Is it possible to lose salvation?

[Ronald Nolette]

Soooo, LIED in Eph. 1:22-23, Luke was LYING in Acts 9:4-5 and John LIED in John 14:6??

What are saying I said? I do not disagree with these texts. so what are you saying?

It is made up of all BAPTIZED Trinitarian followers of Christ.

No- Just those who have placed their trust in the death and resurrction of jesus for their sins. Baptism is for believers after they are saved.

Says ME, says the Early Church and says plain old grammar . . .

As I informed you before – the use of “The Catholic Church” in 2nd century documents like The Martyrdom of Polycarp is as a TITLE – not a mere description . This is a fact that you simply cannot argue against. . .

Well I have as others, get over it.

But they can jump out of His hand. This verse is a promise to those who REMAIN in Christ and REMAIN faithful.

There are MANY verses that warn us NOT to fall away or we will LOSE our secure position . . .

WSrong! If you are a person, yo0u cannot pluck yourself out of Jesus hand.

WRONG.

Show me where they taught OSAS and Sola Scriptura.
Chapter and Verse, please . . .

I did. go back and look them up.

Here are a few other warnings about the SAME thing . . .
(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)

Many of these are referring to tribulation saints which can lost their salvation, or unbelievers, or merely losing rewards.

As Jesus said I give them eternal life and they shall never perish

Jhn 10:28
And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand.

 

[BreadOfLife]

To this I only say you are a liar!

I only lost to one who refuses to accept the definitions as given and not implied.

When YOU can prove me wrong that Adelphos can be used for MANY things other that uterine sibling - (half-brither, cousin, relative, fellow-believer, neighbor, fellow-countryman, etc.) then you can claim victory.

Until then - you've LOST thois debate . . .


PS - you have YET to show me a SINGLE verse that talks about Mary's other children . . .

 

[BreadOfLife]

What are saying I said? I do not disagree with these texts. so what are you saying?

In post #3915, I wrote the following Biblical truths:

a. The Church is the FULLNESS of Christ (Eph. 1:22-23).
b. Jesus identifies His very SELF with His Church (Acts 9:4-5).
c. Jesus is Truth itself (John 14:6).

YOU responded by saying, “You are wrong!”

No- Just those who have placed their trust in the death and resurrction of jesus for their sins. Baptism is for believers after they are saved.

Baptism is REQUIRED . . .

Mark 16:16
Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned.

John 3:5
Jesus answered, “Very truly I tell you, no one can enter the kingdom of God unless they are born of water and the Spirit.

1 Pet. 3:21
Baptism, which corresponds to this, NOW SAVES YOU, not as a removal of dirt from the body but as an appeal to God for a good conscience, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ

Well I have as others, get over it.

Uhhh, NO, you haven’t.

Your “argument” has been one of pure denial – and denial is NOT a valid argument . . .

WSrong! If you are a person, yo0u cannot pluck yourself out of Jesus hand.

You absolutely can – as I have repeatedly shown . . .

(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)

I did. go back and look them up.

NOW who’s LYING??
You haven’t given me a SINGLE verse that teaches either of these false Protestant inventions.

I’ll give you another chance. Give me Biblical proof for:
- Sola Scriptura
- Eternal Security (OSAS)

Chapter and Verse, please

Many of these are referring to tribulation saints which can lost their salvation, or unbelievers, or merely losing rewards.

As Jesus said I give them eternal life and they shall never perish

WRONG.
The warning applies to ALL born-again believers:

Romans 11:22
“See, then, the kindness and severity of God: severity toward those who fell, but God's kindness to you, provided you REMAIN in his kindness; otherwise you to will be cut off.”
Paul is warning the faithful to REMAIN in God’s favor or they will lose their salvation. How can they lose what they never had?

Hebrews 10:26-27
“If we sin deliberately AFTER receiving KNOWLEDGE of the truth, there no longer remains sacrifice for sins but a fearful prospect of judgment and a flaming fire that is going to consume the adversaries.”
This is a clear warning that falling away from God will result in the loss of our salvation. The Greek ford for “knowledge” used here is NOT the usual word (oida). This is talking about a full, experiential knowledge (epignosei). This verse is about CHRISTIANS who had an EPIGNOSIS of Christ and who can fall back into darkness and LOSE their salvation by their own doing.

