"Sola Scriptura"

[Realcatholicgk]

I have noted a consistent and almost desperate Protestant reliance upon scripture as being “sufficient” for salvation. What our separated brothers and sisters are saying is that they want to believe the bare minimum to enter the Kingdom. To go deeper into faith means becoming, ugh, Catholic! And, since they do not believe in purgatory, they are not even aiming for it. What if they miss?

**

Yea, Po18,
You almost got it! They think that the scriptures are sufficent for salvation. That they contain everything that is needed. I also believe that they are correct! Where they have it wrong is they “Misinterpret” the scriptures. If they used the scriptures alone, and understood them in context and with clear vision it could only lead them into the Catholic Church!
Ask any convert. They had a :newidea: lightbulb minute when they realized that they had been lied to all their Protestant years and that God really did want them to obtain fulliness through the Catholic Church. Many converts told me that their first Communion was like a “rebirth” . They actually felt Jesus enter into their body. I thank God that after more that 55 years of communions, I still have that exact same feeling ! Praise God! Praise His Son! Praise His Blessed Mother, and most of all Praise His Holy Roman Catholic Church for remain true to Jesus and His teachings through all these centuries! **

 

[Ruthie]

Ask any convert. They had a :newidea: lightbulb minute when they realized that they had been lied to all their Protestant years and that God really did want them to obtain fulliness through the Catholic Church.

Let’s not try to read other people’s minds.

I’m a convert, and I did not have a “lightbulb minute.” It took about a year after my interest in the Church began. My decision to become Catholic may have taken only a moment, but it was the culmination of a process. Determining a certain number’s square root (without a calculator) is a similar process. You do the reasoning and get the result.

Nor do I believe my non-Catholic Christian friends and pastors lied to me. For one thing, they have much truth in their beliefs. They did not lie about the Trinity, or the love our Lord has for us, for instance. For another, if you believe something is true (like sola scriptura), how is it a lie to tell me that? It is a mistake, not a lie.

Remember charity!

God bless all of us,

Ruthie

 

[benedictus2]

**Ask any convert. They had a :newidea: lightbulb minute when they realized that they had been lied to all their Protestant years and that God really did want them to obtain fulliness through the Catholic Church. **

Too true.

 

[benedictus2]

Nor do I believe my non-Catholic Christian friends and pastors lied to me. For one thing, they have much truth in their beliefs. They did not lie about the Trinity, or the love our Lord has for us, for instance.

That is true. There is also much truth in what they teach. But I think that is also what makes it quite dangerous. When it is a total lie, it is easy to spot it. But when there is half a truth in them, it makes it harder to see it as a lie hence much easier for people to swallow.

A friend of mine told me that the Catholic Church was founded by an edict (referring to the Edict of Milan). Now he did 4 years of theology in a protestant school before becoming a pastor yet he did not know the truth about something as basic as that. He obviously got that from his school. Whoever taught him that only had to google this and they would have been set right and yet it seems no one bothered.

So you wonder how much does truth matter to them.

 

[po18guy]

That is true. There is also much truth in what they teach. But I think that is also what makes it quite dangerous. When it is a total lie, it is easy to spot it. But when there is half a truth in them, it makes it harder to see it as a lie hence much easier for people to swallow.

A friend of mine told me that the Catholic Church was founded by an edict (referring to the Edict of Milan). Now he did 4 years of theology in a protestant school before becoming a pastor yet he did not know the truth about something as basic as that. He obviously got that from his school. Whoever taught him that only had to google this and they would have been set right and yet it seems no one bothered.

So you wonder how much does truth matter to them.

1. Does the Holy Spirit unite?
2. Does the demon divide?

 

[benedictus2]

1. Does the Holy Spirit unite?
2. Does the demon divide?

Really that says it all.

I actually used that argument in another thread (but I did say that I got that from you )

 

[po18guy]

Really that says it all.

I actually used that argument in another thread (but I did say that I got that from you )

Unfortunately, scripture is currently being used, without authoritative interpretation, to divide. Sadly, we are drowning in evidence if it.

 

[benedictus2]

Unfortunately, scripture is currently being used, without authoritative interpretation, to divide. Sadly, we are drowning in evidence if it.

I disagree. It may seem like that but you know what they say, the darkest hour is just before dawn.

