The New Testament testifies to the Old and they are in complete harmony, showing that Jesus was the fulfilment of the prophesied Old Testament Hebrew Messiah, which means anointed and in Greek anointed is Christos or Christ. So simply by believing what you read, rather than reading what you believe and letting the Bible interpret the Bible, then the secret plan God has for mankind’s future can be revealed. Letting us know the when, where and who of the End-Times. I hope pray you will grow more in you faith and become a more mature Christian as we rapidly head towards the great tribulation.
This will probably be my last post in this thread, as I am tired of the run around.
The Bible cannot interpret itself, as it is a book. It is completely impossible for a book to interpret itself.
The interpretation comes from the mindset of the reader, no matter what, and there is no escaping this.
There are hundreds of interpretations of any verse of scripture out there on the internet for all to read. This is the primary cause as to the large amount of denominations that we see today, because of interpretation. Everybody and anybody can claim that they and their sole interpretation of the Bible is led by the Holy Spirit, and therefore is correct, and there is nothing stopping them from going out and starting their own church based off of those interpretations.
How did this happen? It's very simple, and we will go to history to see why.
Before the invention of the printing press, all Bibles were hand written and too expensive for the commoner to afford, therefore they were mostly in Churches. The Church, had sole authority over interpretation of the Bible, and this is often refereed to as part of the 3 legged stool analogy.
Now one might ask, how would the Church have sole authority over interpreting scripture? This comes from the main reason as to why the protestant reformation happened; authority. During this time, many lashed out against the authority of the Church, believing that the sole authority we have here on earth is the Bible; aka Sola Scriptura. This basically meant that the flood gates had been open to self-interpretation of the Bible. Now don't get me wrong, there is nothing wrong with personally reading the Bible, far from it. However, not everybody will read each part of scripture the same.
Lets simply take a look at the topic of baptism. There are large divisions over whether baptism is needed or not, symbolic or not, even over the words "water and the Spirit." This was not the case before the reformation, as it was widely agreed that baptism was needed and necessary. But now, with the large amount of differences in teachings between denominations, there is war on what the meaning of baptism is. And this is only one example.
The reason the Church had authority over the interpretation of scripture, is because the scriptures came from the Church herself. Most Christians tend to believe that the Bible just simply came to be, and this is not the case. The Bible was not around until late in the 4th century, when after a series of councils and synods, an agreement came as to what books were allowed to be read in mass, and these became the Bible. Prior to this, there was no Bible, and no collection of books that were known to be sacred scripture other than the OT.
The Church declared the books in the NT and OT to be divinely inspired and sacred scripture, and the Bible came to be. Now since the Bible is a product of the Church, the Church had authority over it's interpretation. The common argument against this is that the Holy Spirit is the interpreter of the Bible. But this begs the question, who then has the Holy Spirit to interpret the Bible and how do we know who is true and who is false? This leads back to we have to judge what they say against the Bible. It is circular logic, as everything spirals in a circle with no definitive answer.
Case in point, if person A claims that they are led by the Holy Spirit and their interpretation of say John 3:5 is that the water is referencing the "broken water" a mother has shortly before giving birth to her child, and person B also claims to be led by the Holy Spirit, but say that John 3:5 is talking of physical water as in baptism, how are we to know which one is correct and who is led by the Holy Spirit?
We cannot simple go to the Bible and ask "which is correct for John 3:5?", as the Bible does not interpret itself. There needs to be a higher authority on earth that we can turn to in order to see who is correct.
This leads right into denominations. But this begs the question, which denomination is right? Since all denominations have their own interpretation of scripture, things start to become murky.
We need to look into history to see who would have the correct interpretation. This feeds right back into where the Bible came from, and how it came to be. Which Church put the Bible together, kept it together, and spread it across the world between the time after Jesus left us and went into heaven, and the late 4th century where it was finally declared sacred scripture?
This leads us to the 4 Apostolic Churches; the Catholic Church, the Eastern Orthodox Church, the Oriental Orthodox Church, and the Church of the East.
To further narrow it down, one must delve into the writings of the early Church and it's fathers to see which Church most closely relates to these teachings, and there we have the 1 Church who has the authority over the interpretation of the Bible.
To end this long post: the Bible cannot, does not, and will not interpret itself.