2 Peter 2:20-22
For if they, having escaped the defilements of the world through the KNOWLEDGE of our Lord and savior Jesus Christ, again become entangled and overcome by them, their last condition is worse than their first.
For it would have been better for them not to have KNOWN the way of righteousness than after knowing it to turn back from the holy commandment handed down to them.
Here, Peter illustrates that those who had a full, experiential knowledge (epignosei) of Christ – CHRISTIANS – who can fall back into darkness and LOSE their salvation by their 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.

Rev. 3:5
He who overcomes will, like them, be dressed in white. I will never blot out his name from the book of life, but will acknowledge his name before my Father and his angels.
God cannot blot out a name that was never there in the first place. He is talking about CHRISTIANS who are already saved and how they can LOSE their salvation.

Romans 11:20-22
But they were broken off because of unbelief, and you stand by faith. Do not be arrogant, but be afraid. For if God did not spare the natural branches, he will not spare you either. Consider therefore the kindness and sternness of God: sternness to those who fell, but kindness to you, provided that you continue in his kindness. Otherwise, you also will be cut off.
PROVIDED that you continue in His kindness . . .

Hebrews 3:6
But Christ is faithful as a son over God's house. And we are his house, IF we hold on to our courage and the hope of which we boast.
IF we hold on . . .

Jhn 10:28
And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand.

Correct.
Nobody can pluck you out of His hand.

However – as the Bible warns YOU can choose to leave . . .

 

[MonoBiblical]

Peter is petros- a stone
rock is petra is ledge or masive rock!

Petros is what makes a rock. Peter was a rock-maker at least metaphorically. Petra is a rock, and tauta is other. On this other a rock, he built his own Assembly. The rock is not Peter, which is obvious from the Greek which the neo-Romans no longer use, but it is Jesus who is also the rejected rock.

 

[MonoBiblical]

When YOU can prove me wrong that Adelphos can be used for MANY things other that uterine sibling - (half-brither, cousin, relative, fellow-believer, neighbor, fellow-countryman, etc.) then you can claim victory.

That definition was given by Jesus, and doesn't follow in all NT usage. Roman "Catholics" don't know Greek, proving they are not the original church but merely Latin proselytes.

 

[MonoBiblical]

PS - you have YET to show me a SINGLE verse that talks about Mary's other children . . .

Joseph didn't have any other children either. Some Jews were mistaken. Yet Jesus did call them his brothers.

 

[Christian Soldier]

Therefore I endure all things for the sake of the elect, that they also may obtain the salvation which is in Christ Jesus with eternal glory. 2 Timothy 2:10


We all see clearly that in this statement by Paul, under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, that the elect refers to the Jews.


Paul stated many times about his zeal to reach his own countrymen, the Jews, from whom the Messiah came.


This is the context of the meaning of being chosen or predestined; chose for God's purpose not chosen for salvation.


For I could wish that I myself were accursed from Christ for my brethren, my countrymen according to the flesh, who are Israelites, to whom pertain the adoption, the glory, the covenants, the giving of the law, the service of God, and the promises; of whom are the fathers and from whom, according to the flesh, Christ came, who is over all, the eternally blessed God. Amen. Romans 9:3-5

• of whom are the fathers and from whom, according to the flesh, Christ came

The Jews were "chosen" (elected) to be the bloodline lineage from whom Christ came.

This speaks of purpose, elected for purpose, not elected for salvation.

for the children not yet being born, nor having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works but of Him who calls. Romans 9:11

There's a few problems with your interpretation of both 2 Timothy 2:10 and Romans 9:11

In 2 Tim 2:10 Paul was referring to the Jews, but he was well aware of the fact that the elect of God were not only Jews, but also the Gentiles.

John 3:16 confirms this; "For God so loved the world (not only the Jews) that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life".