So many protestants have seen the light and have converted and they are now in the forefront of Catholic apologetics.

There is much hope. It is Christ’s Church and His promise to be with her is not empty. He will bring His Body back into unity.

We just need patience. And a lot of hardwork. Your doing very good work and every little bit counts.

And yes, a lot of prayer.

 

[Crucified]

Jesus made one church . . .there are now estimated to be 33,000 counterfeit denominations with 28,000 imitation sub denominations with 1,375 doctrines

You rashly attribute the differences of opinions among Christians to ‘Sola Sciptura’ - namely, the Protestant belief that the Holy Scripture is the only infallible rule of Christian doctrine.

The fault is not in the Scripture but in the human heart.

We need to distinguish between two basic facts.

Firstly, the Bible is perspicuous (clear, understandable) - it is not some mysterious book that cannot be understood by common ordinary Christians. Otherwise why would the apostles address their epistles to them rather than the magisterium?

Secondly, the human nature is such that people can misunderstand even the simplest of matters. This is true of Christians – even the apostles were hard to understand! – and it is even more so in the case of unregenerate people whose hearts are darkened. So, it is unfair to say that since Christians have disagreements between themselves, and since they study the same Bible, the Bible is not clear.

The problem is not with the Bible but with us.

The apparent unity of the Roman Catholic Church is illusory, as any informed Catholic would know. The unity is structural and organizational, but there are serious divisions at all levels, especially between the more liberal and conservative Catholics.

Take the charismatic movement for an example. In Protestant circles, Charismatics form separate denominations (and so the distinction from other denominations is obvious). Whereas in the Catholic church, the charismatic groups remain under the Roman umbrella. Their differences from non-charismatic Catholics are hidden though they are just as real as in Protestant churches.

So, what is the cause of the differences among Christians?

First of all, Christians are disciples (students); we are still learning and we have not yet arrived to a full and mature understanding of the Scriptures (see Ephesians 4:13). Therefore one expects to find differences among God’s children.

Secondly, Christians are not immune to error or the the deceptions introduced by false teachers. The apostle Paul had to correct the believers in Corinth, Galatia and Colosse for various errors. It is not any different today.

Thirdly, and most importantly, the sin remaining in the Christian heart opposes the plain teaching of God’s Word. Sometimes we find it hard to accept the teaching of the Bible because of practical implications we don’t like or simply because it humiliates our natural pride. Many people did not receive the words of Jesus because of fear of the Jewish leaders and social isolation. Sometimes we do not receive the teaching of the Bible, not because we don’t understand it, but because we are not willing to do so. There are differences because our beliefs and practices are not always consistent with our basic presupposition, namely, Sola Scriptura.

We assert that the Bible is our only infallible rule of faith, and yet we sometimes misunderstand the Bible, or add to, or take away, from the teaching of Scripture.

There is an analogous problem in the Roman Catholic Church.

We find a similar constellation of opinions on any subject among the Catholic faithful, despite their ‘infallible’ magisterium and their rejection of sola Scriptura. For example, in a nationwide survey of fifteen hundred American Catholics,

The survey found significant gaps between individual values and the Roman Catholic Church’s structure and teachings. When asked to make a moral decision on several issues, 50% said in vitro fertilization procedures are not wrong, and 61% would not condemn artificial birth control. The church opposes both. Although the church also opposes the death penalty, Catholics were evenly split on the issue. However, 61% agreed with their church’s stand against stem-cell research that ‘entails destruction of human embryos’; 68% agreed, ‘that abortion is morally wrong under virtually all circumstances’; and 61% said ‘homosexual behavior’ is wrong. Nonetheless, 83% said it is wrong 'to discriminate against homosexuals. Most would let priests marry (54%), allow women to be ordained (53%), give the laity more leadership roles (72%) and make the church more democratic in its decision-making (62%) (Cathy Lynn Grossman, USA TODAY 11/16/2001).

The problem is not limited to the laity.

There are serious differences of opinion among priests and theologians. For example - what about the debate about Vatican II? What about the partim/partim debate? Catholic apologists are lined up on both sides of the issue - no?

Evangelicals consider the Bible as their highest authority while Catholics submit to the magisterium. In theory there is a unifying principle in both camps. In practice, we find an assortment of opinions and beliefs within both groups.

