What texts prove that Mary was a sinner?

[chevyontheriver]

The simple reality, of course is that the relevant portion (i.e. over 90%) of them is identical, both in the Old Testament and in Romans 3.

Fine. But that is not an argument for the supercanonicity of either.

If the universal sinfulness of humanity is a matter of idle theological speculation then one, I suppose, must develop some clever means of eliminating these troubling passages.

I'm not campaigning to eliminate them. I haven't heard of any campaign to eliminate them.

By the way, lest you wonder, there are a host of theological arguments which have been advanced concerning the innate goodness of humanity.

Arguments I would find wrong by simple empiricism. Humanity is not good. We rise once in a while but otherwise we mostly live in the gutters.

Just ask our EO friends and they will gladly inform you as to why original sin has never existed.

Our Orthodox friends didn't do the theological working out of original sin, so they are against it. They would be against the Trinity if it wasn't something they did most of the theological work on. They're just like that. On lots of things. For the most part they are not universalists though. And without daring to say so, they pretty much agree with Catholics about Mary. Though they would have to deny it.

 

[prodromos]

Our Orthodox friends didn't do the theological working out of original sin, so they are against it. They would be against the Trinity if it wasn't something they did most of the theological work on. They're just like that. On lots of things. For the most part they are not universalists though. And without daring to say so, they pretty much agree with Catholics about Mary. Though they would have to deny it.

 

[bbbbbbb]

My reaction, precisely!

 

[Daniel Marsh]

No. It's the same Greek root but the word itself differs. And thus the meaning, though similar, is not at all identical.

From your link:

The difference is Greek Grammar. It is related. The context is different friend.

Even your own Greek experts whom I pointed to agrees with A.T. Robertson, who was a very well respected Greek expert by all. Also, with Strong's I was pointed to the Greek.

Luke 1:28
Douay-Rheims 1899 American Edition
28 And the angel being come in, said unto her: Hail, full of grace, the Lord is with thee: blessed art thou among women.

Ephesians 1:6
Douay-Rheims 1899 American Edition
6 Unto the praise of the glory of his grace, in which he hath graced us in his beloved son.

Berean Study Bible
to the praise of His glorious grace, which He has freely given us in the Beloved One.

Contemporary English Version
God treated us with undeserved grace because of the Son he dearly loves, and so we should praise God.

glorious
δόξης (doxēs)
Noun - Genitive Feminine Singular
Strong's Greek 1391: From the base of dokeo; glory, in a wide application.

grace,
χάριτος (charitos)
Noun - Genitive Feminine Singular
Strong's Greek 5485: From chairo; graciousness, of manner or act.

"Wherein he hath made us accepted in the beloved.--The verb here rendered "made us accepted," is the same verb used in Luke 1:28 (and nowhere else in the New Testament), where we translate "highly favoured." Etymologically it means to "bestow grace upon;" the tense here is the past tense, not the perfect Hence the meaning is (in connection with the previous clause), "His grace, which He bestowed upon us in the Beloved"--in virtue of our unity with "His beloved Son, in whom He is well pleased" (Matthew 3:17). This special title is given to our Lord to mark a connection with the "love" declared in the last verse to be the source of God's predestination. It is a love to all mankind, as in God's foreknowledge already made one with His beloved Son. (See John 17:23; John 17:25, "Thou hast loved them, as Thou hast loved Me . . . for Thou lovedst Me before the foundation of the world.")"
Ephesians 1:6 to the praise of His glorious grace, which He has freely given us in the Beloved One.

Luke 1:28
New International Version
The angel went to her and said, "Greetings, you who are highly favored! The Lord is with you."


English Standard Version
And he came to her and said, “Greetings, O favored one, the Lord is with you!”

Berean Literal Bible
And having come to her, he said, "Greetings, you favored with grace! The Lord is with you."

New American Standard Bible
And coming in, he said to her, "Greetings, favored one! The Lord is with you."

Christian Standard Bible
And the angel came to her and said, "Greetings, favored woman! The Lord is with you."

Contemporary English Version
The angel greeted Mary and said, "You are truly blessed! The Lord is with you."

Good News Translation
The angel came to her and said, "Peace be with you! The Lord is with you and has greatly blessed you!"

Holman Christian Standard Bible
And the angel came to her and said, "Rejoice, favored woman! The Lord is with you."

