Is it possible to lose salvation?

[BreadOfLife]

continued . . .

You cannot provide a scintilla of empirical evidence from Scripture that Mary was born without a sin nature and kept free from sin all her life. All you have is philosophical reasonings from some early church Fathers!

Actually, this is a big, fat LIE.

I DID provide Scriptural evidence (Luke 1:28)) and explained to you the meaning of the name the Angel called her by (Kecharitomeme). As I educated you before – it translates as “completely, perfectly, enduringly endowed with grace” - and indicates a completed action with a permanent result.

You never refuted that fact. You just continued with your moronic denials . . .

You haven't even dared touch on purgatory yet. But let me remind you , if one can loste their salvation because of any sin or sins, or if one has to be punished for a temmporal period of time for their sins, then the only conclusion one can draw is thet you do not believe jesus paid the price and was punished for all your sins.

The teaching of a Final Purification (Purgatory) is indeed Scriptural.
Time for a Bible Lesson . . .

In 1 Cor. 3:10-15, this is how the process is described:
"According to the grace of God given to me, like a wise master builder I laid a foundation, and another is building upon it. But each one must be careful how he builds upon it, for no one can lay a foundation other than the one that is there, namely, Jesus Christ. If anyone builds on this foundation with gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, or straw, the work of each will come to light, for the Day (judgment) will disclose it. It will be revealed with fire, and the fire [itself] will test the quality of each one’s work. If the work stands that someone built upon the foundation, that person will receive a wage. But if someone’s work is burned up, that one will suffer loss; the person WILL be saved, but only as through fire."

- This cannot be Heaven because the person will SUFFER ‐ and there is NO suffering in Heaven.
- This cannot be Hell because the person will be SAVED ‐ ad there is NO salvation in Hell.
- This is describing a THIRD state – a state of Final Purification.

Since Rev. 21:27 tells us that nothing unclean can enter heaven, a final purification or purgation is necessary for some before entering heaven.

In 2 Macc. 12:42-46, we see that Judas Maccabeus prays for the men of his army, killed in battle. Verse 44 says, “… for if he were not expecting the fallen to rise again, it would have been useless and foolish to pray for them in death.”

Matt. 5:25-26 tells us that unless we have settled our matters, we will be “… handed over to the prison guard and will not be released until we have paid the last penny.”

Additionally, Matt. 12:32 states, “whoever speaks against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven, either in this age or in the age to come”, which indicates that there IS purification after death for some.
Matt. 18:32-35 and Luke 12:58-59 are additional verses that support this doctrine.

Now – instead if issuing your usual denials – why don’t you try to REFUTE me on this?

 

[amigo de christo]

Never studied Revelation...never will.
Dr. Scott Hahn wrote the only book on revelation that makes any sense to me...
The Lamb's Supper
But it refers it to the Mass.

and that is why you will be decieved .
Have you not heard , have you not read
BLESSED IS HE WHO READS and They WHO hear the words of this book .
BLESSED .
BLESSED and those who keep the sayings of this book .
WE GOT A HUGE HARLOT at work my friend
and as always SHE LOVES to keep the people n the dark

 

[BreadOfLife]

Hi Bread
Just saw the above - it's really old but I have a question regarding what you've stated.

It's re Acts 2:38-39
38 Peter said to them, "Repent, and each of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.
39 "For the promise is for you and your children and for all who are far off, as many as the Lord our God will call to Himself."

You said THE PARENT WILL CHOOSE FOR THE CHILD.
I agree wholeheartedly that this was the original intent in the early church because the parents INTENDED to raise the child in a Christian home with Christian ideals and beliefs.

Acts can mean that the promise will be also for the children of the baptized - but the children were also baptized as I remember from church history.

But the way you worded it, it sounds as if even the children will be saved.
If this were true, then every single Catholic would be saved.
Is this what you believe?

A young priest here explained it like this at Mass:
An infant/child is baptized.
The Holy Spirit is received.
However, it's as if the Holy Spirit is sleeping and must be activated by the child
when he reaches an age of understanding. (age of accountability).

