Olivia
Online
Holistic Care
@naturecare
Psychotherapy || Female nature|| r/ship dynamics || sigma voice||
Buy the truth, and sell it not; also wisdom, and instruction, and understanding. Pr. 23:23
Joined November 2021
191 Following
99 Followers
1.5K Posts
In 2 Thessalonians 2, Paul provides a pastoral warning to the believers in Thessalonica. They were seriously alarmed by false reports that the "Day of the Lord" (the Second Coming) had already arrived. Paul firmly corrects them by stating that Christ cannot return until a specific historical sequence takes place.
Paul writes: "Let no one deceive you by any means; for that Day will not come unless the falling away [Greek: apostasia] comes first..." (2 Thessalonians 2:3).
The word apostasia means a rebellion, a defection, or a departure from the truth. This means the Antichrist power does not arise from outside the world (like an explicit atheistic or pagan empire). It is an inside job a massive, internal corruption within the visible Christian Church.
Paul labels this figure "the man of sin... the son of perdition" (2 Thessalonians 2:3).
In the entire New Testament, the title "Son of Perdition" is used only twice. First, by Paul here; second, by Jesus in John 17:12 to describe Judas Iscariot.
Who was Judas?
Judas was not a Roman soldier or a pagan ruler; he was an Apostle. He was an insider, a treasurer of the ministry, who kissed Christ on the cheek while betraying Him to His enemies. By using this specific title, the Holy Spirit signals that the Man of Sin acts exactly like Judas: a prominent, visible leader of the Church who professes loyalty to Christ while systematically betraying the Gospel.
Paul notes that this power "...opposes and exalts himself above all that is called God or that is worshiped, so that he sits as God in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God." (2 Thessalonians 2:4).
Paul consistently uses the phrase "the temple of God" (naos) to refer to the Christian Church, the body of believers (e.g., 1 Corinthians 3:16, 2 Corinthians 6:16). He is not talking about a rebuilt literal stone building in Jerusalem. Therefore, the Man of Sin seats himself in a position of supreme spiritual rule inside the Christian Church, claiming divine honors, titles, and absolute authority over the consciences of men
Paul reminds them: "And now you know what is restraining, that he may be revealed in his own season. For the mystery of lawlessness is already at work; only He who now restrains will do so until He is taken out of the way." (2 Thessalonians 2:6-7).
Why didn't Paul openly name the restraining force in his letter?
Because the restraining force was the Pagan Roman Empire and the Caesar. If Paul had written down that the Roman Empire was going to be overthrown and destroyed, the Roman authorities would have confiscated the letter and executed Christians for treason.
The early Church Fathers (including Tertullian, Jerome, and Chrysostom) universally understood this. They knew that as long as the iron fist of the Roman Caesar held political monopoly over Europe, the ecclesiastical "Man of Sin" could not rise to global political dominance. But when the Roman Empire collapsed in 476 AD, the Caesar was "taken out of the way," and the Bishop of Rome stepped directly onto the vacant imperial throne, perfectly fulfilling Paul's prophecy.
Truth is higher than position.
A true shepherd never fears the light. Only wolves fear accountability.
My loyalty to Christ must override my loyalty to any failing institution. Friendship with the world is enmity with God.
Indifference and neutrality in a religious crisis is regarded of God as a grievous crime and equal to the very worst type of hostility against God.
If you truly want to know and deeply understand the real identity of the Antichrist power as revealed in Bible prophecy, you must bypass the modern, sensationalized theories popularized by Hollywood and contemporary fiction.
The Bible does not describe a grotesque, sci-fi monster suddenly emerging from an apocalyptic void. Instead, prophecy maps out a far more dangerous, deceptive, and highly religious entity that operates from within the visible borders of Christendom.
To unmask this power with absolute biblical precision, you must understand the dual semantic meaning of the Greek word ἀντίχριστος (antichristos).
The prefix ἀντί (anti) does not merely mean "against" or in open, furious opposition.
In Koine Greek, it primarily means "instead of" or "in the place of".
The Antichrist is not a pagan atheist who openly denounces the name of God. He is a supreme religious counterfeit, a substituted authority that claims to speak for Christ while systematically subverting His written Word and usurping His unique divine prerogatives.
The classic, historic Protestant Reformers including Wycliffe, Tyndale, Luther, Calvin, and Knox unanimously utilized a method of prophetic interpretation known as Historicism.
As these faithful men prayerfully tracked the matching structural descriptions across Daniel, 2 Thessalonians, and Revelation, they arrived at an unavoidable, sobering conclusion:
The prophetic blueprint of the Antichrist power is perfectly fulfilled by the institutional dynasty of the ROMAN CATHOLIC PAPACY.
