Protestant "private judgment", wrong again, MARY (crushes) not brusies the head of the serpent...

No wrong again it was Jesus.

The dragon is Satan, the woman who brought forth the man child is MARY. Satan knows who is assigned to crush
his head one day.

Revelation 12:13
And when the dragon saw that he was cast unto the earth, he persecuted the woman, who brought forth the man child:

The blatant change of words in Genesis 3:15 by King James' fellas. I wonder if they changed Rev 12:13? I could look...

And when the dragon saw that he was cast unto the earth, he persecuted the woman which brought forth the man child.


The KJV tramslators changed one word..."which."

"who" refers to a person, "which" refers to a thing???

The woman in Revalations 12 is the same woman in Genesis 3:15.

Mary was nothing more than a sinful human being. She was a virgin at Jesus birth but did not remain so. Her and Joseph had other children. The Holy Bloodline was actually through His father Joseph not Mary. Mat.1:16.

The seed is through Joseph.

Last Edited by Interested Reader 1 on 03/31/2013 06:52 PM

Ahh the woman in genesis who crushes the head of the serpent,,

could it be the woman in the following

Jesus they have no wine. Woman what does this have to do with me, my time has not yet come...

From the Cross.. Woman Behold your son.. Son behold your mother

Revelation.. I looked into Heaven and saw the Woman clothed with the Sun

Protest ANTS are stubborn and stupid and will pay dearly in the end,, Your not getting into a kingdom where you deny the Queen of that kingdom

There was a thread up on the first page with a title saying Jesus bruises the head of the serpent.

The error of private interpretation of Scripture "private judgment" AND obvious changes to Scripture by translators.

Mary is the only one, not Our Lord "who brought forth the man-child." It is God's desire and has been revealed, Our Lord's mother crushes the head of the serpent.

She is the New Eve. Seee... Since the beginning, the evil one has hated this mere human, when he was given knowledge of Mary's place in our Redemption.

Yeah I love how protest ANTS big phrase is that they go right to God and dont need Man.. All Jesus did was put man between God and man.. The First thing Jesus did today on EASTER when he appeard to the twelve was say.. I Give you the power to forgive sins. whos sins you forgive are forgiven. whose sins you retain are retained,,, haahaha youll never catch one of these heretics preaching on that most important time in scripture,,,

Catholics keep trying to share with our brothers and sisters, it will be God showing them personally because they're stuck on "faith alone" big time and "private judgment" of Scripture.

God gave the authority to interpret Scripture to the CHURCH. Many, many Protestant ministers convert when they discover this truth.

Protestants, we love you all, DO NOT take it personal, you didn't object to Mary, the reformers did to distance themselves from Catholicism.

When the "awakening" as you hear it in prophecy takes place,
I wish before, you will fall in love with Our Lord's mother.

Look at the change made to the original verse, you gotta
throw OUT the King James Version Bible. There are thousands
of changes in the KJV.

If you had known the true, the original verse, there may of not been the Protestant objection to the Dogma that Our Lord's mother, Mary was Immaculately conceived, no sin. First, to help see, we all realize, God makes exceptions and you all accept some of God's other exceptions.

Read this, the same verse Genesis 3:15 and you will have no
objection to the Immaculate Conception of Mary.

I thank Dr. TAYLOR MARSHALL, these are his words to show
you proof. Mary is the Immaculate Conception.

+ + +

[link to wwww.taylormarshall.com] (archives)



Argument #2
Mary as New Eve Having Enmity with Satan

Gen 3:15
"I will put enmities between thee and the woman, and thy seed and her seed: she shall crush thy head, and thou shalt lie in wait for her heel.."

In this verse God addresses Satan. The Seed here is Christ. The Woman is His Mother, that is, Mary. Thus Satan has perfect enmity with Christ and with His Mother. The Catholic Church has interpreted this as indicating the sinlessness of Christ and Mary. If either actually committed sin, then they would not be at enmity with Satan but actually a cooperator with Satan at times.

Do you get what Taylor Marshall said the above?

Another to help, why does Our Lord keep referring to His beloved mother as "woman" in the Gospel? Pretty wild, nowhere in the Bible does a son refer to his mother as "woman" except for Jesus.