You might respond that the disagreements and discord among Catholics is not the fault of the Catholic authority since the teaching of the magisterium is plain enough.

You might add that there is a need to teach Catholics more clearly to correct their misunderstanding of Catholic doctrine.

You might also say that some Catholics are willingly disobedient to the teaching of the Church.

In principle, the same is true for evangelical Christians.

The doctrinal differences among Christians are not due to our authority (the Bible) but due to the limitations and sinfulness of the human heart.

 

[mackbrislawn]

You rashly attribute the differences of opinions among Christians to ‘Sola Sciptura’ - namely, the Protestant belief that the Holy Scripture is the only infallible rule of Christian doctrine.

The fault is not in the Scripture but in the human heart.

We need to distinguish between two basic facts.

Firstly, the Bible is perspicuous (clear, understandable) - it is not some mysterious book that cannot be understood by common ordinary Christians. Otherwise why would the apostles address their epistles to them rather than the magisterium?

Secondly, the human nature is such that people can misunderstand even the simplest of matters. This is true of Christians – even the apostles were hard to understand! – and it is even more so in the case of unregenerate people whose hearts are darkened. So, it is unfair to say that since Christians have disagreements between themselves, and since they study the same Bible, the Bible is not clear.

The problem is not with the Bible but with us.

The doctrinal differences among Christians are not due to our authority (the Bible) but due to the limitations and sinfulness of the human heart.

In reference to the last paragraph, indeed, doctrinal differences are not due to lack of authority of the Bible, but due to limitations of humans. And as long as we have limited, fallible humans interpreting the Bible, we will have different doctrines and divisions. The conclusion is, even though the Bible is authoritative and infallible, it does us no good, because the humans who read it are not infallible.

That the Bible is perspicuous (clear, understandable) seems to be directly contradicted by statements in the Bible itself. For instance, Peter says, “There are things in the letters of our beloved brother Paul that are hard to understand, that the untaught and the unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do the rest of the scriptures.” And the Ethiopian eunuch asked, “How can I understand, unless someone guide me?” In light of these scriptural passages how can anyone maintain that the Bible is always clear and understandable?

Not only that, also in light of historical empirical evidence of the wild variety of interpretations–if the Bible were perspicuous, the interpretations should be the same. They are not.

The apostles were the magisterium, that is why the epistles were addressed to the congregations, or to leaders, such as Timothy. The epistles were examples of the magisterium in action, addressing problems that had arisen in the various Chrisitan churches of the day.

Don’t we need such a magisterium today, to settle what the truth is that Christ said we would know? Because if we don’t have the means to know the truth, Jesus was speaking falsely.

That the fault is not with Scripture, but with the human heart, is definitely true. That is why a magesterium is needed.

 

[po18guy]

I disagree. It may seem like that but you know what they say, the darkest hour is just before dawn.

So many protestants have seen the light and have converted and they are now in the forefront of Catholic apologetics.

There is much hope. It is Christ’s Church and His promise to be with her is not empty. He will bring His Body back into unity.

We just need patience. And a lot of hardwork. Your doing very good work and every little bit counts.

And yes, a lot of prayer.

It almost seems as if the number of denominations increases apace with the number of Protestants individuals converting to Catholicism. However, once the faith has reached a state of dissolution, and it is arguably close, the Lord has His “fire and brimstone” manner of causing unity to occur once again.

As with the doubting Apostle Thomas, Christ in the Flesh is sometimes needed to restore, or induce a complete faith. Thomas did not write a single line of scripture, but his work remains to this day, revealed by those in India who bear his name in memory of his spreading of the Gospel.

Christ’s peace.

 

[Crucified]

That the Bible is perspicuous (clear, understandable) seems to be directly contradicted by statements in the Bible itself. For instance, Peter says, “There are things in the letters of our beloved brother Paul that are hard to understand, that the untaught and the unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do the rest of the scriptures.”

He said “some things” not “all things” are “hard” not “impossible” to understand.

And the Ethiopian eunuch asked, “How can I understand, unless someone guide me?”

This passage only establishes the need for Christ to be preached - besides, the eunuch was reading Isaiah 53 which was a prophecy that NOBODY understood until Christ was revealed, so the simple fact that Philip knew that Christ had come and fulfilled that passage does not prove the point that you are trying to make.