@renewingprotest Sadly, Protestantism has forgotten this important truth
A beautiful face can’t hide an ugly soul forever.
"And God blessed the seventh day, and sanctified it: because that in it he had rested from all his work which God created and made." (Genesis 2:3)
The first thing God called holy was not a mountain, a temple or a city. It was time.
God blessed the seventh day, then He sanctified it. To sanctify means to set apart for a holy purpose.
Before there was a Jew. Before there was Israel. Before there was sin. God separated one day from the other six and made it holy.
Observe carefully what Genesis says.
God did not ask man to bless the seventh day. God Himself blessed it. Man cannot make holy what God has not made holy. Neither can man make common what God has declared holy. The holiness of the Sabbath does not come from human worship. It comes from the presence and blessing of the Creator.
Every week, the seventh day quietly reminds the world of three great truths.
• God is our Creator.
• God is our Owner.
• God is worthy of our worship.
That is why the Sabbath stands at the very beginning of human history. It is the memorial of creation. Each week it calls us away from ourselves and back to the One who made us.
In a world that measures time by profit and productivity, God reserved one day for fellowship, one day to remember, one day to worship and one day to delight in His presence.
The Sabbath is not a burden laid upon humanity, it is a gift given to humanity. A weekly invitation to cease from our own works and rejoice in His. From Eden to the new earth, the Creator calls His children to meet with Him in sacred time.
The question is not whether God blessed the seventh day. Scripture has already answered that. The question is whether we will receive the blessing He placed within it.
"Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy." (Exodus 20:8)
The defining theological center of Roman Catholicism is the altar.
According to the Catechism of the Catholic Church, the Mass is not a mere memorial; it is a true propitiatory sacrifice in which the very same Christ who offered Himself on Calvary is continually offered by the priest to appease the wrath of God for the sins of the living and the dead.
The author of the Epistle to the Hebrews as if anticipating this blasphemy, dedicates two entire chapters to systematically proving that a repeating sacrifice is the absolute proof of an ineffective religion.
Under the Old Covenant, Jewish priests had to offer sacrifices day after day, year after year. Hebrews explicitly states why:
"For the law... can never with those sacrifices which they offered year by year continually make the comers thereunto perfect. For then would they not have ceased to be offered?" (Hebrews 10:1-2)
The Holy Spirit establishes an unyielding logical axiom:
---> If a sacrifice genuinely cleanses guilt, it ceases to be repeated. The very fact that the Roman Catholic priest must ascend the altar daily to offer the Mass is the absolute, scriptural proof that the Mass can never permanently take away a single sin.
Repetition is the ultimate admission of insufficiency.
Hebrews draws a sharp, dramatic contrast between the frantic, endless work of human priests and the majestic, completed work of our Savior Jesus Christ:
"And every priest standeth daily ministering and offering oftentimes the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins: But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, sat down on the right hand of God." (Hebrews 10:11-12)
Kindly pause and carefully observe the postures.
The earthly priest must stand daily because his work is never finished. But Jesus offered one single sacrifice for sins for ever, and then He sat down.
In the ancient ancient courts, a seated posture signified that the work was completely finished.
For a pagan institution to pull Christ down from His heavenly throne and force Him to be re-offered on an earthly altar is a direct denial of His finished work.
The Hebrews text leaves absolutely no room for the complex Catholic rationalization that the Mass is a bloodless "re-presentation" of Calvary:
"Nor yet that he should offer himself often... for then must he often have suffered since the foundation of the world: but now once in the end of the world hath he appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself." (Hebrews 9:25-26)
The Bible clearly links offering with suffering. If Christ is offered often, He must suffer often. If He does not suffer in the Mass, He is not being offered. The text seals the entire argument with absolute finality:
"By one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified" (Hebrews 10:14).
True believers do not need a daily wafer to keep them saved; they have already been perfected forever by a single past event.
Catholics argue that Sola Scriptura is unhistorical because the early Church relied on Sacred Tradition before the New Testament canon was finalized. However, this creates a major historical and logical problem for modern Roman Catholicism.
For "Sacred Tradition" to be a binding, infallible source of revelation parallel to Scripture, it must be traceable, consistent, and apostolic.
Modern Roman Catholic dogmas like the Immaculate Conception (1854) and the Bodily Assumption of Mary (1950) have no explicit footprint in the first few centuries of Church history. In fact, early Church Fathers like Augustine, Chrysostom, and Basil openly questioned Mary’s absolute sinlessness.
If "Tradition" can evolve to include dogmas that the early Church did not explicitly teach, then Rome’s definition of "Tradition" is not an ancient, preserved oral deposit. It is a shifting, evolving concept dictated by the current Magisterium.