NET Bible
The angel came to her and said, "Greetings, favored one, the Lord is with you!"

GOD'S WORD® Translation
When the angel entered her home, he greeted her and said, "You are favored by the Lord! The Lord is with you."

New American Standard 1977
And coming in, he said to her, “Hail, favored one! The Lord is with you.”


you who are highly favored!
κεχαριτωμένη (kecharitōmenē)
Verb - Perfect Participle Middle or Passive - Vocative Feminine Singular
Strong's Greek 5487: To favor, bestow freely on. From charis; to grace, i.e. Indue with special honor.

Luke 1:28 The angel appeared to her and said, "Greetings, you who are highly favored! The Lord is with you."

As we can see, both verses has some variance in translation. Both verses are translated by Committees, many included Catholic Scholars. We will have to investigate whom the translators were. Since this is by memory and I am dealing with the virus again.

 

[Daniel Marsh]

Thanks D.M. Robertson very well may be a well known expert on Greek, but you didn't answer my question in regards to him. I'll re-post it.

"would you agree everything he has to say in this article, outside of quoting Scripture, are the words of a fallible man who has no authority whatsoever outside of that which he (and/or his assistant's) have vested in themselves? I ask this because of what I read, he rests some crucial points, not on the Word of God, but on his fallible, non-authoritative opinion and personal interpretation of Scripture, which could be in error. Do you agree?"





Have a Blessed day!

Thanks, A.T. Robertson was a very respected Scholar, his statements are very authoritative.
As for Romans 3, in case I forgot to answer.

Verse 9 appears to be absolute
Verse 12 appears to be absolute
Verse 19 appears to be absolute
Verse 22-23 appears to be absolute

Romans 3
Douay-Rheims 1899 American Edition
3 What advantage then hath the Jew, or what is the profit of circumcision?

2 Much every way. First indeed, because the words of God were committed to them.

3 For what if some of them have not believed? shall their unbelief make the faith of God without effect? God forbid.

4 But God is true; and every man a liar, as it is written, That thou mayest be justified in thy words, and mayest overcome when thou art judged.

5 But if our injustice commend the justice of God, what shall we say? Is God unjust, who executeth wrath?

6 (I speak according to man.) God forbid: otherwise how shall God judge this world?

7 For if the truth of God hath more abounded through my lie, unto his glory, why am I also yet judged as a sinner?

8 And not rather (as we are slandered, and as some affirm that we say) let us do evil, that there may come good? whose damnation is just.

9 What then? Do we excel them? No, not so. For we have charged both Jews, and Greeks, that they are all under sin.

10 As it is written: There is not any man just.

11 There is none that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after God.

12 All have turned out of the way; they are become unprofitable together: there is none that doth good, there is not so much as one.

13 Their throat is an open sepulchre; with their tongues they have dealt deceitfully. The venom of asps is under their lips.

14 Whose mouth is full of cursing and bitterness:

15 Their feet swift to shed blood:

16 Destruction and misery in their ways:

17 And the way of peace they have not known:

18 There is no fear of God before their eyes.

19 Now we know, that what things soever the law speaketh, it speaketh to them that are in the law; that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may be made subject to God.

20 Because by the works of the law no flesh shall be justified before him. For by the law is the knowledge of sin.

21 But now without the law the justice of God is made manifest, being witnessed by the law and the prophets.

22 Even the justice of God, by faith of Jesus Christ, unto all and upon all them that believe in him: for there is no distinction:

23 For all have sinned, and do need the glory of God.

24 Being justified freely by his grace, through the redemption, that is in Christ Jesus,

25 Whom God hath proposed to be a propitiation, through faith in his blood, to the shewing of his justice, for the remission of former sins,

26 Through the forbearance of God, for the shewing of his justice in this time; that he himself may be just, and the justifier of him, who is of the faith of Jesus Christ.

27 Where is then thy boasting? It is excluded. By what law? Of works? No, but by the law of faith.

28 For we account a man to be justified by faith, without the works of the law.

29 Is he the God of the Jews only? Is he not also of the Gentiles? Yes, of the Gentiles also.

30 For it is one God, that justifieth circumcision by faith, and uncircumcision through faith.

31 Do we, then, destroy the law through faith? God forbid: but we establish the law.

Jesus is an unique situation in that he is God. Thanks for the Romans 3 question of "all" being relative or absolute to ask Jehovah's Witnesses who deny his deity.