I thought this was an excellent way of explanation and have used it myself.

Just clarify, please, that not every Catholic will end up saved because of the fact that they were baptized.

The Catholic Church does NOT teach the Protestant invention of OSAS. The above statement in RED is only true if OSAS is true. What the priest told you is a poor analogy. The Holy Spirit is alive and well in the Baptized baby.

The Bible warns ALL believers that we can LOSE our secure position. NOT because God takes it away - but by our OWN doing.

2 Peter 3:17
Therefore, dear friends, since you already know this, be on your guard so that you may not be carried away by the error of lawless men and fall from your secure position.
Peter is warning the faithful not to fall back into sin and lawlessness.

1 John 2:24
See that what you have heard from the beginning remains in you. IF it does, you also will REMAIN in the Son and in the Father.
This is an admonition to try to remain faithful.

Rev. 22:19
And if anyone takes words away from this book of prophecy, God will take away from him his share in the tree of life and in the holy city, which are described in this book.
How can God “take away” somebody’s “share” of heaven if they never had it to begin with? This is about CHRISTIANS who may or may NOT make it into Heaven.

(Matt. 7:19-23, Matt. 10:22, Matt. 24:13, Matt. 25:31–46, John 15:1-6, Rom. 11:22, 1 Cor. 4:4, 1 Cor. 9:27, 1 Cor. 10:12, 1 Tim. 4:1, 1 Tim. 4:16, 2 Tim. 2:12, Heb. 3:6, Heb. 3:12-14, Heb. 6:4-6, Heb. 10:26-27, 2 Pet. 2:20-21, 2 Pet. 3:17, 1 John 2:24, 1 John 5:13, Rev. 3:5, Rev. 22:19)

 

[Dan Clarkston]

The Catholic Church does NOT teach the Protestant invention of OSAS.

No, they have their own damnable heresies they are hawkin

 

[nedsk]

No, they have their own damnable heresies they are hawkin View attachment 71382

So you acknowledge that all of protestantism is a heresy. There might be hope for you yet.

 

[LoveYeshua]

Never studied Revelation...never will.
Dr. Scott Hahn wrote the only book on revelation that makes any sense to me...
The Lamb's Supper
But it refers it to the Mass.

Dear Fran, the book of Revelation is a message given by Jesus to His servants so they would know the things that must soon take place. From the beginning, it was not meant to be hidden. When the angel spoke to John, he said, “Do not seal the words of the prophecy of this book, for the time is at hand” (Revelation 22:10). This means that the book is open for all who believe to read and understand its message. But to see the whole picture, we must understand how God reveals truth. In the Old Testament, the prophet Daniel was told the opposite. God said to him, “Shut up the words, and seal the book until the time of the end; many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall increase” (Daniel 12:4). Daniel’s visions were closed until the last days because the time of their fulfillment was far away.

Revelation, however, is different. It was given after Jesus came, died, and rose again, and after He revealed the mystery of God’s plan. Yet, even though it is open, its full meaning will only be understood when the time of the end comes, because the symbols and events it describes become clear only as they begin to happen.

The Lord said that those who stay close to Him and walk in wisdom will understand, but the wicked will not. “None of the wicked shall understand, but the wise shall understand” (Daniel 12:10). That wisdom comes from obeying God and listening to His Spirit, not from human guessing. Jesus also told His followers to pay attention to the signs of the times. He said, “When these things begin to happen, look up and lift up your heads, because your redemption draws near” (Luke 21:28). This means that as the world begins to move toward the things written in Revelation, those who love and follow Christ will recognize what is taking place.

so the book of Revelation is both open and unfolding. It has been given for all to read, but it will be completely clear only as the final events begin. Those who seek God’s truth, keep His commandments, and hold fast to the testimony of Jesus will understand, for to them it is given to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven.

yes it contains a lot of symbolism, Revelation uses many symbols, but most of them are not new. They come from earlier prophecies in the Old Testament, especially from Daniel, Ezekiel, Isaiah, Zechariah, and the Psalms.

Blessings.

