Mary- other children

[John1717]

Benadam:
After as much reasonable evidence from scripture has been applied to the defense of the catholic view of Mary’s role in salvation history for John to continue the discussion he will have to give reason why catholic reasons are unreasonable which he hasn’t shown the ability to directly address.

As I have stated elswhere, you have made God so small that you see nothing wrong with elevating one of His creatures to a status she does not deserve! She is a speck of dust compared to God!!!

How can the child have authority over a parent?
The scriptures are a fruit of the People of God. Do you really believe that the people who’s lives make visible the Word of God have less authority than the words that describe their lives?

The Scriptures are the very words of God! The problem is that you elevate your “tradition” to a position above Scripture!

 

[John1717]

Mickey:

It is obvious that Nestorius was never Catholic. The anti-Catholic rhetoric, the false depictions of Catholic belief, the ignoring of valid refutation to his weak arguments.

Hey Nestorius, perhaps you should find a nice forum where you and James White can bask in your twisted interpretations.

Seriously though Nestorius. Why are you here? It is surely not to discover the truth about the Catholic Church. And you are not going to evangelize anyone with your hateful rhetoric. Why are you here?

**Was Jesus hateful when He rebuked the religious leaders of His day? How about Paul when he spoke out about false teaching? How do you tell someone that what they believe is not true without offending them? Please tell me. **

smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/23/23_28_113.gif

 

[John1717]

Mickey:

It is obvious that Nestorius was never Catholic. The anti-Catholic rhetoric, the false depictions of Catholic belief, the ignoring of valid refutation to his weak arguments.

Hey Nestorius, perhaps you should find a nice forum where you and James White can bask in your twisted interpretations.

Seriously though Nestorius. Why are you here? It is surely not to discover the truth about the Catholic Church. And you are not going to evangelize anyone with your hateful rhetoric. Why are you here?

**Was Jesus hateful when He rebuked the religious leaders of His day? How about Paul when he spoke out about false teaching? How do you tell someone that what they believe is not true without offending them? Please tell me. **

---

Do you think it is possible to get back to the topic of this thread???

smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/23/23_28_113.gif

 

[Lisa4Catholics]

John1717:

Benadam:

After as much reasonable evidence from scripture has been applied to the defense of the catholic view of Mary’s role in salvation history for John to continue the discussion he will have to give reason why catholic reasons are unreasonable which he hasn’t shown the ability to directly address.

As I have stated elswhere, you have made God so small that you see nothing wrong with elevating one of His creatures to a status she does not deserve! She is a speck of dust compared to God!!!

How can the child have authority over a parent?
The scriptures are a fruit of the People of God. Do you really believe that the people who’s lives make visible the Word of God have less authority than the words that describe their lives?

**The Scriptures are the very words of God! The problem is that you elevate your “tradition” to a position above Scripture!**We don’t make God small,you do with your idea of what he is about.He exalts the humble,we just believe what scriptures say.All generations shall call me blessed-the Virgin Mary inspired by the Holy Spirit,or is that some scripture you would rather overlook?She is not compared with God the only one who is doing that is you.The Church only does what Christ appointed Her to do, nothing more and nothing less.God Bless

 

[John1717]

MaggieOH:

You talk as one who makes false and slanderous statements:

1. The Bible, that is a proper translation of the Bible has never been placed on the Index of Forbidden Books. On the other hand an extremely poor translation with many errors was placed there. I seem to remember reading that it was either the Wycliffe of the Tyndale translation that got this treatment because of the deliberate errors that were to be found.
2. In all of the parishes of the Catholic Church where I have been no priest ever made such a statement. This is something that is stretching the truth and yes I remember Sandra making a very similar false claim. I guess it must be on the card that you get for how to handle Catholic objections.

My first Bible is 40 years old. I used it in school as I studied both the New and the Old Testament. I am involved with the Scripture Study course in my parish. We are encouraged to think freely and it is a lie to state otherwise.

I doubt that you ever were a Catholic. It is a line that I heard from Sandra and she could not give any details regarding the Mass, let alone any proper doctrine. The same is obvious in what you are stating.

You claim things that have never been true. I am surprised that you did not come out with the one about how the priest never reads the Bible, and if you had been a Catholic you would know that is not true.

The understanding that you have of Mary is also distorted, just as it is distorted in any Fundamentalist Church that has strayed so far from the Truth.

