Hope you’re having a nice conversation with yourself

only His Church has authority over scripture when guided by the Holy Spirit, all private interpretation is useless.
since we're posting videos here's a popularized summary of one of my favorite saints on the subject



This post was edited by majorblood on Jul 6 2026 01:22pm

I have 2 simple questions. Because there are scholars on both sides of the isle who vastly disagree. Thousands of points of views even among christians themselves.
1. Which version is the correct/true version?
2. Even if we are able to find the so called "correct bible" who has the right interpretation of that version?



Video summary
Your interpretation is wrong my interpretation is right.

Other than stating your opinions can you explain how and why yours is the correct interpretation?

There is a true interpretation because Christ did not send a bible, he created a Church (His body) through His Apostles and promised the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.


The bible didn't just appear, real historical people were chosen by Christ (whether you believe He is God or not) and they were given authority by Him and the ability to pass this onto bishops. This event primarily happened at Pentecost, the beginning of the Church, where the person of the Holy Spirit indwelled the Church. None of this is an interpretation of the bible, the early Christians did not have a bible as we understand it, they lived with Christ and His apostles and lived the praxis with divine given authority.

Secular scholars mean nothing without the backing of the Episcopate, because as the early Church firmly established where the bishop is, there is the Church.

My personal interpretation means nothing, nor does anyone in this thread, without the blessing of a bishop who has authority unbroken since Pentecost.

This post was edited by majorblood on Jul 6 2026 04:21pm

Its not about my or your belief its about what can be proven beyond blind faith/ignorance. You have not been able to prove or demonstrate those things in any way other than hearsay.

Even if we assume that these so called bishops were granted authority to interpret scripture then reason and logic become arbitrary in determining what anything means or the intent behind the meaning, unless you have a title and a funny hat.
Essentially if you are not chosen you are wrong.

This is argument from authority. Faulty logic especially when you cannot prove the very authority you draw your conclusions from.

This is all nonsense.

Are you arguing in favor of general papal infallibility? Literally not even the pope believes in that.

There are innumerable examples of the church fucking up in history—just as there are innumerable examples of every other human institution fucking up.

You’re saying that, for instance, Dostoevsky had nothing important to say on Christianity… that’s a view almost no intellectual modern Christian would support you in, even Catholics.

I do not support the papacy, no.

Dostoevsky had nothing to say on the dogmatic interpretations of written tradition, to say "he has nothing important to say on Christianity" is irrelevant. Dostoevsky himself would be the first to tell you his personal art does not supersede the authority of the Church's bishops.

"fucking up" is some vague thing, only the Church has authority granted by Christ on guarding the traditions of the Church.

the Church is not a human institution, it is divine.

This post was edited by majorblood on Jul 6 2026 05:42pm

Argument from authority doesn't mean something is wrong, this is a fallacy fallacy. Citing the continuous, historical institution that actually compiled and codified a text to explain its parameters is basic historical methodology.

My argument is grounded in the consistent worldview of Eastern Orthodoxy. If you want to reject it and compare frameworks, let's see how your arbitrary, secular worldview accounts for the existence of transcendental categories, invariant laws of logic, the objective possibility of knowledge, human agency, or truth itself. Before you critique my authority, justify your own.

I am telling you the authority within the Christian worldview, granted by the Word, to safeguard the traditions of His Holy Bride.

Which church are we talking about here? Regardless of what you think he would be the first to tell me, what Dostoevsky actually said about the Catholic church is that it was an amoral institution equal to atheism, and was equally responsible for the rise of socialism.

The Church established at Pentecost that Dostoevsky belongs to, the Eastern Orthodox Church. I do not care about the papacy.

This post was edited by majorblood on Jul 6 2026 06:15pm