Rick

 

[nedsk]

Dear Fran, the book of Revelation is a message given by Jesus to His servants so they would know the things that must soon take place. From the beginning, it was not meant to be hidden. When the angel spoke to John, he said, “Do not seal the words of the prophecy of this book, for the time is at hand” (Revelation 22:10). This means that the book is open for all who believe to read and understand its message. But to see the whole picture, we must understand how God reveals truth. In the Old Testament, the prophet Daniel was told the opposite. God said to him, “Shut up the words, and seal the book until the time of the end; many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall increase” (Daniel 12:4). Daniel’s visions were closed until the last days because the time of their fulfillment was far away.

Revelation, however, is different. It was given after Jesus came, died, and rose again, and after He revealed the mystery of God’s plan. Yet, even though it is open, its full meaning will only be understood when the time of the end comes, because the symbols and events it describes become clear only as they begin to happen.

The Lord said that those who stay close to Him and walk in wisdom will understand, but the wicked will not. “None of the wicked shall understand, but the wise shall understand” (Daniel 12:10). That wisdom comes from obeying God and listening to His Spirit, not from human guessing. Jesus also told His followers to pay attention to the signs of the times. He said, “When these things begin to happen, look up and lift up your heads, because your redemption draws near” (Luke 21:28). This means that as the world begins to move toward the things written in Revelation, those who love and follow Christ will recognize what is taking place.

so the book of Revelation is both open and unfolding. It has been given for all to read, but it will be completely clear only as the final events begin. Those who seek God’s truth, keep His commandments, and hold fast to the testimony of Jesus will understand, for to them it is given to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven.

yes it contains a lot of symbolism, Revelation uses many symbols, but most of them are not new. They come from earlier prophecies in the Old Testament, especially from Daniel, Ezekiel, Isaiah, Zechariah, and the Psalms.

Blessings.

Rick

And all related to the Catholic Mass as Dr Hahn, former Catholic hating Protestant, clearly points out.

 

[Ronald Nolette]

The whole thing is one package. If all that was necessary was blood on the door posts then only there directions for where to apply the blood would have been needed. The stuff about eating the lamb is completely meaningless. Its all attached bring passover event.

Yes Passover is one festival or meal, but the blood was a one time event just like Jesus shedding His blood was a one time event.

 

[Ronald Nolette]

I am "studied" and "approved unto God"! I have been "walking with the Lord" for 55 years which is longer than you have. Is it possible that I am "one of untold legions of followers of Jesus who can detect false teachings"?

Curious Mary

I am sure you can spot many! But given you follow the Catholic line on Mary and purgatory and penances and holy days of obligation and celibacy, you have missed these due to your Catholic upbringing

Do I know all my false teachings? Well I believe I am right in all I believe, but am willing to be shown wrong by compelling evidence from Scripture..

 

[Ronald Nolette]

WRONG.

I gave you DOZENS of verses. All YOU’VE given in return are denials . . .

No you gave verses, then provided your analogous interpretation of those verses and concluded your analogies were correct.

The Manna tablets and rod that the Ark carried were ALL types of Jesus.
Mary carried the fulfillment.

I have no problem with Mary being the Mom of Jesus. But analogies are not doctrine but types and shadows. That does not make Mary a new ark. Even you admitted she hails to meet many of the things required concerning the ark!

WRONG.
You did NO such thing.

You gave me some verses that indicated “Adelphoi of Jesus” – NOT children of Mary. The Apostles were ALL his Adelphoi – but NOT his uterine siblings . .

True but context is critical. I am an adelphos of Jesus but not uterine. but James, Joses, Si9mon, and the sisters were uterine half siblings. It is up to you to show empirical and not philosophical proof that Jewish rabbis were referring to these people in teh context of inclusing Mary and Joseph as mere national brethren Maybe you are so used to accepting analogies as the reality that you forget truth is written in plain language. Besides you argued they were possibly cousins and the word "syngenes" which was common would have been used as it was in other places.

Either you’re REALLY dense – or you just enjoy LYING because I already educated you on this point . . .