My understanding of Mary comes from 47 years in the Catholic faith, with twelve of those year’s being in Catholic schools!

 

[John1717]

cyprian:

Prayers for the dead in Maccabees 12:?. Because of this, Maccabees is said to have been added to our Bible when actually, HISTORICALLY, it was removed.
Peace and love.
He is All
i am nothing

Some reasons why we must reject the Apocrypha as being part of canon of Scripture are:

It is not included in the Hebrew canon of Scripture. The Apocryphal writers sometimes disclaim divine inspiration. For example, in 2 Maccabees 15:38,39 CT, we read, "So these things being done with relation to Nicanor and from that time the city being possessed by the Hebrews, I also will here make an end of my narration. Which if I have done well and as it becometh the history, it is what I desired: but if not so perfectly, it must be pardoned me."

“In all of the New Testament there is not even one single reference or quotation, made by Christ or any of the Apostles, that would confirm all or any part of the Apocrypha as being divinely inspired.”(7)

In 2 Machabees (another spelling) 12:43-46, we have the reference cited by the Catholic Church to support Purgatory. If one would read verses 40 through 46, he would learn that God killed these people because of idolatry. According to Catholicism, if you die in the state of mortal sin, which idolatry is, you’ll go straight to Hell when you die! Therefore, according to Catholic doctrine, Judas Machabeus was WRONG in suggesting that the people should “pray for the dead, that they may be loosed from sins” (verse 46)!

For a person to believe in the doctrine of Purgatory, he/she would have to be totally misinformed about the Biblical doctrines of the Atonement, Redemption and even Salvation. Purgatory infers works for salvation, a soul-damning and devilish teaching. Augustine said, “there are some who have departed this life, not so bad as to be deemed unworthy of mercy, nor so good as to be entitled to immediate happiness.” This statement infers works for salvation which is refuted by Eph. 2:8,9; Titus 3:5; Rom. 4:4-6 and 2 Tim. 1:9. Consequently, one can therefore conclude that Augustine was NOT a Christian but instead a minister and servant of Satan, 2 Cor. 11:13-15!

In summary, the Apocryphal books, which include 2 Maccabees, are NOT from God, NOT inspired and MUST NOT be placed on the same level of authority as Holy Writ.

I hope this helps.

 

[John1717]

cyprian:

Prayers for the dead in Maccabees 12:?. Because of this, Maccabees is said to have been added to our Bible when actually, HISTORICALLY, it was removed.
Peace and love.
He is All
i am nothing

Some reasons why we must reject the Apocrypha as being part of canon of Scripture are:

It is not included in the Hebrew canon of Scripture. The Apocryphal writers sometimes disclaim divine inspiration. For example, in 2 Maccabees 15:38,39 CT, we read, "So these things being done with relation to Nicanor and from that time the city being possessed by the Hebrews, I also will here make an end of my narration. Which if I have done well and as it becometh the history, it is what I desired: but if not so perfectly, it must be pardoned me."

“In all of the New Testament there is not even one single reference or quotation, made by Christ or any of the Apostles, that would confirm all or any part of the Apocrypha as being divinely inspired.”(7)

In 2 Machabees (another spelling) 12:43-46, we have the reference cited by the Catholic Church to support Purgatory. If one would read verses 40 through 46, he would learn that God killed these people because of idolatry. According to Catholicism, if you die in the state of mortal sin, which idolatry is, you’ll go straight to Hell when you die! Therefore, according to Catholic doctrine, Judas Machabeus was WRONG in suggesting that the people should “pray for the dead, that they may be loosed from sins” (verse 46)!

For a person to believe in the doctrine of Purgatory, he/she would have to be totally misinformed about the Biblical doctrines of the Atonement, Redemption and even Salvation. Purgatory infers works for salvation, a soul-damning and devilish teaching. Augustine said, “there are some who have departed this life, not so bad as to be deemed unworthy of mercy, nor so good as to be entitled to immediate happiness.” This statement infers works for salvation which is refuted by Eph. 2:8,9; Titus 3:5; Rom. 4:4-6 and 2 Tim. 1:9.

The Apocryphal books, which include 2 Maccabees, are NOT from God, NOT inspired and MUST NOT be placed on the same level of authority as Holy Writ.

I hope this helps.

