There are schools of thought on this, Zed. Perhaps if you did some study you might realise this and learn something.
The Roman Catholics believe that the interpretation of the Scriptures belongs to the Church, namely Rome, and its scholars. Whatever the Church says the Bible says is what the Bible says.
The Orthodox Christians hold to a similar view. Whatever the Orthodox Church teaches the bible says - the bible says.
Historically, the Roman Catholics, from the West, hold to a literal understanding of the language in the bible. Not a genre of literalism - in the sense of modern fundamentalists, but literal in the sense that - words have a real meaning that can be understood in the context and that more than one person can arrive at the meaning of the word.
The Orthodox, from the East, held to an interpretation that was more allegorical. Actually, they had what we might consider layers of interpretation. The basic literal meaning. A moralistic meaning. A spiritual meaning. An allegorical meaning. It was this latter one which has come to have more significance. Understandings of words came about by some kind of "mystical secret knowledge". Only the initiated or the paramount scholar could understand the text.
The Protestants, Luther and Knox and Calvin, derived from the Western position and so - held to the idea that words were literal and could be understood. Again, it was not literal in the sense of how fundamentalists understand it today. they did not see literalism as a genre. Yet they rejected the idea that the church interpreted the meaning of what the bible was saying. They held to the view that the bible came from God, and was not put together by the church. Rather, God preserved it, having given it to the church.
After the Protestants, the dissidents arrived. The non-establishments, and the anabaptists. They took hold of Luther's priesthood of all believers and changed it. For Luther it never meant that the clergy didn't have a role in interpreting the Scriptures, but the newer dissidents did. For them the priesthood of all believers gave carte blanche to interpret the Scriptures themselves without any need for the oversight of the church or the clergy. They held to the idea that the Spirit will give them all wisdom and will help them interpret.
Hence, why it is really at this point in history that denominations went from 3 or 4 basic ones to about a hundred.
And then came the Charismatic / pentecostal movements from about 1900. Now not only did people have the bible in their own language and not only could they interpret it anyway they liked, now they had the Spirit of God who was giving new revelation apart from the Scriptures. Literally, the church splintered in hundreds of denominations.
And then finally in the 20th century, worldwide philosophy changed from the modern position to the post modern position. Now everyone could believe and think whatever they wanted and nobody could tell them what to do. Hence a zillion denominations sprang up.
But having said this. the church always reflects the world or the world is a reflection of the church. The world is just as confused as the Church. no one knows who they are anymore. We all identify however we want and no-one is able to say - no.
Yet this history only demonstrates how things changed and perhaps why.
I spring from the protestant point of view. I think the bible can be understood and has meaning that can be understood. there are ways to read books - even those written prior to Gutenburg. Books prior to Gutenburn DO NEED to read in a particular style. One example, is not in a chronological manner. Prior to Gutenburg, books were rare and valuable. Nobody wrote anything unless they absolutely had too. Words were important and not wasted. To copy a book required someone to physically write it out with hand. Ink and Quill or however they did it back then. they were written to be read and reread - with links back to previous parts and links to future parts. Nowadays, books can copied at the push of a computer button. They are written to be read once and discarded. There are absolutely billions of books with subjects about everything. They are written primarily to be read from cover to cover in a chronological order.
that is some of the differences necessary to understand when to read any book pre-gutenburg. Yet, the similarities are there too with modern books. they have words which most people can read and understand. the interpretation is not so subjective that there are a billion different meanings. Words and contexts have meanings.
A book came out in the previous century, called "how to read a book". It is not a religious book. Yet it is a wonderful book, for it teaches us how to read. You can download it for free on the internet. Yet it uses the same principles that I would use in reading the bible. And that anyone can use to read it and to understand it.
I take the view that if more than one person is able to come to the same conclusion as you when reading it - then you are starting to read it less subjectively. Of course the more people who arrive at the same conclusions as yourself - about what the text says and is trying to say - the more objective you are. When one person reads something and NO ONE arrives at the same conclusion it is a warning to be cautious. Of course it doesn't mean you are incorrect, but it does mean that you should be able to have good arguments for why you came to that position.
In the church, we have thousands of denominations - but actually relatively few disagreements on theological issues. Yes, that sounds like a contradiction - and yet when we start to see what the differences are - they are actually a lot less than we might consider. they mostly revolve around - the meaning of sacraments, church government, and the meaning of salvation. Yes, we could throw in endgames, and perhaps even interpretations of the bible. But basically that is it.
In my view - these issues of difference result from passion, culture and pride. And perhaps ignorance as well. America is very individualistic and anti-authoritarian in its culture. this is very different from Europe and England in particular which prides itself on traditions and authority. the Asian cultures, are very corporate orientated and this means that they in many ways - are opposed to individualistic thinking. Australia is a mixture of individualism and anti-authority, with many Asian cultures. And more recently, Middle Eastern and African mixes. these all play a part in how we understand the bible.
the thing is - we don't need secret knowledge to understand the bible. Yes it helps to understand the original languages and church history. It helps to have a viewpoint of these things.
If you think there are no answers - you will hit that everytime.