ONE more time, son:
The term “Firstborn does NOT mean that other children followed. It means, the one who “opens the mother’s womb” and does NOT indicate more children. Samuel was Hannah’s “firstborn” – and she only had ONE child.

No, you tried to indoctrinate me in Catholic dogma, but did not educate me.

But let me educate you again. Firstborn in Hebrew means that sspecifically, but in common knowledge it means the first.

In Greek it means the first to split the womb! And Luke was written in Greek nor Hebrew.

Transliteration
prōtotokos (Key)
Pronunciation
pro-tot-ok'-os
KJV Translation Count — Total: 9x
The KJV translates Strong's G4416 in the following manner: firstborn (7x), first begotten (2x).

But teh other issue is that Joeph did not have sex until Jesus was born. You falsely use the text concerning Michal which all know no one can have children after death! Now you must prove that Jospeh did not have sex with Mary at all!

All you showed is possibilites and hypotheses based on unequal examples of the word until.

 

[nedsk]

Yes Passover is one festival or meal, but the blood was a one time event just like Jesus shedding His blood was a one time event.

That one time event started passover. What you're failing to comprehend, and the question you seem unable to answer is, if the eating of the lamb is meaningless then why all the specificity about it's gathering, killing cooking and eating? The reference to the blood and doorposts is just one line. It wasnt an either or event. You people just ignore stuff thats inconvenient to your narrative.

 

[BreadOfLife]

No you gave verses, then provided your analogous interpretation of those verses and concluded your analogies were correct.

And YOU gave me nothing but denials.
Give me a Scriptural refutation. For once . . .

I have no problem with Mary being the Mom of Jesus. But analogies are not doctrine but types and shadows. That does not make Mary a new ark. Even you admitted she hails to meet many of the things required concerning the ark!

This is a really idiotic statement.

David didn’t meet ALL of the things about Jesus.
Neither did Joseph, son of Jacob.

No fulfillment meets EVERY aspect of the OP type.

True but context is critical. I am an adelphos of Jesus but not uterine. but James, Joses, Si9mon, and the sisters were uterine half siblings. It is up to you to show empirical and not philosophical proof that Jewish rabbis were referring to these people in teh context of inclusing Mary and Joseph as mere national brethren Maybe you are so used to accepting analogies as the reality that you forget truth is written in plain language. Besides you argued they were possibly cousins and the word "syngenes" which was common would have been used as it was in other places.

These “Aadelphoi” are NEVER referred top as Mary’s children They are ALWAYS referred to as the Adelphoi of Jesus.

As for James and Joses – they are explicitly identified as the children of the “other Mary” standing near the cross and her husband Clopas/Alphaeus (John 19:25).

Matt. 27:56 says, "…among whom were Mary Magdalene, and MARY THE MOTHER OF JAMES AND JOSEPH, and the mother of the sons of Zebedee".

Mark 15:40 states, "There were also women looking on from afar, among whom were Mary Magdalene, and MARY THE MOTHER OF JAMES THE YOUNGER AND OF JOSES, and Salome".

Finally, John 19:25 states, "But standing by the cross of Jesus were his mother, and HIS MOTHER’S SISTER, Mary the wife of Clopas, and Mary Magdalene".

When you compare the different accounts of the crucifixion, they clearly show the mother of James and Joseph (Joses) to be the wife of Clopas (also called, Alphaeus) – NOT Mary, the Mother of Jesus. Any attempt to connect these people as uterine brothers of Jesus are squashed by the Bible.

No, you tried to indoctrinate me in Catholic dogma, but did not educate me.

But let me educate you again. Firstborn in Hebrew means that sspecifically, but in common knowledge it means the first.

In Greek it means the first to split the womb! And Luke was written in Greek nor Hebrew.

Transliteration
prōtotokos (Key)
Pronunciation
pro-tot-ok'-os
KJV Translation Count — Total: 9x
The KJV translates Strong's G4416 in the following manner: firstborn (7x), first begotten (2x).

Another idiotic and ignorant argument.

The “Firstborn” in Jewish culture means NOTHING BUT the one “who opened the womb”. To this day, it means the SAME thing in Jewish culture.