JW - Is the use of the word all in each verse of Romans 3 relative or absolute?

 

[Daniel Marsh]

EPISTLE TO THE LAODICEANS
From "The Apocryphal New Testament"
M.R. James-Translation and Notes
Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1924
Introduction
It exists only in Latin: the oldest copy is in the Fulda MS. written for Victor of Capua in 546. It is mentioned by various writers from the fourth century onwards, notably by Gregory the Great, to whose influence may ultimately be due the frequent occurrence of it in Bibles written in England; for it is commoner in English MSS. than in others. As will be seen, it is wholly uninteresting, and was merely written to justify or explain St. Paul's mention of the letter from Laodicea in Col. iv. 16.
1 Paul, an apostle not of men nor by man, but by Jesus Christ, unto the brethren that are at Laodicea.

2 Grace be unto you and peace from God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.

3 I give thanks unto Christ in all my prayers, that ye continue in him and persevere in his works, looking for the promise at the day of judgement.

4 Neither do the vain talkings of some overset you, which creep in, that they may turn you away from the truth of the Gospel which is preached by me.

5 And now shall God cause that they that are of me shall continue ministering unto the increase of the truth of the Gospel and accomplishing goodness, and the work of salvation, even eternal life.

5 And now are my bonds seen of all men, which I suffer in Christ, wherein I rejoice and am glad.

7 And unto me this is for everlasting salvation, which also is brought about by your prayers, and the ministry of the Holy Ghost, whether by life or by death.

8 For verily to me life is in Christ, and to die is joy.

9 And unto him (or And also) shall he work his mercy in you that ye may have the same love, and be of one mind.

10 Therefore, dearly beloved, as ye have heard in my presence so hold fast and work in the fear of God, and it shall be unto you for life eternal.

11 For it is God that worketh in you.

12 And do ye without afterthought whatsoever ye do.

13 And for the rest, dearly beloved, rejoice in Christ, and beware of them that are filthy in lucre.

14 Let all your petitions be made openly before God, and be ye steadfast in the mind of Christ.

15 And what things are sound and true and sober and just and to be loved, do ye.

16 And what ye have heard and received, keep fast in your heart.

17 And peace shall be unto you.

18 The saints salute you.

19 The grace of the Lord Jesus be with your spirit.

20 And cause this epistle to be read unto them of Colossae, and the epistle of the Colossians to be read unto you.

It is not easy to imagine a more feebly constructed cento of Pauline phrases.

Zahn believed himself to have found a fragment of the Epistle to the Alexandrians in the shape of a lesson -a liturgical Epistle- in the (eighth century) Sacramentary and Lectionary of Bobbio (Paris Bib cat., Lat. 13246). It is headed Epistle of Paul the Apostle to the Colossians, but it is not from that letter or any other.

Brethren, we that are under the power of the Lord ought to keep the commandment of God. They that keep the Lord's precepts have eternal life, and they that deny his commandments get to themselves ruin and thereto the second death. Now the precept of the Lord is this: Thou shalt not swear falsely, thou shalt not steal, thou shalt not commit adultery, thou shalt not bear false witness, thou shalt not take gifts against the truth, neither for power. Whoso hath power and denieth the truth, shall be denied the kingdom of God and be trodden down into hell, whence he cometh not forth again. How are we frail and deceitful, workers of sin! We do not repent daily but daily do we commit sin upon sin. That ye may know this, dearly beloved brethren, that our works is written in this book: 'it shall be for a memorial against us in the day of judgement.' There shall be neither witnesses nor companions, neither shall judgement be given by gifts; for there is nothing better than faith, truth, chastity, fasting, and almsgiving which putteth out all sins. And that which thou wouldest not have done to thyself, do not unto another. Agree thou for the kingdom of God and thou shalt receive the crown which is in Christ Jesus our Lord.

This, again, is a very incoherent little piece; it is rather like some curious fragmentary homilies printed by Dom de Bruyne from Carlsruhe (Reichenau) MSS. which I am sure are of Irish composition. I do not think it can be called an apocryphon at all; there are other pieces scattered about in manuscripts called 'preachings' of Paul, or the like, which are just centos of texts and precepts. The Epistle to the Laodiceans

I do not see the relationship;.

Good Night all and God Bless,
Daniel

 

[chevyontheriver]

The difference is Greek Grammar. It is related. The context is different friend.