 

[John1717]

cyprian:

Prayers for the dead in Maccabees 12:?. Because of this, Maccabees is said to have been added to our Bible when actually, HISTORICALLY, it was removed.
Peace and love.
He is All
i am nothing

Some reasons why we must reject the Apocrypha as being part of canon of Scripture are:

It is not included in the Hebrew canon of Scripture.

The Apocryphal writers sometimes disclaim divine inspiration. For example, in 2 Maccabees 15:38,39 CT, we read, "So these things being done with relation to Nicanor and from that time the city being possessed by the Hebrews, I also will here make an end of my narration. Which if I have done well and as it becometh the history, it is what I desired: but if not so perfectly, it must be pardoned me."

“In all of the New Testament there is not even one single reference or quotation, made by Christ or any of the Apostles, that would confirm all or any part of the Apocrypha as being divinely inspired.”

In 2 Machabees (another spelling) 12:43-46, we have the reference cited by the Catholic Church to support Purgatory. If one would read verses 40 through 46, he would learn that God killed these people because of idolatry. According to Catholicism, if you die in the state of mortal sin, which idolatry is, you’ll go straight to Hell when you die! Therefore, according to Catholic doctrine, Judas Machabeus was WRONG in suggesting that the people should “pray for the dead, that they may be loosed from sins” (verse 46)!

For a person to believe in the doctrine of Purgatory, he/she would have to be totally misinformed about the Biblical doctrines of the Atonement, Redemption and even Salvation. Purgatory infers works for salvation, a soul-damning and devilish teaching. Augustine said, “there are some who have departed this life, not so bad as to be deemed unworthy of mercy, nor so good as to be entitled to immediate happiness.” This statement infers works for salvation which is refuted by Eph. 2:8,9; Titus 3:5; Rom. 4:4-6 and 2 Tim. 1:9.

The Apocryphal books, which include 2 Maccabees, are NOT from God, NOT inspired and MUST NOT be placed on the same level of authority as Holy Writ.

I hope this helps.

 

[MarkAnthonyCozy]

**The problem is, Catholics have made God too small! You believe that mere men have the power to call the Creator of the Universe out of heaven, place Him on an altar and re-present Him as a sacrifice again and again, thousands of times each day. Then you actually believe that you can eat God! You have a very small God indeed!!! **

We are the royal priesthood whose duty it is to partake of the one true sacrifice that gives us life. Jesus blood and body were given to us to nourish us until he comes again.

We, the remnant of her (Mary’s) seed, which keep the commandments of God and have the testimony of Jesus Christ, are at war with the dragon.

Through us God gave us the holy scriptures, they just didn’t fall out of the sky.

I once believed as you, questing for knowledge, taking bite after bite of that fruit of the tree of knowledge believing that the Catholic Church was foolish.

Then my heart was transformed, it is a matter of the heart, a relationship with Jesus Christ, knowing nothing but Christ crucified. His kingdom not in word, but in power!

Walk with Jesus for but a little while, let him teach you, empty yourself of yourself, let the Holy Spirit fill you, pray and fast, come to the water and drink deeply of the life that Jesus wants to give you!

Only God can do this. If only if you say “yes” to him as Mary did, “be it unto me according to thy word.”

 

[Axion]

John1717:

Why do you continue to call Mary God’s mother when anyone with an ounce of logic knows that GOD HAS NO MOTHER!!!

But this is a case where men’s “logic” is foolishness to God.

In your wisdom you think that God cannot in any way have a mother. But God can do anything He wishes. God the Son was born of a Woman and made man in her womb. Mary is therefore mother of God the Son. That is undeniable, unless you reject the incarnation.

You say that I am not a Christian yet it is you who deny the sufficiency of Christ’s death on the cross each time you attend Mass! You say that you are a Christian but for you, Christ isn’t enough! You also need Mary, the Sacraments, the Church and your good works to obtain salvation.

Changing the subject…

The point is that to be a Christian, you have to believe in the Incarnation. You must accept that Jesus is the Christ and IS God the Son as well as Son of Mary and David and Adam. Do you believe this?

As for Mary, the Sacraments, the Church and Good Works. These are things decreed by God as channels of His Grace. None are opposed to his purpose, but serve to bring His purpose about.

Please enlighten me, just when was God born???

God the Son was born into the World as the pprson Jesus Christ, fully God and fully Man around 2000 years ago.