Our Lord knows the past (Genesis) and the future (Revelation), Mary is the "woman" in Genesis 3:15 and the
"woman" in Revelation, chapter 12. Some say but, the "woman" is Israel and or the Church. True, it is fact though, above those two, Mary describes the woman who brought forth the man child perfectly.

AND, how does the Apostle John introduce the "woman" in Revelation 12:1? In the last verses of Revelation Chapter 11, John speaks of the Ark of the Covenant in Heaven.

The Ark of the NEW Covenant is Mary AND she is in Heaven.

Do you get what Taylor Marshall said above?

Corrected the underlined, OOPS, I took out the word "the" in my question.

Look at the differences in the same verse, the KJV changes
the words! The Douay-Rheims Bible is a word word translation of St. Jerome's Latin Vulgate, the first
Bible.

The KJV states , "it" bruises the head of the serpent. No, the KJV translators altered the original words. God has revealed Mary is going to CRUSH the head of the serpent.

No authority to interpret Scripture brings error so the heresy of "Private Judgment" results in these kind of threads.

Thread: Jesus bruised the serpents head ~ the power of death is dead!

And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.

[link to www.kingjamesbibleonline.org]

I am very shocked that any serious student of truth would not seek the most pure interpretation known, the Douay-Rheims translation from.original Latin Vulgate.
Also, wasn't it Eve who actually disobeyed to begin with, well it makes total spiritual sense that since through a woman humanity "fell" that God had a perfect plan to establish a way back home through an obedient woman .....Ava so that through this "obedient"woman He, as in Jesus, could redeem us.
So, God reversed what happened in that garden, when the mother of our physical selves erred and we lost our inheritance . He then made a sinless vessel of Grace to bring forth His Son...for sin cannot touch what is HOLY and sinless for it would become contaminated by sin if God had not spared Mary from original sin. Blessings. Those who do not understand that this is truth do not want to truly know the way, truth, and light.

With apologies, the theology of most of the Catholics I have met is weak - the folks who are posting here are no different. At least some of the Catholics posting out here appear to be genial people who are trying to post their views and win converts - though I disagree with you theologically, I appreciate the civil tone you come with.

In terms of the theology of some of these arguments, they are incorrect. I guess I'll start here as an example - the last poster suggested the following (courteously I might add):

“Also, wasn't it Eve who actually disobeyed to begin with, well it makes total spiritual sense that since through a woman humanity "fell" that God had a perfect plan to establish a way back home through an obedient woman .....Ava so that through this "obedient"woman He, as in Jesus, could redeem us.”

I’m sorry, but that’s not even close. Adam acted as our Federal head – the admonition is given to Him and not Eve in the Garden. This can easily be seen in Genesis 2:15:

“The Lord God took the man and put him in the garden of Eden to work it and keep it. 16 And the Lord God commanded the man, saying, “You may surely eat of every tree of the garden, 17 but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat of it you shall surely die.”

Adam, not Eve, stood as the head for humanity; likewise, it’s Christ who stands for us – not Mary. You need to study the great imputations in scripture, but here’s some sections that will give you at least a start in the right direction:

Romans 5:12-15
Therefore, just as sin came into the world through one man, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all sinned— 13 for sin indeed was in the world before the law was given, but sin is not counted where there is no law. 14 Yet death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over those whose sinning was not like the transgression of Adam, who was a type of the one who was to come. 15 But the free gift is not like the trespass. For if many died through one man's trespass, much more have the grace of God and the free gift by the grace of that one man Jesus Christ abounded for many. 16 And the free gift is not like the result of that one man's sin. For the judgment following one trespass brought condemnation, but the free gift following many trespasses brought justification. 17 For if, because of one man's trespass, death reigned through that one man, much more will those who receive the abundance of grace and the free gift of righteousness reign in life through the one man Jesus Christ."

I doubt I'll post again on this thread, I am too busy, and there's too much anger. I could deal with theological discussions, but, I don't have time trying to sift through anger - life's too short.

Peace -

catholics trying to interpret scripture is pure comedy.

Hi Interested Reader,

How could the person to carry God Himself inside her have sin on her soul? Mary is God's "exception", do you see? Mary was conceived without original sin and never sinned in her life.

Joseph and Mary were/are both celibates, ever virgin (from
prophecy, part of God's revelation).

Joseph and Mary came from the line of David. Tradition is also part of God's revelation, it is the "oral" revelation of God passed down and this is how we know Mary's father's name was Joachim. Heli is another word for Joachim.