Of course they are related. AND of course they differ grammatically. One needs to consider their similarities AND their differences. The construction 'kecharitomene' is unique to the Bible.

κεχαριτωμένη (kecharitōmenē)
Verb - Perfect Participle Middle or Passive - Vocative Feminine Singular
Strong's Greek 5487: To favor, bestow freely on. From charis; to grace, i.e. Indue with special honor.

Here's where I referred people to an article on Catholic Exchange on Luke 1:28:
What Do We Mean By Full of Grace?

Since this is by memory and I am dealing with the virus again.

Which virus? Corona a second time?

 

[OzSpen]

Of course you don't. It would upset a large apple cart in your theology if you interpreted Luke 1:28 as something beyond 'favored'. I think the word 'kecharitōmenē' demands a more expansive meaning. That is not a 'hint' but to me it is clear and Biblical. She was so graced that there was no room for sin in her life. And it was fitting to have that sort of mother to raise the Son of Man. She was not blessed merely for being a biological mother. She was blessed before she became a biological mother according to the text.

chevy,

I'm an honest exegete. If Luke 1:28 agreed with your exposition, I'd be the first on board and going to my local RCC. I'm serious.

However, kecharitwmene is the perfect passive participle of karitow and means 'endowed with grace' (kari) or 'enriched with grace' as in Eph 1:6. The Latin Vulgate's gratiae plena is correct if it means 'full of grace which you have received'. It is not exegetically sound to translate as 'full of grace which you have to bestow.

The oldest MSS do not include, 'Blessed are you among women' in Luke 1:28.

Oz

 

[chevyontheriver]

chevy,

I'm an honest exegete. If Luke 1:28 agreed with your exposition, I'd be the first on board and going to my local RCC. I'm serious.

However, kecharitwmene is the perfect passive participle of karitow and means 'endowed with grace' (kari) or 'enriched with grace' as in Eph 1:6. The Latin Vulgate's gratiae plena is correct if it means 'full of grace which you have received'. It is not exegetically sound to translate as 'full of grace which you have to bestow.

My understanding is 'full of grace which you have received'. I didn't suggest it had anything to do with bestowing. Except it was bestowed by God to Mary. Just having received an unmerited and overwhelming blessing from God.

The oldest MSS do not include, 'Blessed are you among women' in Luke 1:28.

Oz

I think that IS found in Luke 1:42 though. I do not remember suggesting it was in Luke 1:28. If I inadvertently did so it was my mistake. I had intended to link that only with Luke 1:42.

 

[Fidelibus]

Thanks, A.T. Robertson was a very respected Scholar, his statements are very authoritative.

Well, Mr. Robertson may have been a specialist in his particular branch of study, and his statements/writings may have been respected by his peers, but would you agree, that it is fair to say that he had no authority.... none whatsoever when it comes to deciding issues of doctrine, discipline, morality, biblical interpretation, and so on?

As far as I can tell, nowhere in his writings does he claim to be infallible, nor does his name appear any where in the Bible. So again, would you agree, when it comes to religion, he has no authority over anyone. (including you and I) So with that being said, would you also agree that he, and his writings, outside of quoting Scripture directly are fallible and that he had no authority over anyone in matters of faith, and that his personal interpretations of Scripture are subject to error?

As for Romans 3, in case I forgot to answer.

Verse 9 appears to be absolute
Verse 12 appears to be absolute
Verse 19 appears to be absolute
Verse 22-23 appears to be absolute

So when you say "appears", and for sake of discussion, I will take that as you do believe the word "all" in these verses to be an absolute. Meaning, "all" absolutely means all!

Remember DM when I asked you on post #313...."Do you seek God?" A question you did not address. Well, you probably wondered why I asked such a question. The reason I asked you (and other Protestants) this question is because in Romans 3:11 it says that "no one" seeks for God. Well, you didn't answer, but every other Protestant I asked if they are seeking God in their lives, the answer was a firm and absolute "Yes!"

But, Rom 3:11 says, "No!" "No one seeks for God!" So DM, if you believe "all" in Rom 3:23 (and the other verses you quoted) is/are an absolute, then do you also believe "no one" in Rom 3:11 to be an absolute as well?. The way I see it, every Protestant who says Rom 3:23 means everyone, without exception, has sinned, cannot be seeking God in his or her life because Rom 3:11, according to his or her methodology of interpreting Scripture, says that absolutely no one is seeking God.