God did not die!!! The God-man Jesus Christ died!

This answer seems very confused to me. Is Jesus Christ not God? If so, God, one of the **personhoods ** of God died. That is what the redemption is all about.

If not then the death of Jesus could not redeem the world - as you admit below.

Can a man’s death pay the price of the sins of the entire world? No.

I agree 100%

God, in His divinity, cannot be conceived and born any more than He can die. It cannot therefore be said of Mary that she bore God(and hence, bears the designation “mother of God”), any more than it can be said of the Jews that they killed God. Jesus in His humanity had a mother; Jesus in His divinity was "without father or mother; without genealogy, without begining of days or end of life!

Again you say “God cannot be conceived and born. Nor can He die.” Yet again we have to focus on the question. Is Jesus God the Son? If so, He was indeed born and did indeed die for our sins on the cross.

If not, Christianity is a lie.

Mary bore Jesus Christ who is God the Son, 2nd person of the Trinity. Jesus Christ, did not exist as fully man and fully God in one person, before the incarnation. He took His human nature and body from Mary. She is therefore His Mother. Mother of the person Jesus Christ. Mother of God the Son.

If you cannot accept this, you deny the very essentials of Christianity - The fact that God became man and died for our sins. You fall into Gnostic or Nestorian heresy.

Are you saying, that for a time, God ceased to exist!!!

When we as humans die, do we cease to exist? No. We transfer to another state. This is what happened to Jesus. He descended to Hades as did all who died up until that time. God the Father and the Holy Spirit remained as ever, although they, being also One with Jesus, shared His experience.

The problem is, Catholics have made God too small! You believe that mere men have the power to call the Creator of the Universe out of heaven, place Him on an altar and re-present Him as a sacrifice again and again, thousands of times each day. Then you actually believe that you can eat God! You have a very small God indeed!!!

No. God has made Himself **accessible ** to humans, and in a way we can never fully understand. Do you think we can fully understand everything God does? That is very unlikely, isn’t it? Just as a dog or cat could not begin to explain how a television set works, or how the market economy functions. We cannot even start to think on the right level to explain the deeper mysteries of God. No-one imagines he is eating the totality of God when they obey Jesus’s “hard teaching”, to eat His body and blood in the Eucharist. It is done in Faith.

Just so we have to accept that God is Three and is One at the same time. You have also to accept that you cannot divide Jesus Christ into two persons, as you have attempted to do - one who has no mother and father, and one who has. The moment you do this, you deny the incarnation, that God **became ** man. He didn’t pretend to be a man, or “inhabit” a man, he became man. And His mother is Mary.

 

[MaggieOH]

My understanding of Mary comes from 47 years in the Catholic faith, with twelve of those year’s being in Catholic schools!

I for one do not believe that you are telling the truth about your understanding of Mary. If you were taught properly at school then you would still be Catholic today.

What you say about Mary is based upon lies and deception that you have picked up from inferior sources of information.

I spent the same length of time in Catholic schools as you claim and I certainly did not come away with such a poor understanding of Mary’s role in God’s plan of Salvation.

I suggest that you have deliberately forgotten everything that you learned in school because you have agreed to accept what you have been told in some “bible study” that allegedly opened your eyes to the truth. If that is the case then I say that the bible study itself was bunk.

Maggie

 

[MaggieOH]

John1717:

Some reasons why we must reject the Apocrypha as being part of canon of Scripture are:

It is not included in the Hebrew canon of Scripture.
since when did Christians accept a canon of Scripture that was not determined prior to circa 90 A.D.? Have you not been told that the intention of the meeting at Jamnia was two-fold? (1) to deny that the writings of the Christians were Scripture and (2) to deny any manuscripts that were written in the Greek as Scripture.

The Apocryphal writers sometimes disclaim divine inspiration. For example, in 2 Maccabees 15:38,39 CT, we read, "So these things being done with relation to Nicanor and from that time the city being possessed by the Hebrews, I also will here make an end of my narration. Which if I have done well and as it becometh the history, it is what I desired: but if not so perfectly, it must be pardoned me."
Sorry but this does not compute. Show me where any of the accepted manuscripts of the Old Testament claim to be divinely inspired. How do you distinguish between the history given in the Books of Kings and Chronicles and that of the Maccabees? To be more precise, why do you believe that Scripture should not give the reason for the festival known as Chanukah? I will await a coherent response.