..."the name of Mary's father, Heli, agrees with the name given to Or Lady's father in a tradition founded upon the report of the Protoevangelium of James, an apocryphal Gospel which dates from the end of the second century. According to this document the parents of Mary are Joachim and Anna. Now, the name Joachim is only a variation of Heli or Eliachim, substituting one Divine name (Yahweh) for the other (Eli, Elohim)."


[link to www.catholicapologetics.info]


blessings,

The quote from the link above about Mary's lineage as written in Luke. It helps explain Luke: 3:23. Luke 3:23 implies Mary's lineage, Jesus is the SON-IN-LAW of Heli who is Joachim, another word Heli. Bible Alone isn't enough, you have to accept the oral tradition to completely understand.


..."St. Luke (2:4) says that St. Joseph went from Nazareth to Bethlehem to be enrolled, "because he was of the house and Family of David". As if to exclude all doubt concerning the Davidic descent of Mary, the Evangelist (1:32, 69) states that the child born of Mary without the intervention of man shall be given "the throne of David His father", and that the Lord God has "raised up an horn of salvation to us in the house of David his servant". [21] St. Paul too testifies that Jesus Christ "was made to him [God] of the seed of David, according to the flesh" (Romans 1:3). If Mary were not of Davidic descent, her Son conceived by the Holy Ghost could not be said to be "of the seed of David". Hence commentators tell us that in the text "in the sixth month the angel Gabriel was sent from God. . .to a virgin espoused to a man whose name was Joseph, of the house of David" (Luke 1:26-27); the last clause "of the house of David" does not refer to Joseph, but to the virgin who is the principal person in the narrative; thus we have a direct inspired testimony to Mary's Davidic descent. [22]

While commentators generally agree that the genealogy found at the beginning of the first Gospel is that of St. Joseph, Annius of Viterbo proposes the opinion, already alluded to by St. Augustine, that St. Luke's genealogy gives the pedigree of Mary. The text of the third Gospel (3:23) may be explained so as to make Heli the father of Mary: "Jesus. . .being the son (as it was supposed of Joseph) of Heli", or "Jesus. . .being the son of Joseph, as it was supposed, the son of Heli" (Lightfoot, Bengel, etc.), or again "Jesus. . .being as it was supposed the son of Joseph, who was [the son-in-law] of Heli" [23]. In these explanations the name of Mary is not mentioned explicitly, but it is implied; for Jesus is the Son of Heli through Mary"...



Luke 3:23
And Jesus himself was beginning about the age of thirty years; being (as it was supposed) the son of Joseph, who was of Heli, who was of Mathat,

Please read Genesis 3:15, which were the original writings as first translated by St. Jerome in the Latin Vulgate. If you can't read Latin, most of us can't read the translation of the first Bible, read Genesis 3:1 in the
[link to www.drbo.org] , the Douay-Rheims Bible and NOT the changed words in the KJV.

Jesus is "head of humanity" our God and Savior, we all agree. Catholics do not profess Mary is the head of humanity or God, she is a created person.

You're correct though "Adam stood as the head of humanity."

Do you see the "typology" here? Adam and Eve in the Old Covenant, Adam fell, Jesus incarnated in the New Covenant is perfect, sinless, He is the New Adam. Eve, fell, Mary in the New Covenant immaculately conceived is sinless, she is recognized as the New Eve.

It is so difficult to change another person's spiritual beliefs. The reason God asks everyone to pray for conversion, God's grace can work to help the person change.

Catholics keep trying, I post again...

Genesis 3:15 states two things, Mary in God's plan is
the one to crush the head of the serpent (Revelation 12
backs up the prophecy in Genesis 3:15). Number 2, Mary is sinless, she was immaculately conceived.

Taylor Marshall is a convert to the faith, he explains the second perfectly.

Look, the OP's response on page 2.

Thread: Jesus bruised the serpents head ~ the power of death is dead! (Page 2)

She states now, she is not sure, still she tells you God the Holy Spirit is going to guide her to interpret Scripture which is a big fat lie.

Her last reply posted to someone attacking the faith and the correct, interpretation of Genesis 3:15 is a quizzical figure.

Heresies (this time, private judgment) only confuse and bring error.

