Another "so what?" comes to us from the New Testament itself: Paul & Peter.
They were at times at odds re: how Gentiles were to be treated...should they be circumcized or not?...What about the types of food they ate?...what about the level of hospitality & open association the Jews should be showing these Gentiles in Christ?
These were all real questions of the day in the Early Church. It got to the point where the apostle Paul "opposed Peter to his face" (Gal. 2:11) over some of these issues.
To hear you tell it, you'd probably accuse both Peter & Paul (or one or the other) of being "schismatics" over these issues.
To hear you tell it, why since Peter & Paul "disagree[d] on various passages, despite the fact that their differing views on Scripture were formed honestly, through study, prayer, and meditation on God's word" -- therefore, no one, real, true position existed -- or could be interpreted -- on God's position on the matter.
Well, had you taken such a first-century commentary vantage, you would have been wrong; just like you're wrong now to be promoting your subtle Biblical relativism.
The fact is, it was over such disagreements that we get some of the most marvelous Scriptural verses we have -- verses like Gal. 2:20 + justification by faith (Gal. 2:16-21) -- which comes imbedded in a message Paul gave to his fellow Jews over these disagreements. Also, please commit Gal. 2:14 to memory over these kind of disagreeable issues in the Church: 14When I saw that they were not acting in line with the truth of the gospel...(Yes, Virginia r9etb, there is "the truth of the gospel" which measures our behavior!)
Here, I'll cite the passage at length:
9James, Peter and John, those reputed to be pillars, gave me and Barnabas the right hand of fellowship when they recognized the grace given to me. They agreed that we should go to the Gentiles, and they to the Jews. 10All they asked was that we should continue to remember the poor, the very thing I was eager to do.
11When Peter came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face, because he was clearly in the wrong. 12Before certain men came from James, he used to eat with the Gentiles. But when they arrived, he began to draw back and separate himself from the Gentiles because he was afraid of those who belonged to the circumcision group. 13The other Jews joined him in his hypocrisy, so that by their hypocrisy even Barnabas was led astray.
14When I saw that they were not acting in line with the truth of the gospel, I said to Peter in front of them all, "You are a Jew, yet you live like a Gentile and not like a Jew. How is it, then, that you force Gentiles to follow Jewish customs?
15"We who are Jews by birth and not 'Gentile sinners' 16know that a man is not justified by observing the law, but by faith in Jesus Christ. So we, too, have put our faith in Christ Jesus that we may be justified by faith in Christ and not by observing the law, because by observing the law no one will be justified.
17"If, while we seek to be justified in Christ, it becomes evident that we ourselves are sinners, does that mean that Christ promotes sin? Absolutely not! 18If I rebuild what I destroyed, I prove that I am a lawbreaker. 19For through the law I died to the law so that I might live for God. 20I have been crucified with Christ and I no longer live, but Christ lives in me. The life I live in the body, I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me. 21I do not set aside the grace of God, for if righteousness could be gained through the law, Christ died for nothing!"
In any case, your assertion that Scripture is “clear” to those who study and pray, is directly at odds with your statement that “NO ONE can infallibly interpret scripture.”
- - - - -
I asserted the FIRST part of taht statement, but I NEVER, nor would I ever state: “NO ONE can infallibly interpret scripture.”. So you are apparently confused r9.