So, through my Catholic eyes, either the Protestant is not seeking God in his or her life, or the Bible is lying...at least, according to the Protestant interpretation. Or, could be another possibility? The only other possibility, is that the words, "no one," are not being used in an absolute sense. And, if they are not being used in an absolute sense, then it can be argued that the word "all" in 3:23, is also not being used in an absolute sense. Which would shoot a hole in the Protestant argument about Mary. So what do you think?


Have a Blessed day!

 

[chevyontheriver]

So when you say "appears", and for sake of discussion, I will take that as you do believe the word "all" in these verses to be an absolute. Meaning, "all" absolutely means all!

Remember DM when I asked you on post #313...."Do you seek God?" A question you did not address. Well, you probably wondered why I asked such a question. The reason I asked you (and other Protestants) this question is because in Romans 3:11 it says that "no one" seeks for God. Well, you didn't answer, but every other Protestant I asked if they are seeking God in their lives, the answer was a firm and absolute "Yes!"

But, Rom 3:11 says, "No!" "No one seeks for God!" So DM, if you believe "all" in Rom 3:23 (and the other verses you quoted) is/are an absolute, then do you also believe "no one" in Rom 3:11 to be an absolute as well?. The way I see it, every Protestant who says Rom 3:23 means everyone, without exception, has sinned, cannot be seeking God in his or her life because Rom 3:11, according to his or her methodology of interpreting Scripture, says that absolutely no one is seeking God.

So, through my Catholic eyes, either the Protestant is not seeking God in his or her life, or the Bible is lying...at least, according to the Protestant interpretation. Or, could be another possibility? The only other possibility, is that the words, "no one," are not being used in an absolute sense. And, if they are not being used in an absolute sense, then it can be argued that the word "all" in 3:23, is also not being used in an absolute sense. Which would shoot a hole in the Protestant argument about Mary. So what do you think?

That is all true, but complicated. If they follow the argument it would be interesting to see how they respond. But most will not get it.

 

[Daniel Marsh]

Of course they are related. AND of course they differ grammatically. One needs to consider their similarities AND their differences. The construction 'kecharitomene' is unique to the Bible.

Here's where I referred people to an article on Catholic Exchange on Luke 1:28:
What Do We Mean By Full of Grace?

Which virus? Corona a second time?

Yes, I am on my seventh or eight round with it.

 

[Daniel Marsh]

Well, Mr. Robertson may have been a specialist in his particular branch of study, and his statements/writings may have been respected by his peers, but would you agree, that it is fair to say that he had no authority.... none whatsoever when it comes to deciding issues of doctrine, discipline, morality, biblical interpretation, and so on?

As far as I can tell, nowhere in his writings does he claim to be infallible, nor does his name appear any where in the Bible. So again, would you agree, when it comes to religion, he has no authority over anyone. (including you and I) So with that being said, would you also agree that he, and his writings, outside of quoting Scripture directly are fallible and that he had no authority over anyone in matters of faith, and that his personal interpretations of Scripture are subject to error?




So when you say "appears", and for sake of discussion, I will take that as you do believe the word "all" in these verses to be an absolute. Meaning, "all" absolutely means all!

Remember DM when I asked you on post #313...."Do you seek God?" A question you did not address. Well, you probably wondered why I asked such a question. The reason I asked you (and other Protestants) this question is because in Romans 3:11 it says that "no one" seeks for God. Well, you didn't answer, but every other Protestant I asked if they are seeking God in their lives, the answer was a firm and absolute "Yes!"

But, Rom 3:11 says, "No!" "No one seeks for God!" So DM, if you believe "all" in Rom 3:23 (and the other verses you quoted) is/are an absolute, then do you also believe "no one" in Rom 3:11 to be an absolute as well?. The way I see it, every Protestant who says Rom 3:23 means everyone, without exception, has sinned, cannot be seeking God in his or her life because Rom 3:11, according to his or her methodology of interpreting Scripture, says that absolutely no one is seeking God.

So, through my Catholic eyes, either the Protestant is not seeking God in his or her life, or the Bible is lying...at least, according to the Protestant interpretation. Or, could be another possibility? The only other possibility, is that the words, "no one," are not being used in an absolute sense. And, if they are not being used in an absolute sense, then it can be argued that the word "all" in 3:23, is also not being used in an absolute sense. Which would shoot a hole in the Protestant argument about Mary. So what do you think?