Then the nail in the coffin for the idea that election was not onto salvation but for service, is >>>>

2 Thessalonians 2:13
But we should always give thanks to God for you, brethren beloved by the Lord, because God has chosen you from the beginning for salvation through sanctification by the Spirit and faith in the truth.

You claim that the elect were not chosen for salvation, but Gods Word says otherwise.

We should also take into consideration that "Israel" or "Jews" are mentioned in two different contexts. We read about "national Israel" (the blood relatives or descendants of Abraham), then we have "spiritual Israel", which is comprised of Jews and Gentiles in the Body of Christ or the Church or the Temple of God.

Galatians 3:28 "There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus".

Romans 2:28 For he is not a Jew who is one outwardly, nor is circumcision that which is outward in the flesh; 29 but he is a Jew who is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the Spirit, not in the letter; whose, praise is not from men but from God.

 

[JLB]

There's a few problems with your interpretation of both 2 Timothy 2:10 and Romans 9:11

In 2 Tim 2:10 Paul was referring to the Jews, but he was well aware of the fact that the elect of God were not only Jews, but also the Gentiles.

John 3:16 confirms this; "For God so loved the world (not only the Jews) that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life".

Then the nail in the coffin for the idea that election was not onto salvation but for service, is >>>>

2 Thessalonians 2:13
But we should always give thanks to God for you, brethren beloved by the Lord, because God has chosen you from the beginning for salvation through sanctification by the Spirit and faith in the truth.

You claim that the elect were not chosen for salvation, but Gods Word says otherwise.

We should also take into consideration that "Israel" or "Jews" are mentioned in two different contexts. We read about "national Israel" (the blood relatives or descendants of Abraham), then we have "spiritual Israel", which is comprised of Jews and Gentiles in the Body of Christ or the Church or the Temple of God.

Galatians 3:28 "There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus".

Romans 2:28 For he is not a Jew who is one outwardly, nor is circumcision that which is outward in the flesh; 29 but he is a Jew who is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the Spirit, not in the letter; whose, praise is not from men but from God.

Therefore I endure all things for the sake of the elect, that they also may obtain the salvation which is in Christ Jesus with eternal glory. 2 Timothy 2:10


We all see clearly that in this statement by Paul, under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, that the elect refers to the Jews.

This is irrefutable.


The context of the meaning of being chosen or predestined; chosen for God's purpose not chosen for salvation.


For I could wish that I myself were accursed from Christ for my brethren, my countrymen according to the flesh, who are Israelites, to whom pertain the adoption, the glory, the covenants, the giving of the law, the service of God, and the promises; of whom are the fathers and from whom, according to the flesh, Christ came, who is over all, the eternally blessed God. Amen. Romans 9:3-5

for the children not yet being born, nor having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works but of Him who calls. Romans 9:11

• of whom are the fathers and from whom, according to the flesh, Christ came

The Jews were "chosen" (elected) to be the bloodline lineage from whom Christ came.

This speaks of purpose, elected for purpose, not elected for salvation.


No where in scripture is there any verse that teaches us, that some were chosen for eternal salvation, while others were chosen for eternal damnation.



God loves all men and desires them to be saved.


For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life. John 3:16



For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Savior, who desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth. 1 Timothy 2:3-4

 

[BreadOfLife]

That definition was given by Jesus, and doesn't follow in all NT usage. Roman "Catholics" don't know Greek, proving they are not the original church but merely Latin proselytes.

There are 344 instances are instances where the word “Adelphos” and all of its variations are used in the NT.

- 41 times (12%) are cases where "Adelphos" clearly or probably refers to a family sibling.
- 47 instances (14%) are cases where "Adelphos" may or may not refer to a family sibling.
- 256 instances (74%) are cases where "Adelphos" cannot or almost certainly does NOT refer to a family sibling.

How 'bout that?? The overwhelming majority of times, "Adelphos"it is NOT used to describe siblings.
So, contrary to your false accusation - THIS Catholic knows his Greek . . .

Joseph didn't have any other children either. Some Jews were mistaken.