“Firstborn” as YOU understand it is a modern understanding.

But teh other issue is that Joeph did not have sex until Jesus was born. You falsely use the text concerning Michal which all know no one can have children after death! Now you must prove that Jospeh did not have sex with Mary at all!

All you showed is possibilites and hypotheses based on unequal examples of the word until.

How did I “falsely” show this about Michal??
It’s a FACT.

I gave you TWO other examples of the use of the word, “Until” – and you failed to address them:
Moses was buried by God in the valley of Moab after his death. Deut. 34:6 explicitly states: "And he buried him in the valley of the land of Moab over against Phogor: and no man hath known of his sepulchre UNTIL this present day.
Sooooo – did they find his grave after this??

Let’s also examine Acts 2:34-35 (also see Psalm 110:1, Matt 22:44): "For David did not go up into heaven, but he himself said: 'The Lord said to my Lord, "Sit at my right hand until I make your enemies your footstool."'

Are we to surmise that Jesus will cease to sit at the right hand of the Father after his enemies are made his footstool? The problem here is that ignorant people try to apply 21st century English to Hebrew and Greek from a culture thousands of years ago.

 

[BreadOfLife]

No, they have their own damnable heresies they are hawkin

The fallacy of “once Saved Always Saved” was invented by the SAME 16 century Protestants who brought you the fairy tale of Sola Scriptura.

NEITHER of these falsehoods can withstand the scrutiny of Scripture . . .

 

[Marvelloustime]

and that is why you will be decieved .
Have you not heard , have you not read
BLESSED IS HE WHO READS and They WHO hear the words of this book .
BLESSED .
BLESSED and those who keep the sayings of this book .
WE GOT A HUGE HARLOT at work my friend
and as always SHE LOVES to keep the people n the dark

@amigo de christo

 

[Ronald Nolette]

That one time event started passover. What you're failing to comprehend, and the question you seem unable to answer is, if the eating of the lamb is meaningless then why all the specificity about it's gathering, killing cooking and eating? The reference to the blood and doorposts is just one line. It wasnt an either or event. You people just ignore stuff thats inconvenient to your narrative.

Well your false accusations aside, it was only the blood that was spread on the door posts and lintels that spared people. there is nothing about teh eating of the passover lamb that spared the people. Yes they ate it and it is typical, but has nothing to do with teh blood and sparing of lives that night.

 

[nedsk]

Well your false accusations aside, it was only the blood that was spread on the door posts and lintels that spared people. there is nothing about teh eating of the passover lamb that spared the people. Yes they ate it and it is typical, but has nothing to do with teh blood and sparing of lives that night.

What do you mean it was typical? Typical suggests it was a common thing to do. That was the first passover. There was nothing typical about it. If eating the lamb is meaningless then it's nonsensical to take such pains to explain how to procure it, cook and eat it. The spreading of the blood on the door posts was notice that the people within the building observed the instructions handed down by God through Moses.

 

[Ronald Nolette]

And YOU gave me nothing but denials.
Give me a Scriptural refutation. For once .

I have, it is you that is using analogies and inferences to try to prove your point.

And BTW the ark of the covenant on earth was a perfect type of the ark of the covenant in heaven!

This is a really idiotic statement.

David didn’t meet ALL of the things about Jesus.
Neither did Joseph, son of Jacob.

No fulfillment meets EVERY aspect of the OP type.

It is idiotic only to those who are the same. she failed to meet most of the analogies as I showed you.

These “Aadelphoi” are NEVER referred top as Mary’s children They are ALWAYS referred to as the Adelphoi of Jesus.

And you call my statements idiotic!

Matthew 13:54-56

King James Version

​

54 And when he was come into his own country, he taught them in their synagogue, insomuch that they were astonished, and said, Whence hath this man this wisdom, and these mighty works?
55 Is not this the carpenter's son? is not his mother called Mary? and his brethren, James, and Joses, and Simon, and Judas?
56 And his sisters, are they not all with us? Whence then hath this man all these things?

