Hi. I've never had any formal Bible study training... and that's probably part of the problem. I was raised Southern Baptist, but am now getting myself all twisted in knots after reading Church history and some of the Church Fathers and trying to read Scripture with an open mind...
I do believe that the Bible is supposed to be our ultimate authority, but I'm really getting frustrated at all the places where the right way to understand doctrine doesn't seem clear. I know what
Baptists have traditionally taught and believed -- but the early Church Fathers seem in many places to teach something different, and I'm finding
the Bible seems to teach something different -- that is, unless I begin with Baptist assumptions.
It seems like everybody has to begin with a certain set of assumptions -- or else there's no way to make sense of all this at all. 
For an example of just one knot I am twisting myself in, one I was thinking about earlier today --
What is actually required for salvation? Rather than being simple and clear like I've always been told this is
supposed to be, I find that the Bible isn't very clear at all -- unless I begin from a certain assumption (
sola fide for example) and subject everything else I read to that.
- Paul talks about being "saved by grace through faith" and "not a result of works" in Ephesians 2:8-10. Protestants take this to be a statement of sola fide, justification by faith alone.
- James says "a person is justified by works and not by faith alone" (James 2:24). And yes I know how Protestants usually explicate this in light of Paul -- but why do we prioritize Paul over James? How is that decision made?
- Jesus makes statements that seem to pretty clearly state there are things we have to do (works?) in order to be saved. For example, He says "unless one is both of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God" (John 3:5), traditionally understood to refer to baptism; He says "unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you" (John 6:53), traditionally held to refer to the Lord's Supper. And yes, Baptists say neither one refers to either, but they still both apparently refer to something we have to do.
- Jesus also gives parables of the Judgment indicating we will be judged according to our works (Matt 25:31-46). Paul also says pretty plainly that God "will render to each one according to his works" (Roman 2:6) -- shortly before the passages where Protestants find the boldest proclamations of sola fide. How does that square?
And I could go on. There are
other passages that don't seem to line up with the rest of these. And I'm just making myself miserable trying to figure out how all this sorts out.
People tell me in
sola fide threads to "use Scripture to interpret Scripture" -- but I don't see how that works at all, when these Scriptures appear to be saying completely different things. It feels like trying to solve a mathematical proof -- I feel like
everything should make sense, if only I know the theorem to start with. But I feel like, in my mind, I have no idea where to begin... People tell me to keep studying, that if I study more, it will all begin to make sense... but it feels like the more I study, the less
anything makes sense.
And yes I know that the Catholic Church has a magisterium that "fixes everything"! But is that the only answer? I know that the Church Fathers give guidance in how
they, the Early Church, understood things -- and that helps a lot. But should I prioritize
their interpretations?
How do Protestants make it work at all?
