Here’s a deductive, biblical argument for kecharitomene: 1. The Bible teaches that we are saved by God's grace. 2. To be "completely, perfectly, enduringly endowed with God’s grace " then, is to be saved. 3. Therefore, Mary (kecharitomene) is saved (Luke 1:28.). 1. To be " completely, perfectly, enduringly endowed with God’s grace (kecharitomene) is thus to be so holy that one is sinless. 2. Therefore, Mary is holy and sinless. 1. The essence of the Immaculate Conception is sinlessness. 2. Therefore, the Immaculate Conception, in its essence, can be directly deduced from Scripture. @IndianaBrunner only way out of the logic would be to deny one of the two premises, and hold either that grace does not save or that grace is not that power which enables one to be sinless and holy.

@alexlyle @prettyfastngl @TaylorRMarshall Tell that to biblical scholar John Meade who disagrees with you 👍🏼

@ordinanceops @EmmmieG @Faustzme Same characters though.

@alexlyle @prettyfastngl @TaylorRMarshall You seem to ignore the existence of the book of Baruch.

@alexlyle @prettyfastngl @TaylorRMarshall Yeah no. Again. Go argue with the Protestant scholars who say this not me 👍🏼 I’m sorry to inform you that you’re wrong

@alexlyle @prettyfastngl @TaylorRMarshall Also notice the canon includes Baruch and the letter 👍🏼

@alexlyle @prettyfastngl @TaylorRMarshall He literally says, “Jeremiah, and with it, Baruch, Lamentations, and the Letter” I don’t know what you’re waffling on about. I’ll attach the Greek to👍🏼

@RealMattFradd @poperespecter1 Matt, it’s superbowl Sunday. Please. Soccer? Really?

@alexlyle @prettyfastngl @TaylorRMarshall Also may or may not have considered bel and the dragon and Susanna canonical 👍🏼

@alexlyle @TaylorRMarshall Not a single canon list, in history matched yours. Your canon is straight from Luther. Not god. Nor his church.

@alexlyle @TaylorRMarshall None of those canon lists matches your 66 book bible. Not a single one.

@LeeFoo9 @Chad4328 No worries, you can’t get the Eucharist correct, I don’t expect you to get responding to people on x correct 🤡🫵🏼

Do you not find it odd that the doctrine of Christ having two wills (dyothelitism) was not formally defined until the 7th century? Or the doctrine of His two natures was not clarified and universally accepted until the 5th century? And when you claim, ‘It’s in the Bible,’ yet rely on implicit biblical evidence and theological development, why should the papacy be treated differently? Shouldn’t the same principle of development apply consistently across all doctrines? Of course not, because your logic is inconsistent 👍🏼

RT @AFpost: Pope Francis tells Ukrainian youth to forgive Russia. Follow: @AFpost

@ReformedToRome @Chad4328 I love how you have this on speed dial 😂

Those are definitely the characters. Please don’t lie. The caractors document symbols were put on a broadside in 1844 alongside the bom. The symbols were also good enough to be used as cover art for the BoM in 1980. Approval for that sort of thing only comes from the guy at the very top with the Spirit of Discernment.

@The_Catechumen Date for St Vincent?

@Prolecat @constellarphoen @AMDG_Derek @aquilasurgens

@MormonDisc what do you think of something like this?