You need to relearn basic English grammar! The subject is Jesus,

and Mary is mentioned as His Mother, so isn't Joseph, and so aren't his four hafl brothers and at least 2 sisters, though not by name

att. 27:56 says, "…among whom were Mary Magdalene, and MARY THE MOTHER OF JAMES AND JOSEPH, and the mother of the sons of Zebedee".

Mark 15:40 states, "There were also women looking on from afar, among whom were Mary Magdalene, and MARY THE MOTHER OF JAMES THE YOUNGER AND OF JOSES, and Salome".

Finally, John 19:25 states, "But standing by the cross of Jesus were his mother, and HIS MOTHER’S SISTER, Mary the wife of Clopas, and Mary Magdalene".

When you compare the different accounts of the crucifixion, they clearly show the mother of James and Joseph (Joses) to be the wife of Clopas (also called, Alphaeus) – NOT Mary, the Mother of Jesus. Any attempt to connect these people as uterine brothers of Jesus are squashed by the Bible.

And so we now have two very common Jewish names and they ,according to you, cannot be be referring to other James and Joses who are not jesus half-brothers. but iof you bothere to look James and Joses are mentioned with two other half brothers and are living together!

Another idiotic and ignorant argument.

The “Firstborn” in Jewish culture means NOTHING BUT the one “who opened the womb”. To this day, it means the SAME thing in Jewish culture.

“Firstborn” as YOU understand it is a modern understanding.

Did you major in just vomiting out ad-hominems in your parish? You seem to exel in that!

No in Jewish culture, firstborn meant firstborn. they were the inheritors of their fathers wealth and propserity! also the word firstborn appears 122 times in the OT and it is this:

Transliteration
bᵊḵôr
Pronunciation
bek-ore'

Part of Speech
masculine noun
Root Word (Etymology)
From בָּכַר (H1069)
Dictionary Aids
TWOT Reference: 244a
Variant Spellings
The following spelling is supported by Strongs and Gesenius: בכור.
KJV Translation Count — Total: 117x
The KJV translates Strong's H1060 in the following manner: firstborn (101x), firstling (10x), eldest (4x), firstborn (with H1121) (1x), eldest son (1x).
Outline of Biblical Usage [?]

1. firstborn, firstling
   1. of men and women
   2. of animals
   3. noun of relation (fig.)
2. Any other deceptions you wish to pull on the brethren here????
   

   How did I “falsely” show this about Michal??
   It’s a FACT.
   
   I gave you TWO other examples of the use of the word, “Until” – and you failed to address them:
   Moses was buried by God in the valley of Moab after his death. Deut. 34:6 explicitly states: "And he buried him in the valley of the land of Moab over against Phogor: and no man hath known of his sepulchre UNTIL this present day.
   Sooooo – did they find his grave after this??
   
   Let’s also examine Acts 2:34-35 (also see Psalm 110:1, Matt 22:44): "For David did not go up into heaven, but he himself said: 'The Lord said to my Lord, "Sit at my right hand until I make your enemies your footstool."'
   
   Are we to surmise that Jesus will cease to sit at the right hand of the Father after his enemies are made his footstool? The problem here is that ignorant people try to apply 21st century English to Hebrew and Greek from a culture thousands of years ago.

   
   And we still no not the burial site of Moses, and it was unknown from the time He died until the time of writing !

The average even low IQ person knows that death ceases the ability t0 have children. Maybe all your reinteprreting Scriupture to try to prove things has caused you to forget these simple facts.

And Jesus is still at teh right hand of the Father. Once the enemies are vanquished, Jesus returns to earth as King of Kings and Lord of Lords and when the Millennial kingdom is over, He once again submits HImself to Our father. Do not believe me. go to any third grader and they will gladly educate you on these simple and easy to understand basic facts of life!

 

[BreadOfLife]

I have, it is you that is using analogies and inferences to try to prove your point.

And BTW the ark of the covenant on earth was a perfect type of the ark of the covenant in heaven!

Ahhhh, so YOU’RE position is that there are TWO Arks? One here on earth that is lost and probably buries in cave somewhere – and an identical replica in Heaven??