Thank you for your response – again, I disagree, but I don’t mind a theological discussion based on merits. To your specific objections, you had written,

“Please read Genesis 3:15, which were the original writings as first translated by St. Jerome in the Latin Vulgate. If you can't read Latin, most of us can't read the translation of the first Bible, read Genesis 3:1 in the, the Douay-Rheims Bible and NOT the changed words in the KJV.”

Your suggestion is that English readers will understand the original Hebrew/ Greek / Aramaic writings of the Bible better by reading a Latin translation. Logically, that doesn’t make sense. Also, I think you misunderstand the importance of the King James Version of the Bible – it’s a decent translation, but we do not have to read the English used at the time the King James were written. Most modern scholarly translations go directly back to the source texts in Hebrew / Greek / Aramaic to make their translations. Further, the best translations are created by entire teams of scholars who debate any questionable texts, so the words in the ESV, NASB, RSV, etc are literally translated from source documents and are accurate.

This is not just a debating point: this is foundational in understanding how accurate our Bible is today. When a non-believer questions the veracity of the Bible’s translations, we (all of us) can point them to the fact that there is literally thousands source documents that we can go back to and read to support the modern translations. In short, if you don’t understand or acknowledge that, you are under cutting support for your own modern translations, and I don’t think you want to do that. The words are easy enough to translate from the Greek or Hebrew to English, so there is no magic in that process.

But even if, as you say, the Latin version you quoted is somehow more accurate than the modern English translations of the last 50 years (and I am in no way agreeing to that), then you still aren’t making the argument you are trying to make. The note explaining the quote you reference, in your own translation points back to Jesus and not Mary – it says as follows:

“[15] She shall crush: Ipsa, the woman; so divers of the fathers read this place, conformably to the Latin: others read it ipsum, viz., the seed. The sense is the same: for it is by her seed, Jesus Christ, that the woman crushes the serpent's head.”

It’s Jesus that crushes the head of the serpent – not Mary.

We come to some agreement on some things you wrote (though I would have said it a little different):

“Jesus is "head of humanity" our God and Savior, we all agree. Catholics do not profess Mary is the head of humanity or God, she is a created person. You're correct though "Adam stood as the head of humanity."

We disagree on some others:
“Do you see the "typology" here? Adam and Eve in the Old Covenant, Adam fell, Jesus incarnated in the New Covenant is perfect, sinless, He is the New Adam. Eve, fell, Mary in the New Covenant immaculately conceived is sinless, she is recognized as the New Eve.”

I fail to see the typology where you equate Adam and Eve to Jesus in Mary. I have never heard an argument to make her the new Eve. Adam and Eve were married – Jesus and Mary were not – the bride of Christ in the New Testament is the church.

But a question for you now, you have readily posted on your message that Mary is a created person, and I agree. There is no indication in the Bible to suggest she is of divine origin, and instead it indicates she is of human origin. If that’s the case, then are the words on Matthew 11:11 wrong. I’ll even use your translation of choice if it makes it more readily available to you:

Matthew 11:11 - Douay-Rheims
“11 Amen I say to you, there hath not risen among them that are born of women a greater than John the Baptist: yet he that is the lesser in the kingdom of heaven is greater than he.”

Is Jesus wrong when he said that, “…there hath not risen among them that are born of women a greater than John the Baptist…”? We both agree that Mary was born of man, and it would seem to me that if Mary was born of man and John was born of man, and Jesus says that ‘John is greater’ then there would seem to be a flaw in your argument that she perfect and divine.

I’m off to sleep and then off to work – I don’t live in this virtual environment – if we don’t speak again, because I get terribly busy – God bless you -

You keep interpreting this passage with RCC dogma running through your head. It's all that you 'hear' and 'see' every time that you open scripture. Things that come in between man and His Creator are satans, adversaries. The gospels point this out beautifully in the passage where Our Lord Jesus Christ rebukes Peter, calling him 'Satan' --"thy mind is not on the things that are of God, but on the things that are of men." You are doing no differently than Peter was doing, interpreting and understanding the words of God through the dogma of your church. You cannot come up with a spiritual understanding of this scripture because all the RCC clouds your mind. 

Mary is sinless? According to your church only. Satan again, adversary to God's revealed word.

Genesis 3 references 'eve'. According to your church only. Satan again, adversary to God's revealed word. 