But seriously now, do you not realize that you are trying to persuade me not to interpret the Bible for myself by showing me a Bible verse that supposedly proves your point?

But if I cannot interpret the Bible for myself, how can I understand the meaning of the verse you quoted?

Moreover you don’t even abide by your own rule. For you read the Scriptures and use your mind to understand the meaning of the text, don’t you?

What you really want to say is this:

Read the Bible as much as you like, as long as you don’t question any doctrine taught by the Roman Catholic magisterium. And if you find any variation between the teaching of the Bible and the teaching of the Vatican, then surely you must be misunderstanding the Bible. The Roman magisterium refuses to be held accountable and to be examined in the light of God’s Word!

Not only that, also in light of historical empirical evidence of the wild variety of interpretations–if the Bible were perspicuous, the interpretations should be the same. They are not.

Again - that is not due to the lack of perspicuity of God’s word, and you must admit that having an infallible teaching magisterium does not solve this problem of “vaious interpretations.” I mentioned the Vatican II debates and the partim/partim debates that are still not resolved among your churches apologists.

At the end of the day your problem is only removed by one step, for though you have [you claim] to have access to infallible interpretations - you still must interpret those interpretations; something that not always results in doctrinal and practical harmony - as I have demonstrated. The Catholic Church needs an infallible interpreter to interpret the infallible interpretations - and so on . . .

The epistles were examples of the magisterium in action, addressing problems that had arisen in the various Chrisitan churches of the day.

Yes - and they were addressed to the common Christian - not the “teaching magisterium.”

That the fault is not with Scripture, but with the human heart, is definitely true. That is why a magesterium is needed.

I partly agree - however tt is certainly not necessary for someone to be infallible in order to be authoritative. Our governments possess authority, but they are not infallible! As a father you have authority over your children to raise them up in the counsel and admonition of the Lord, yet, as you are painfully aware, you are a fallible human being. You may make mistakes, probably you have already committed quite a few, and yet you’re still the authoritative head of the family. What if your children say, “Our dad is not infallible, therefore he has no real authority, therefore we will not submit to him.”

Do you see my point?

 

[guanophore]

But seriously now, do you not realize that you are trying to persuade me not to interpret the Bible for myself

no.

 What you really want to say is this:

Read the Bible as much as you like, as long as you don’t question any doctrine taught by the Roman Catholic magisterium. And if you find any variation between the teaching of the Bible and the teaching of the Vatican, then surely you must be misunderstanding the Bible.

No, It is a given that everyone interprets what they hear, and what they read.

Catholic doctrine is not “Roman”.

There are very often variations between an individual’s perceptions of the bible and the Church teaching. However, the bible does not “teach”. People teach, that is why Jesus appointed them. teaching requires intellect, will, and discernment. These are not qualities belonging to text, but to persons.

It is just as likely that the reader will not understand the Catholic Teaching as it is the scripture.

The Roman magisterium refuses to be held accountable and to be examined in the light of God’s Word!

This is nothing but an anti-Catholic accusation. The Magesterium is not “Roman”, and their accountability is not maintained by those who are not in union with the teachings of Jesus Christ.
They are certainly not held accountable for erroneous interpretations of the Sacred Writings.

Again - that is not due to the lack of perspicuity of God’s word, and you must admit that having an infallible teaching magisterium does not solve this problem of “vaious interpretations.”

I do admit that. What is different is that Catholics have a standard outside themselves they can use to determine when their private interpretations have gone off track.

At the end of the day your problem is only removed by one step, for though you have [you claim] to have access to infallible interpretations - you still must interpret those interpretations; something that not always results in doctrinal and practical harmony - as I have demonstrated.

Are we in agreement that the Teaching of Jesus exists in doctrinal and practical harmony?

I agree that it is difficult for individuals at times to enter into the harmony and unity that Jesus established and has maintained in His Body on earth.

The Catholic Church needs an infallible interpreter to interpret the infallible interpretations - and so on . . .

“…but we have the mind of Christ”…

Yes - and they were addressed to the common Christian - not the "teaching magisterium."

It was both, but most importantly, they were WRITTEN by the teaching authority appointed by Christ.

