which believe and know the truth.
This sounds like the protestant reformation, until that time their was only one church.
In regards to these goofy arguements over forbidding marriage and abstaining from meat, you need to look at history and what was happening at that time. They were warning against the pagan (gnostics) traditions of that time, but if you don't believe this then I offer the following.
The catholic church does not forbid marriage, sure priests are to remain celebate but they can marry, they just have to give up their priestly duties. They still are priests since they will always carry this spiritual title.
As for forbiding food, Catholics can eat any food they want, the church asks its people to obstain from meat on Fridays during lent to bring us closer to Jesus through personal sacrifice. Meat was considered to be an extragant food for years and by obstaining from it on Fridays one is giving ups something for our lord and it also helps us focus on Jesus' passion. If a person really likes fish over meat, then fish is what he should obstain from. We do not make any sweeping condemnation of food in general.
These doctrines as you call them are not dogma, they are not infalliable and do not necessarily come from the apostalic tradition. These are man made traditions of the church. We as Catholics do have to follow the rules set down by the church so it would be sinful if we do not obey these rules.
As being a doctrine of demons, I think you are getting a little carried away. Remember judge not, lest yea be judged. These rules of the church do not have any evil intent, tell me what is wrong with these doctrines. As for the priesthood, Saint Paul says that it is best not to be married. Jesus who is the high priest of the church never married. These are not evil things. We are warned that a married man cares for the things of his wife and not of the things of the lord (sorry I didnt look up the actual text).
It has a private interpretation of the Bible, does not give its people soul liberty to decide for themselves on the basis of their own study, and what they teach is obviously from Satan, according to this passage. The Roman Catholic Church fits this bill.
Again if sole liberty is not private interpretation then what is it. It is interpretation by a person (private). And the remarks saying the Catholic church is of Satan. Be careful what you say, if I am correct and the Catholic church is the church founded by Jesus, you are commiting blasphemy to his church. Also it not very christian like to attack a fellow christian religion this way.
A person has the right to believe what he wants to believe. If he believes that is what the Bible teaches (infant baptism), instead of burning him at the stake (as the Catholics did to those who disagreed with them), we ask such a person to keep their beliefs to themselves (i.e., not to propagate them, or find a church where he would be more comfortable.
Who did we burn at the stake? I get a kick out of your churchs response to someone believing as they do "Keep your mouth shut". At least we admit that there is one teaching and if they do not believe this teaching they are in conflict with the teachings of the church. If one is a Catholic then one has to believe as a Catholic regarding the doctrin of the church.
---Authority in a Catholic Church is a burden, a yoke to bear, something that keeps one in bondage.
But it is not so in a Baptist Church. In a Baptist Church every member has an equal vote. It is not a hierarchy that rules things. We all, as one assembly, sit and make decisions, democratically as they pertain to the church. Everyone that is a member has their say, their vote.
This is true unless you beleive in a different doctrine like infant baptism then your voice is not to be heard. Its human pride and arrogance which keeps people from obeying authority set forth by Jesus.
---You say: "We do not have to worry about correct scripture interpretation." That is just another way of saying, "We don't have to worry about having to think; the church does it for us." What a shame! "Study to show yourselves approved unto God," the Bible says. You say: "No thank you, the Church does it for me. We have our private interpretation. Soul liberty is not allowed here
You see we believe that the church has the authority to interpret scriptures, also since the Catholic Church has been around 1500 years longer than any other christian group, we have alot more experience with interpretation. Our interpreters go back to the time of Jesus. Soul liberty has resulted in schism and division into thousands of beliefs. There is only one truth in Heaven.
Furthermore I don't have any trouble with the authority of my church at all. I have trouble with the authority of your church which by Biblical definitions is not a church. It is an organization; not a church. Check the meaning of the word "ekklesia."
Well our definition of church is the body of believers with Jesus as its head, Jesus also designated people of authority, Peter as the earthly head of the church and the apostles and the bishops of the church. This is the heiarchy which Jesus designed into his church, which as endured for over 2000 years. Can you say that your church as stayed true to its intial beliefs. For instance the original protestants believed that birth control was wrong, as well as abortion. Luther and Calvin had a great devotion to Mary, the teachers of the church where to be men. Many of your beliefs differ greatly, the Catholic church has stayed true to its belief.
Peace be with you all.
Yours in Christ
Daniel