If you are not going to seek to understand what serpents and satans represent, how will you ever understand what 'woman' signifies? Like Peter, your minds are on the things of men and therefore like Peter, you argue from the standpoint of men, the RCC.

Eve in the gospels walks us through the entire picture of what the woman represents. Paul equates woman to the 'spirit of the prophet'. Eve, the 'spirit of the prophet', was created to be subject to her husband (man), the prophet. Who did the serpent in Genesis appeal to? The woman, the spirit, etc. Who should have been her head? Adam, the one given the command. Repeatedly we see Eve take the words of Our Lord and think about them carefully. Why would she have to do this? Like all of us, she is weighing His words against the words of men, the dragon's flood, which are as Our Lord Jesus told Peter - your mind is on the things of men. She grew up under the apostate religion that Jesus found in Jerusalem, adversaries of Our God who oppressed their people with the rules and dogmas of men. Only a handful were waiting for the Messiah to be born because of this very issue! They could not hear nor see because like Peter, their reasonings and understanding were clouded by these dogmas of men. 

The woman crushing the head of the serpent is the spirit of man being taught by the Spirit of God to crush these words of men, the dragon's flood. It's crushing the serpent as your head and making Our Lord Jesus Christ your head. 

Likewise, Catholics caught up in the dragon's flood cannot hear anything else except their church's teachings. Catholics cannot even hear what Our God tells them through 2 Peter 1

"20Above all, you must understand that no prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet’s own interpretation of things. 21For prophecy never had its origin in the human will, but prophets, though human, spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit."

You HEAR the RCC when you read this scripture. You do not HEAR that all prophecy, though written by men's hands, originated from and came from the Holy Spirit - not the prophet's own interpretation.

You have not crushed the serpent's head...and therefore the serpent IS your head. Whilst you wait for 'Mary' to come down and crush some 'fallen angel satan's head', the entire gospel message of transforming your mind and the spirit of man (woman) thereby crushing the serpent as your head just bypasses you. You aren't even doing what Mary did - taking Jesus' words to heart and thinking about them, weighing them against what she had been taught by His adversaries.

Floods are the doctrines of men. We were all told that the dragon chases the woman with a flood. And to this end, you believe that Mary is "a Queen", that Mary was "immaculately conceived", that Mary is a "co mediator", that only the RCC has the right to interpret scripture, that only the RCC is Jesus' bride, and that 'Mary' is coming back to crush some serpents head..... Those who are drowning need a life ring....and to this end do what Mary did....open your Bibles and seriously weigh your Lord's words against those words of men from which your understanding comes. Take off the RCC glasses because those glasses are adversarial to Our Creator. He made us FREE from this, yet you don't want this freedom. You want the RCC as your head, not the Lord Jesus Christ.

"Repeatedly we see Mary take the words of Our Lord and think about them carefully"

Correction made.

Mary worship is from the devil. And it will not go unpunished.

WHY IS MARY CRYING?... [link to www.chick.com]

God bless you too Ac 3193979,

Thanks for a thoughtful reply. Neither one of us is going to change their belief so we leave it up to God. He is going to bring a big change "soon", in Heaven's time.

I would like to comment about the underlined. Logic, the original is the most accurate not "more" accurate. The first Bible trumps all of the translations. Latin was the common language of St. Jerome's time, the Douay-Rheims Bible is a word for word translation of the the first Bible, the Latin Vulgate.


Thread: Jesus bruised the serpents head ~ the power of death is dead!


I began this thread after reading the above thread title, it is FALSE. You can't add to and take away from Scripture. Check the KJV Bible, King James' translators did!

Sorry, you aren't familiar or agree with why Mary is the New Eve. and Our Lord is the New Adam, this doesn't make it not true. I explained the reason.

Jesus was emphasizing John's holiness. You have to look at Scripture in context and not take a few select verses literally. Here's another literal misinterpretation Protestants use, they protest with "call no man father." All through Scripture holy men have been referred to as father and in the Gospel by Our Lord. Jesus was using hyperbole in saying call no man father.

The only other person in Scripture besides Our Lord (John 1:14) that was said to be full of grace is Mary (thank you very faithful and wise John Salza, Catholic Apologist). The first words from God for Mary delivered by Gabriel the archangel were "Hail full of grace"
(Luke 1:28). Grace is God's presence, Mary is full of God, no sin. They did it again, King James' fellas changed these words to "Hail, thou that art highly favored."