“In all of the New Testament there is not even one single reference or quotation, made by Christ or any of the Apostles, that would confirm all or any part of the Apocrypha as being divinely inspired.”

Are you really sure that this is correct? Can you give me the Old Testament source for the following quote:

“and others submitted themselves to torture, refusing release so that they would rise again to a better life”. (Hebrews 11: 35)

In 2 Machabees (another spelling) 12:43-46, we have the reference cited by the Catholic Church to support Purgatory. If one would read verses 40 through 46, he would learn that God killed these people because of idolatry.

This is an interesting misstatement of Maccabees but let us look at the context and why this verse supports the idea of Purgatory (which is after all a Jewish belief):

The setting here is that there had been a battle against Gorgias of Idumaea and that a few Jews had lost their lives. Then we pick up the following:

“The next day they came to Judas to have the bodies of the fallen taken up and laid to rest among their relatives in their ancestral tombs. But when they found on each of the dead men, under their tunics, amulets of the idols taken from Jamnia, which the Law prohibits to Jews, it became clear to everyone that this was why these men had lost their lives. All then blessed the ways of the LORD, **the just judge who brings hidden things to light, **and gave themselves to prayer, **begging that the sin committed might be fully blotted out. **Next the valiant Judas urged the people to keep themselves free from all sin, having seen with their own eyes the effects of the sin of the fallen; **after this he took a collection from them individually, amounting to nearly two thousand drachmae and sent it to Jerusalem to have a sacrifice for sin offered, an altogether fine and noble action, in which he took account of the resurrection. For if he had not expected the fallen to rise again it would have been superfluous and foolish to prayer for the dead, whereas if he had in view the splendid recompense reserved for those who make a pious end, the thought was holy and devout. This was why he had this atonement sacrifice offered for the dead, so that they might be released from sin.” (2Macc 12:39-46)

**The teachings that come from this portion of Maccabees says a lot more than those who make false claims will admit.

1. there is a belief that when the flesh perishes the soul does not perish at the same time;
2. there is the recognition of termporal punishment for sins against God (in this case fleshly death)
3. there is a belief in the resurrection of the dead;
4. there is a belief in the mercy of God such that if a person has died in a state of sin, another person can pray to God to have mercy on the soul of that person.
5. the atonement sacrifice for those who died so that they might be released from the punishment due because of sin.

(to be cont)

 

[bloodwater]

according to

“24When Joseph woke up, he did what the angel of the Lord had commanded him and took Mary home as his wife. 25But he had no union with her UNTIL she gave birth to a son. And he gave him the name Jesus.”
Matthew 1:25

it basiclly says joseph waited until mary had jesus to have Union with her. what the heck?

 

[MaggieOH]

bloodwater:

according to

“24When Joseph woke up, he did what the angel of the Lord had commanded him and took Mary home as his wife. 25But he had no union with her UNTIL she gave birth to a son. And he gave him the name Jesus.”
Matthew 1:25

it basiclly says joseph waited until mary had jesus to have Union with her. what the heck?

If you read through all of the posts you might learn something.

There are two flaws in your logic and I will answer those flaws:

1. In order for prophecy to be fulfilled Jesus had to be born of a virgin, otherwise it could not be proved that Jesus was truly Divine as well as truly human.
2. The fact that scripture says “until” is not evidence of anything happening afterwards and is therefore an irrelevant argument.

Maggie

 

[Church_Militant]

My understanding of Mary comes from 47 years in the Catholic faith, with twelve of those year’s being in Catholic schools!

And not learning a blessed thing…
I came home after 34 years of non-Catholic foolishness. The reason it doesn’t make sense to you is because YOU DON’T WANT IT TO MAKE ANY SENSE. You are not open to the truth. When you are willing to follow the truth to wherever it will lead you…then you’ll come home. You don’t trust the Holy Spirit enough ask Him to enlighten you and then follow His leading, but you’ll follow all that trash that those lying teachers and preachers fill you full of.