Have a Blessed day!

Robertson had authority based on his expertise in Greek, his knowledge of History and his knowledge background of the Bible.

John 6:44
No man can come to me, except the Father, who hath sent me, draw him; and I will raise him up in the last day.

John 12:32
And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all things to myself.

Basically, God the Father has to draw unbelievers to Jesus.

 

[Daniel Marsh]

Well, Mr. Robertson may have been a specialist in his particular branch of study, and his statements/writings may have been respected by his peers, but would you agree, that it is fair to say that he had no authority.... none whatsoever when it comes to deciding issues of doctrine, discipline, morality, biblical interpretation, and so on?

As far as I can tell, nowhere in his writings does he claim to be infallible, nor does his name appear any where in the Bible. So again, would you agree, when it comes to religion, he has no authority over anyone. (including you and I) So with that being said, would you also agree that he, and his writings, outside of quoting Scripture directly are fallible and that he had no authority over anyone in matters of faith, and that his personal interpretations of Scripture are subject to error?




So when you say "appears", and for sake of discussion, I will take that as you do believe the word "all" in these verses to be an absolute. Meaning, "all" absolutely means all!

Remember DM when I asked you on post #313...."Do you seek God?" A question you did not address. Well, you probably wondered why I asked such a question. The reason I asked you (and other Protestants) this question is because in Romans 3:11 it says that "no one" seeks for God. Well, you didn't answer, but every other Protestant I asked if they are seeking God in their lives, the answer was a firm and absolute "Yes!"

But, Rom 3:11 says, "No!" "No one seeks for God!" So DM, if you believe "all" in Rom 3:23 (and the other verses you quoted) is/are an absolute, then do you also believe "no one" in Rom 3:11 to be an absolute as well?. The way I see it, every Protestant who says Rom 3:23 means everyone, without exception, has sinned, cannot be seeking God in his or her life because Rom 3:11, according to his or her methodology of interpreting Scripture, says that absolutely no one is seeking God.

So, through my Catholic eyes, either the Protestant is not seeking God in his or her life, or the Bible is lying...at least, according to the Protestant interpretation. Or, could be another possibility? The only other possibility, is that the words, "no one," are not being used in an absolute sense. And, if they are not being used in an absolute sense, then it can be argued that the word "all" in 3:23, is also not being used in an absolute sense. Which would shoot a hole in the Protestant argument about Mary. So what do you think?


Have a Blessed day!

No seeking God refers to unbelievers, not to Christians.

 

[chevyontheriver]

No seeking God refers to unbelievers, not to Christians.

Ah, so 'no one' doesn't really mean 'no one' but no one in a certain situation.

 

[chevyontheriver]

Yes, I am on my seventh or eight round with it.

It took me a long time myself. I was very skeptical. But I went multiple rounds with it and came round right.

 

[Fidelibus]

Robertson had authority based on his expertise in Greek, his knowledge of History and his knowledge background of the Bible.

Hmm.... So are you saying he is/was infallible? Sure sounds like it. And how did he get this authority?

John 6:44
No man can come to me, except the Father, who hath sent me, draw him; and I will raise him up in the last day.

John 12:32
And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all things to myself.

Basically, God the Father has to draw unbelievers to Jesus.

Where does it say that in these passages? Or are you "basically" just giving us your personal and fallible interpretation of what 'you' think these passages mean?


Have a Blessed day, or evening!

 

[Fidelibus]

No seeking God refers to unbelievers, not to Christians.

Got a bit of a problem here DM, the verse in Romans 3:11 does not say, "No one who is an unbeliever seeks God." It says, "No one seeks God." Are you now telling me that "no one" does not actually mean no one? That "no one" is not an absolute? Or are you trying to add your own words and personal interpretation to this verse? Sure seems like it.

Have a Blessed Day!

 

[Fidelibus]

Ah, so 'no one' doesn't really mean 'no one' but no one in a certain situation.

You caught that too. Well, will just have to see how DM responds to my latest post.

Peace be with you!

 

[chevyontheriver]

You caught that too. Well, will just have to see how DM responds to my latest post.

Peace be with you!

It took me a while to see how 'all' and 'no one' were generalities. I was initially skeptical and the whole Mary thing took me a long time. Be patient. The Catholic position makes sense if understood properly. But it all has to fit together first.