So obvious the error, stick with the original verse not the completely altered Genesis 3:15 verse and the Luke 1:28 verse found in the KJV. How insulting the KJV verse for Genesis 3:15, their new meaning, Jesus is called "it!"


I will put enmities between thee and the woman, and thy seed and her seed: she shall crush thy head, and thou shalt lie in wait for her heel.

[link to www.drbo.org]


And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.

[link to www.kingjamesbibleonline.org]


Luke 1:28
And the angel being come in, said unto her: Hail, full of grace, the Lord is with thee: blessed art thou among women

Thread: CATHOLICS are all UTTERLY FUCKED IN THE HEAD..seriously...

This will be my last post here, since I have no desire to go in circles, but I want to point out some things you are missing from my posts.

When you go to most Protestant seminaries, you are taught to read Hebrew and Greek. These are the two languages the majority of the Bible was written in. When they translated to the Latin version of the Bible, they translated it from the original Greek and Hebrew manuscripts that also contain a little Aramaic. It doesn’t matter how accurate the Latin or any English version are, the original writings are the most accurate. If you can’t see that the original writings in Hebrew / Greek / Aramaic are the best sources to read, I can’t help you with that; however, there is no need to understand Latin to interpret the Bible.

You have stated that the KJV changed the meaning of the texts. That's simply not accurate. In fact, when you compare all the translations of the Genesis 3:15 verse you speak about, most of them state what the KJV says instead of that your version of choice states. Below is the Genesis 3:15 text from the Revised Standard Version Catholic Edition (RSVCE) – it agrees with the KJV – look it up and also look at the note that accompanies the text:
15 I will put enmity between you and the woman,
And between your seed and her seed;
he shall bruise your head,[a]
and you shall bruise his heel.”

Footnotes:
a.3.15 he shall bruise your head: i.e., the seed of the woman, that is, mankind descended from Eve, will eventually gain the victory over the powers of evil. This victory will, of course, be gained through the work of the Messiah who is par excellence the seed of the woman. The Latin Vulgate has the reading ipsa conteret, “she shall bruise.” Some Old Latin manuscripts have this reading and it occurs also in St. Augustine, De Genesi contra Manichaeos, II, which is earlier than St. Jerome’s translation. It could be due originally to a copyist’s mistake, which was then seen to contain a genuine meaning—namely, that Mary, too, would have her share in the victory, inasmuch as she was mother of the Savior.

Your reply to my question was, “Jesus was emphasizing John's holiness. You have to look at Scripture in context and not take a few select verses literally.”

It’s your interpretation that Jesus was emphasising John’s holiness, but it’s not what the text is stating. Read the entire chapter and what Jesus is teaching in that section. It doesn’t support what you are suggesting. Even if what you are saying is accurate, how is it logical that John is more Holy then Mary and yet Mary is the queen of heaven? It defies logic.

I wish you well in your journey of understanding the Bible and the process of sanctification. I’ll leave you with the following verses from a Catholic edition of the Bible to chew on. They are simple, direct and easy enough to understand if you let them speak to you – Christ is sufficient – His sacrifice was perfect – nothing else is needed – nothing. Rest in Him – peace –

Hebrews 9: Revised Standard Version Catholic Edition (RSVCE)

11 But when Christ appeared as a high priest of the good things that have come, then through the greater and more perfect tent (not made with hands, that is, not of this creation) 12 he entered once for all into the Holy Place, taking not the blood of goats and calves but his own blood, thus securing an eternal redemption. 13 For if the sprinkling of defiled persons with the blood of goats and bulls and with the ashes of a heifer sanctifies for the purification of the flesh, 14 how much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without blemish to God, purify your conscience from dead works to serve the living God.

15 Therefore he is the mediator of a new covenant, so that those who are called may receive the promised eternal inheritance, since a death has occurred which redeems them from the transgressions under the first covenant.

God did not give everyone the authority to interpret Scripture! He gave the authority to interpret Scripture
to His Church, the RCC.

Lose "private judgment" of Scripture. Start reading the
footnotes of a Catholic Bible to help understand Scripture's meaning. Read the Catechism, check
Church teaching on particular verses.

[link to www.drbo.org]