Do you even understand that the Bible was NOT written in chapter and verse?? Each Book was written as one long letter. Rev. 12:1 doesn’t begin there. It begins back in Rev. 11:

Rev. 11:19
Then God’s temple in heaven was opened, and within his temple was seen the ARK OF HIS COVENANT. And there came flashes of lightning, rumblings, peals of thunder, an earthquake and a severe hailstorm.

And HOW is this Ark described in the very next verse??

Rev. 12:1
A great sign appeared in heaven: A WOMAN clothed with the sun, with the moon under her feet and a crown of twelve stars on her head.

It is idiotic only to those who are the same. she failed to meet most of the analogies as I showed you.

Comparisons between the Ark and Maru – the New Ark:
- The Word of God was on Tablets of Stone (Ex. 25:10) placed inside the Ark (Deut. 10:1)
- The Word of God became Flesh (John 1) conceived inside Mary (Luke 2:38)

- "Who am I that the Ark of my Lord should come to me?" (2 Sam. 6:9)
- "Who am I that the mother of my Lord should come to me?" (Luke 1:43)

- The When the Ark carrying the Word of God returned “David was leaping and dancing before the Lord” (2 Sam. 6:14)
- When Mary carrying the word of God came into Elizabeth's presence the baby “leaped for joy” in Elizabeth's womb (Luke 2:38)

- The Ark carrying the Word of God is brought to the house of Obed-Edom in the hill country of Judea for 3 months, where it was a blessing. (2 Sam. 6:11)
- Mary (the new Ark) carrying the Word of God goes to Elizabeth's house in the hill country of Judea for 3 months, where she is a blessing (Luke 1:56)

- The Ark carrying the Word of God is brought to the house of Obed-Edom for 3 months, where it was a blessing. (2 Sam. 6:11)
- Mary (the new Ark) carrying the Word of God goes to Elizabeth's house for 3 months, where she is a blessing (Luke 1:56)

- On the Day of the Dedication of the Temple which Solomon built, there were 120 PRIESTS present (2 Chron. 5:11). The ARK OF THE COVENANT was carried into the Temple (2 Chron. 5:7) and the HOLY SPIRIT CAME DOWN AS FIRE from Heaven to consume the burnt offering (2 Chron. 7:7).
- The On the Day of Pentecost, there were 120 DISCIPLEs of Jesus present in the Upper Room (Acts 1:15). Mary, the Mother of Jesus and the ARK OF THE NEW COVENANT was also present while the HOLY SPIRIT CAME DOWN AS FIRE as tongues of fire (Acts 2:3).

The prophecy about Mary was clear:
Ezek. 44:
The LORD said to me, “This gate is to remain shut. It must not be opened; no one may enter through it. It is to remain shut because the LORD, the God of Israel, has entered through it.

Only the LORD could enter through that gate (womb).

And you call my statements idiotic!

Matthew 13:54-56​

King James Version​

54 And when he was come into his own country, he taught them in their synagogue, insomuch that they were astonished, and said, Whence hath this man this wisdom, and these mighty works?
55 Is not this the carpenter's son? is not his mother called Mary? and his brethren, James, and Joses, and Simon, and Judas?
56 And his sisters, are they not all with us? Whence then hath this man all these things?

You need to relearn basic English grammar! The subject is Jesus,

and Mary is mentioned as His Mother, so isn't Joseph, and so aren't his four hafl brothers and at least 2 sisters, though not by name

NOWERE does it say that Mary is their mother. She is only called the mother of Jesus.
MY mother and a group of relatives could be described as my mother and my adelphoi.

I realize that this is a hard pill for you to swallow – but I have posted the definition of “Adelphos(oi) on several occasions. YOU need to face the FACTS . . .

And so we now have two very common Jewish names and they ,according to you, cannot be be referring to other James and Joses who are not jesus half-brothers. but iof you bothere to look James and Joses are mentioned with two other half brothers and are living together!

James, the “Brother” of Jesus (James the Less) is listed as “James son of Alphaeus”(Matt. 10:3, Mark 3:18, Luke 6:15 Acts 1:13). Alphaeus/Clopas was married to the “other Mary” standing near the cross. She is described as the “Adelphe”/kinswoman of Mary, mother of Jesus (John 18:25).