I partly agree - however tt is certainly not necessary for someone to be infallible in order to be authoritative. Our governments possess authority, but they are not infallible! As a father you have authority over your children to raise them up in the counsel and admonition of the Lord, yet, as you are painfully aware, you are a fallible human being. You may make mistakes, probably you have already committed quite a few, and yet you're still the authoritative head of the family. What if your children say, "Our dad is not infallible, therefore he has no real authority, therefore we will not submit to him."

Do you see my point?

I do, but for reasons only He knows best, Jesus wanted the Teaching Authority He placed in charge of his sheep to be infallible. Why kick against the goads?

 

[Mea_Culpa]

All that anybody needs to know about sola scriptura is that it is not taught anywhere in the Bible, is therefore unscriptural, and is therefore self-refuting.

They have no arguments, since their whole doctrine is a house of cards built on sand. All they can do is try to blow smoke and confuse people by changing the subject or talking about what they think is wrong with the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church.

Until they can show where sola scriptura is plainly taught in the Bible, it’s not even worth discussing their heretical doctrine.

 

[Crucified]

However, the bible does not “teach”. People teach, that is why Jesus appointed them. teaching requires intellect, will, and discernment. These are not qualities belonging to text, but to persons.

I am using personification; something that the apostle Paul did as well. Paul said that the Scriptures “foresaw” that the Gentiles would be justified by faith. Is this a quality that belongs to the text? Paul said that the Scriptures “preached” the gospel unto Abraham. Is this a quality that belongs to the text? (see Gal 3:8)!

Why would you even waste your words trying to make a point out of that? You are not proving anything, but are rather criticizing the literary employment of the Holy Spirit?

It is just as likely that the reader will not understand the Catholic Teaching as it is the scripture.

yeah . . . I know that.

I do admit that. What is different is that Catholics have a standard outside themselves they can use to determine when their private interpretations have gone off track.

So do we - that would be the apostolic deposit; Holy Scripture.

We also consider the teachings of faithful teachers and ministers of Church History. We know that Christ has gifted the Church with teachers for a reason - but as James says - even they “stumble in many things.”

It was both, but most importantly, they were WRITTEN by the teaching authority appointed by Christ.

No - that is not “most” important.

My comment was a reply to your denial of perspicuity.

My point is established by virtue of who it was written TO.

I do, but for reasons only He knows best, Jesus wanted the Teaching Authority He placed in charge of his sheep to be infallible. Why kick against the goads?

You cannot prove that the teaching authority of your church is infallible, so why do you continue to make such naked assertions.

How do you know for sure that they are infallible?

 

[benedictus2]

How do you know for sure that they are infallible?

Because Christ promised so and we believe in His promse

 

[Crucified]

Because Christ promised so and we believe in His promse

Another assertion?

How do you know that Christ promised that?

 

[benedictus2]

Another assertion?

How do you know that Christ promised that?

R-E-A-D Y-O-U-R B-I-B-L-E

 

[Realcatholicgk]

I am using personification; something that the apostle Paul did as well. Paul said that the Scriptures “foresaw” that the Gentiles would be justified by faith. Is this a quality that belongs to the text? Paul said that the Scriptures “preached” the gospel unto Abraham. Is this a quality that belongs to the text? (see Gal 3:8)!
**

Hi Crucified, :tiphat: How are you?
Oh, you are no St Paul and your rebuttle to guan’s post doesn’t hold water!**

Why would you even waste your words trying to make a point out of that? You are not proving anything, but are rather criticizing the literary employment of the Holy Spirit?

**Rather I think he was trying to tell you that the Bible doesn’t have the Holy Spirit guiding it. The RCC has the HS as its guide. The bible is a book and the one you use is a corrupt twisted, distorted version of the Bible that God inspired, useless. The guide you have guiding your reading must be someone against God, who could that be? **

yeah . . . I know that.
So do we - that would be the apostolic deposit; Holy Scripture.

That is one of them! Catholics have the full depository of God’s teachings Oral, written writings and the scriptures

We also consider the teachings of faithful teachers and ministers of Church History. We know that Christ has gifted the Church with teachers for a reason - but as James says - even they “stumble in many things.”