Lemme tell you. I was HOT about all that for about the first 3 or 4 months after I came home because they told me they knew what they were talkin’ about, then I find out that they DON’T follow the early church fathers who KNEW the apostles and what they were handed down from them. You can’t just “blow off’” the Eucharistic passages and all the basis for confession and the rest of Catholic doctrine, because it’s right there in that Bible that you hold so dear and has been all along. Quit cryin’ and whinin’ and pestering Catholics with your efforts at evangelism and go win souls who don’t belong to a Christian church. Haven’t you figured out yet that Catholics don’t need or want the religion that you’ve got? I used to think like you do, but it’s crazy…because Catholicism is real New Testament Christianity and all the rest are NOT and all the evangelism, propaganda, slander, and other assorted baloney is not gonna change that fact. If you don’t wanna be Catholic, that’s on your soul…but don’t tell us that we gotta be like you…not gonna happen…not me anyway.

“but as for me and my house we will serve the Lord.” (Joshua 24:15B)
Pax vobiscum,

 

[Lost_Found]

John 1717:

What is it with you Protestants, how you carry on and on about Mary. We tell you from the get-go that Mary is not God. And yet you continue to attack her relentlessly day after day.

You can see for yourselves even from Gabriel and Elizabeth’s wonderful greetings, and among Jesus’ final words, that she is very, very special, and yet you are surprised when we defend her against your constant and vicious attacks? What is it, the devil that works through you? Would you like us to respond by belittling her? NO, you WILL NOT “push the envelope” on Catholicism, you Protestants, as you have whittled away at your own religions and society values. First slide a bit on Mary, then on other matters, and eventually all that surrounds Jesus, and then Jesus central. We can all see from this debate (Revelation) how she is our first line of defence from you devils, and judging from the response she accepts the role with another Yes.

Fine, scripturally this is a no-brainer response according to your values; but I am just in awe of the research and expert knowledge and time others have poured into this in order to meet you on your own terms. Over the past several posts some have refused to meet you on your terms but on Catholic terms. That is also good.

Your basic logic errors, starting with the manner you apply renaissance to religion, will emerge gradually for someone with patience, for someone who completely surrenders their self to Jesus as our Savior.

 

[sfp]

I believed Marian doctrine for 47 years until God opened my eyes to the truth found in His Word!

No, what you did was you decided to PRIVATELY interpret scripture, which is dangerous and forbidden by scripture itself.

 

[sfp]

John1717, please interpret this sentence…

"I never said you stole money from me."

Depending on which word you put the verbal emphasis on, there are 6 Possible Interpretations of the exact same sentence…

---

1. “Someone” may have said it, but it wasn’t “me.”
2. I might have “implied it,” but I never “said” it!
3. I said “someone” stole money from me, but not you.
4. I said you “borrowed” it, not stole it.
5. I said you stole my teddy bear, not “money”
6. I said you stole money from “him,” not me.

In case you don’t get it, yet…if it’s this easy to mis-interpret a simple 8-word sentence, then what makes you think that you are incapable of mis-interpreting the thousands of PAGES of sentences in the Bible? HOW DO YOU KNOW THAT YOUR INTERPRETATION OF THE BIBLE IS THE CORRECT ONE?

(Especially since this thread has given more than enough biblical, historical, and common sensical reasons to back up the Catholic/historical interpretation of Marian doctrine)

Again, forget about the Catholic interpretation for a second, and tell me by what authority are you convinced that YOUR interpretation is the correct one…there are 30,000 different “Christian” interpretations of many different matters of faith and morals. Why is yours correct?

 

[hlgomez]

**

My understanding of Mary comes from 47 years in the Catholic faith, with twelve of those year’s being in Catholic schools!

**

---

John1717,

---

**That’s great to know! But were you paying attention to the teacher or you were just messing up around? **

---

With all your anti-catholic rhetoric and misunderstanding of Catholic doctrines, I would conclude you have had a very poor catechesis.

Pio

 

[hlgomez]

**
The Scriptures are the very words of God! The problem is that you elevate your “tradition” to a position above Scripture!

John 1717,

Again this rhetoric is a product of poor catechesis. The Catholic Church doesn’t elevate Tradition from that of Scripture, BUT, believes that Scripture AND Tradition are of the same essence since they BOTH were taught by the Apostles. Scriptures tells us that! Here it is:

“So then, brethren, stand firm and hold to the traditions which you were taught by us, either by word of mouth or by letter.” (2 Thes. 2:15) (emphasis added).

It is very clear, John1717, and why do you reject it? You confess that you believe the very same Scripture, then you contradict it. That’s the effect of personal interpretation that’s very common in Protestantism.

Pio
**