 

[BreadOfLife]

continued . . .

Did you major in just vomiting out ad-hominems in your parish? You seem to exel in that!

No in Jewish culture, firstborn meant firstborn. they were the inheritors of their fathers wealth and propserity! also the word firstborn appears 122 times in the OT and it is this:

Transliteration
bᵊḵôr
Pronunciation
bek-ore'

Part of Speech
masculine noun
Root Word (Etymology)
From בָּכַר (H1069)
Dictionary Aids
TWOT Reference: 244a
Variant Spellings
The following spelling is supported by Strongs and Gesenius: בכור.
KJV Translation Count — Total: 117x
The KJV translates Strong's H1060 in the following manner: firstborn (101x), firstling (10x), eldest (4x), firstborn (with H1121) (1x), eldest son (1x).
Outline of Biblical Usage [?]

1. firstborn, firstling
   1. of men and women
   2. of animals
   3. noun of relation (fig.)
2. Any other deceptions you wish to pull on the brethren here????

WRONG.
Firstborn simply means the on who “opens the womb”:

Exod. 13:2
Sanctify unto me all the firstborn, whatsoever openeth the womb among the children of Israel, both of man and of beast: it is mine.

Luke 2:23
(As it is written in the law of the Lord, Every male that openeth the womb shall be called holy to the Lord;)

“Firstborn” does NOT indicate other children.
B’kohr: The FIRSTBORN Child

Firstborn
In biblical Hebrew usage the term bekhor, “firstborn [male],” and its derivatives, are somewhat ambiguous.

At the same time, the specification that the bekhor be “the first issue of the womb” (Ex. 13:2, 12, 15, etc.; cf. Num. 8:16), which reflects the religious significance of the first products of the procreative process in human and animal life, stresses the biological link to the mother.

1. And we still no not the burial site of Moses, and it was unknown from the time He died until the time of writing !

CORRECT.

Soooo, explain the use of “Until” in this verse since YOU claim that it means that something HAS to happen afterward. It doesn’t because his grave was NEVER found.

In the same way, Joseph not having relations with Mary - “UNTIL” she brought forth her firstborn son does NOT mean that they had relations. Put on your thinking cap, son . . .

The average even low IQ person knows that death ceases the ability t0 have children. Maybe all your reinteprreting Scriupture to try to prove things has caused you to forget these simple facts.

Then why the use of “UNTIL”? Why didn’t the writer just say, “Michal never had children”?
Different culture, different languages.

I hate to break this to you – but the Bible wasn’t written in 21st century English . . .

 

[amigo de christo]

Well your false accusations aside, it was only the blood that was spread on the door posts and lintels that spared people. there is nothing about teh eating of the passover lamb that spared the people. Yes they ate it and it is typical, but has nothing to do with teh blood and sparing of lives that night.

and now for the words OF THE LAMB OF GOD ALL MIGHTY
For my flesh is meat indeed and my blood is drink ..................
Even the original passover lamb
wherein NOT a bone was to be broken
but its blood to be put upon the walls and its meat eaten
SURE was completed IN CHRIST WHO WAS THE LAMB
the VERY BREAD OF HEAVEN that giveth LIFE unto the world .
My words are SPIRIT and THEY are LIFE .
Ever get the feeling that things were a shadow of THE REAL that was TO COME . OH YES .
The temple made by hands after the pattern of the TRUE IN HEAVEN
wherein the prophets and torah POINTED TO HE who was to COME and SET UP the HEAVENLY .
OH yes .
OUR KINGDOM IS NOT OF THIS WORLD . ITS KING SITS AT THE RIGHT hand OF THE FATHER
and maketh interecession for the sheep.
OUR KINGDOM is NOT OF THIS WORLD . let us keep that in mind . And every jew and gentile
That denies JESUS IS THE CHRIST is gonna wail . FOR TO DENY CHRIST IS TO DENY GOD ALL MIGHTY .
again LET us keep that in mind please .