**You consider the teaching of Catholic teachers. Isn’t that cute. I rarely quote a protestant preacher unless his “information” is Catholic. Like I said: I rarely quote a protestant preacher. Yes, Christ has gifted the Catholic Church with teachers and provided us with the Holy Spirit to guide the church. What did Satan provide Protestants?The bible! That will work! :whacky: **

No - that is not “most” important.
My comment was a reply to your denial of perspicuity.
My point is established by virtue of who it was written TO.

It wasn’t written to your Presbyterian, Congregational or Baptist denomination. They weren’t made by Satan until much later. 500 years ago actually. The Holy scriptures were written BY and FOR the Catholic Church. We would have been smarter to leave them as Oral tradition so the devil couldn’t distort their meanings and steal christians away fro Jesus and his Body of real believers, The Roman Catholic Church that your Westminster Assembly of Divines so lovingly called the Roman “Antichrist” around 1850? Wasn’t that sweet? Do you guys still believe that? We have a hard time remembering what the 61,000 counterfeit denominations and subdenominations teach or believe bacause of youir 1,375 various doctrines and Dogma. The Catholic Church are premitted by the HS to change anything that God revealed. Boy, Protestantism is growing at such a cancerous rate it deforms on the body of christ left by Jesus.I am glad that some of the truth is still able to get through to the believers. With the help of the Catholic church they can still be saved if they only follow Jesus commandment to “eat his body and drink his blood” they too could have eternal life! I am just so glad the Catholic Church has the HS to keep us straight. 2,000 years and still on track! Praise Jesus!

You cannot prove that the teaching authority of your church is infallible, so why do you continue to make such naked assertions.

**
We can prove it because Jesus said so in the Bible. You “Johnny-come-lately” tenderfoots (sorry we Texasan talk thataway!) weren’t even around when he gave us that authority 2,000 years ago. I am sure the Cathollic authors wrote about it in the scriptures and some of the earlier writtings of the church.**

How do you know for sure that they are infallible?

Jesus told us so, but I repeat myself!

Partner, someone has been filling you up with some mighty wrong teachings. I’d go get a new bucket if’en I were you. Don’t drink out of that one any more! It is killing your soul. Pray that our Blessed Mother intercedes on your behalf. We will now pause for a few words from our sponsor:

[SIGN]JESUS SAID
ONE: “You search the Scriptures, for in them you think you have eternal life; and these are they which testify of Me.** But you are not willing to come to Me that you may have life**.” John 5:39-40

TWO: " But I said to you that you have seen Me and yet do not believe" John 6:36

THREE: “Then Jesus said to them, “**Most assuredly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, you have no life in you.Whoever eats My flesh and drinks My blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day. For My flesh is food indeed, and My blood is drink indeed.” John 6:53-55 **[/SIGN]
**
One: You read and of Jesus but refuse to comeinto his church. So sad!

Two: You know of Jesus, if you have never eaten his real body and drank his real blood you are dead. Because you don’t know Jesus! So sad!

Three: Only the catholic church has apolstolic authority and the HS. Jesus wasn’t mistaken when he used a “body” to describe His church. It is almost like He Knew that false teachers would come and it would be like a cancerous growth deforming His Body.You would think He would have warned us. Oh, wait, He did, didn’t he…So Sad!

One thing is still for sure God loves us all and wants us to be saved. That is why the Catholic Church is here to cure the cancer called Protestantism But we can only do that on “Jesus’ Terms” He won’t allow His Church to err even to save souls! How Great is He? Praise Jesus! Praise His Holy Roman Catholic Church.

May God BlessYou. **

 

[Realcatholicgk]

R-E-A-D Y-O-U-R B-I-B-L-E

**Hi ben, How are you? :tiphat:
Come on it is a L-A-R-G-E B-O-O-K and they have to read slowly. Let’s help a little OK? :bounce: **

Matthew 28:18 says that "Jesus is the head over all things"

**He is the head of the RCC, so unless Jesus is fallible! **

Matthew 18:18 Jesus said: "Verily I say unto you, Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven"
**

AMEN!**
**
John 5:19 Jesus said: “Verily, verily, I say unto you, The Son can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father do: for what things soever he doeth, these also doeth the Son likewise”**
**So the Church the Body of Jesus Himself can do nothing if it does not reflect the will of the Father. **
**
God Bless **