If the "Tradition" of the 4th century looks radically different from the "Tradion" of the 20th century, it is not a reliable, unchanging rule of faith.
Scripture remains the only static, unchanging, verifiable anchor that prevents doctrine from drifting over time.
🎯🎯🎯🎯🙏
Create a bedroom that helps you rest, reset, and wake up refreshed.
@renewingprotest "The supreme ruler of Roman paganism held the title Pontifex Maximus ("The Supreme Bridge-Builder")." 😳
What if some of the drinks we consume every day are creating the exact environment we’re trying to avoid? 👀🥤
High sugar. Low oxygen. Increased acidity.
This video explores the connection between what we drink, our internal environment, and why reducing sugary, highly processed beverages may be one of the simplest changes we can make. 🌿
Maybe it’s time to rethink what’s in your fridge.
Jesus says to Peter:
"Whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven." (Matthew 16:19)
And later He says essentially the same thing to the disciples collectively:
"Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven…" (Matthew 18:18)
Christ gave His apostles genuine authority. But here's the crucial question:
What does "bind and loose" mean?
The Catholic conclusion requires it to mean:
"The Church possesses unlimited authority to define doctrine, create binding revelation, and make authoritative interpretations that cannot be challenged by Scripture."
But the text doesn't say that.
"Bind and loose" doesn't mean "make truth." This is the fundamental mistake. Christ gives authority to bind and loose. He does not say:
"Whatever you invent becomes God's revelation." Nor: "Whatever the Church teaches is automatically infallible." Nor: "The Church may add doctrines to God's Word."
Authority to administer God's kingdom is not the same thing as authority to create revelation.
Look at what Jesus actually tells Peter
Immediately after Matthew 16:19, Peter gets something dramatically wrong. Jesus begins explaining His coming suffering:
"Be it far from thee, Lord: this shall not be unto thee."
Jesus responds: "Get thee behind me, Satan." (Matthew 16:23)
Think deeply about that.
Peter has just received the authority to "bind and loose." Five verses later, Peter is rebuked as being wrong. That alone should make us extremely cautious about turning Matthew 16:19 into: "Peter can never teach error." The passage doesn't say that.
Peter himself later makes a serious doctrinal mistake:
"But when Peter was come to Antioch, I withstood him to the face, because he was to be blamed." (Galatians 2:11:)
Peter was publicly corrected by Paul.
Why? Because Peter's conduct contradicted the gospel. Paul didn't say: "Peter is the rock, therefore I must submit to his interpretation." He did the opposite. He rebuked Peter. That is an extremely important biblical precedent.
And notice something even more important about "binding." The apostles were not given authority to determine truth independently of Christ.
Jesus says: "Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you." (Matthew 28:20)
Their authority is delegated. They are to teach what Christ commanded. That's fundamentally different from: "You now possess an independent authority to create whatever doctrines you deem binding."
The apostles' authority is subordinate to Christ's revelation. Paul makes the principle explicit:
"For we can do nothing against the truth, but for the truth." (2 Corinthians 13:8)
And:
"For we preach not ourselves, but Christ Jesus the Lord." (2 Corinthians 4:5)
The apostles aren't inventing Christianity.
They're witnesses to what Christ revealed.
And here's where Galatians 1 becomes devastatingly terrifying.
Paul says: "But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed."
Carefully observe the principle.
Paul himself cannot simply redefine the gospel. His authority is bounded by the revelation of Christ. Therefore, Apostolic authority is not unlimited doctrinal sovereignty. It is ministerial authority under divine revelation.
"Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven" doesn't mean heaven follows the Church. This is a subtle but important point. The Catholic argument can make the verse sound like:
Church decides → heaven ratifies.
But that interpretation raises an obvious theological problem. Does heaven really become obligated to approve whatever a human ecclesiastical authority happens to decree? Obviously not.
The apostles' binding and loosing authority must therefore be understood as exercising the authority Christ entrusted to them in accordance with His will and revelation.
God doesn't become subordinate to His servants.
As a #Catholic, I was never assured of salvation. When I sinned, I went 2 confession.
I was 4given, as soon as I sinned again - I needed 2 go 2 confession again. Repeat.
If I died w my sins, I would go 2 purgatory for-God knows how long (?)
TY Jesus 4 ur sacrificial death
When the Roman Catholic hierarchy seeks to justify dogmas that have no baseline in the New Testament text such as the Immaculate Conception (1854) or the Bodily Assumption of Mary (1950), it invariably appeals to a hidden deposit of oral tradition. Adherents are told that these doctrines were preserved outside of Scripture by an unbroken line of bishops, and that the Church possesses the mystical insight to declare them as absolute truth.
The Apostle Peter, the very man Rome claims as its foundational "First Pope," wrote his second epistle to completely destroy this reliance on unwritten, humanly transmitted religious narratives.
"For we have not followed cleverly devised myths, when we made known unto you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but were eyewitnesses of his majesty... We have also a more sure word of prophecy; whereunto ye do well that ye take heed, as unto a light that shineth in a dark place..." (2 Peter 1:16, 19)
Peter begins by drawing a sharp line between historic apostolic truth and religious folklore:
"For we have not followed cleverly devised myths..." (2 Peter 1:16)
The word translated as "myths" is the Greek μύθοις (mythois), which refers to fables, legends, or religious tales that lack historical and scriptural foundation. Peter modifies this by describing them as σεσοφισμένοις (sesophismenois) meaning "cleverly devised," structurally engineered, or artfully crafted by human ingenuity.
This is a precise psychological profile of how extra-biblical dogmas develop within an institution. They do not appear as obvious lies; they are crafted with immense theological sophistication. They are wrapped in beautiful, emotionally moving language, given a false appearance of wisdom, and passed down through generations until they feel apostolic.
Peter warns that no matter how ancient, beautiful, or intellectually sophisticated a religious narrative appears, if it lacks the baseline of apostolic witness, it is nothing more than a humanly engineered fable.
To contrast these fables, Peter points to his own historic reality. He was present on the Mount of Transfiguration. He literally saw the blinding glory of Jesus Christ and heard the audible voice of Almighty God booming from heaven: "This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased" (2 Peter 1:17).
This was the ultimate mystical, supernatural experience. Yet, look at where Peter immediately directs the believer's focus:
"We have also a more sure word of prophecy; whereunto ye do well that ye take heed..." (2 Peter 1:19)
Pause and deeply consider the immense weight of the above statement.
Peter declares that the written, prophetic Word of God is "more sure" (βεβαιότερον - bebaioteron: more stable, more certain, more unshakeable) than his own personal supernatural experience or an audible voice from heaven.
Peter completely cuts the ground out from under institutional mysticism. Rome claims that her popes can speak ex cathedra to define new truths, or that global apparitions can dictate new devotions. But the true Apostle Peter stands up and declares: My own eyes and ears are subordinate to the written text of Scripture.
If a voice from heaven must bow to the written Word, how much more must the voice of a fallen man sitting on a man-made throne in Rome?
It is of the highest consequence to your life, health, and happiness, that you keep fresh air in every room in your home, and especially in your sleeping rooms. If you are not able to have your windows open in very cold weather, then leave a door open into another room.
Roman Catholicism does not reject Sola Scriptura because it's unbiblical, they reject it because it threatens to dissolve their entire system.
Sola Scriptura strictly undermines:
• Papal supremacy
• Marian dogmas
• Purgatory
• Indulgences
• Sacramentalism
• Confession to priests
• Tradition as equal authority etc
Without these traditions, Rome’s entire structure collapses. Thus the issue is not interpretation, it is institutional control.
Last Seen Users on Sotwe
Can Ahmet
Seen from Mexico
Simay tektaş
Seen from Turkey
Esra Erol
Seen from Turkey
Damla ile Porno
Seen from Turkey
King Viral
Seen from Singapore
Jack Baltimore
Seen from Colombia
affoLUVR
Seen from United States
Negro Passivo
Seen from United States
türk yabancı ifşa
Seen from Germany
Atletico Universe 
Seen from Argentina
Most Popular Users
Elon Musk
@elonmusk
241.6M followers
Barack Obama
@barackobama
119M followers
Cristiano Ronaldo
@cristiano
114.1M followers
Donald J. Trump
@realdonaldtrump
111.8M followers
Narendra Modi
@narendramodi
107.2M followers
Rihanna
@rihanna
98.7M followers
NASA
@nasa
92.4M followers
Justin Bieber
@justinbieber
91.8M followers
KATY PERRY
@katyperry
89.9M followers
Taylor Swift
@taylorswift13
83.8M followers
Lady Gaga
@ladygaga
75.3M followers
Virat Kohli
@imvkohli
73.1M followers
Kim Kardashian
@kimkardashian
70.8M followers
YouTube
@youtube
68.8M followers
Neymar Jr
@neymarjr
66.1M followers
Bill Gates
@billgates
65M followers
Selena Gomez
@selenagomez
62.9M followers
The Ellen Show
@theellenshow
62.3M followers
CNN
@cnn
61.8M followers
X
@x
60.7M followers