That’s an opinion - NOT a fact.

According to the Protoevangelium of James, Joseph was a widower with children when he married Mary.

Yet Jesus did call them his brothers.

Jesus also called the Apostles His “brothers” . . .

John 20:17
Jesus said, “Do not hold on to me, for I have not yet ascended to the Father. Go instead to my brothers and tell them, ‘I am ascending to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God.’”

Does that mean that they were ALL children of Mary??

 

[Ronald Nolette]

When YOU can prove me wrong that Adelphos can be used for MANY things other that uterine sibling - (half-brither, cousin, relative, fellow-believer, neighbor, fellow-countryman, etc.) then you can claim victory.

Until then - you've LOST thois debate . .

I already did many times. Maybe you were asleep when you read those posts. but in NT Greek it never means a relative. And the o0ther accepted by Greek speaker definitions do not fit in the context of when the rabbis spoke of James, Joses, Simpon and Judaj being Jesus brethren, especially weeing as those rabbis knew the family and knew that a relative would be syngenes or synapsios.

SWo it is your failure.

PS - you have YET to show me a SINGLE verse that talks about Mary's other children . . .

Once again if you read my posts sober and awake you would have seen them. I also showed Jospeh and marry had sex after jesus was born but you are incapable of accepting that biblical truth.

 

[Ronald Nolette]

In post #3915, I wrote the following Biblical truths:

a. The Church is the FULLNESS of Christ (Eph. 1:22-23).
b. Jesus identifies His very SELF with His Church (Acts 9:4-5).
c. Jesus is Truth itself (John 14:6).

YOU responded by saying, “You are wrong!”

And you are wrong. The Roman church is not 100% right 100% of the time. Jesus is the truth, but the ekklesia or called out p[eople (not a denomination) are not.

 

[MonoBiblical]

go instead to my brothers and tell them, ‘I am ascending to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God.

And who are Jesus' brothers, mothers, father and sisters as future children hint hint?

 

[Big Boy Johnson]

And who are Jesus' brothers, mothers, father and sisters as future children hint hint?

Those that do the will of the Father according to Jesus

 

[Christian Soldier]

Therefore I endure all things for the sake of the elect, that they also may obtain the salvation which is in Christ Jesus with eternal glory. 2 Timothy 2:10


We all see clearly that in this statement by Paul, under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, that the elect refers to the Jews.

This is irrefutable.


The context of the meaning of being chosen or predestined; chosen for God's purpose not chosen for salvation.


For I could wish that I myself were accursed from Christ for my brethren, my countrymen according to the flesh, who are Israelites, to whom pertain the adoption, the glory, the covenants, the giving of the law, the service of God, and the promises; of whom are the fathers and from whom, according to the flesh, Christ came, who is over all, the eternally blessed God. Amen. Romans 9:3-5

for the children not yet being born, nor having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works but of Him who calls. Romans 9:11

• of whom are the fathers and from whom, according to the flesh, Christ came

The Jews were "chosen" (elected) to be the bloodline lineage from whom Christ came.

This speaks of purpose, elected for purpose, not elected for salvation.


No where in scripture is there any verse that teaches us, that some were chosen for eternal salvation, while others were chosen for eternal damnation.



God loves all men and desires them to be saved.


For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life. John 3:16



For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Savior, who desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth. 1 Timothy 2:3-4

There is nothing in the Bible to support the idea that "God loves all men" but the Bible does say that God hates some before they are born, such as Esau.

There are many scriptures confirming the doctrine of election onto salvation. There are no verses to support the idea that God desires to save every single person, "who desires all men (not just Jews) to be saved. You are taking verses out of their intended context and misapplying them to support your views, which don't align with the rest of the scripture.

Here are just some verses confirming the doctrine of "election onto salvation".

In Romans 8:28–30, we read:

We know that in everything God works for good with those who love Him, who are called according to His purpose. For those whom He foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son in order that he might be the first-born among many brethren. And those whom he predestined he also called; and those whom he called he also justified; and those whom he justified he also glorified.

In the following chapter, when talking about God’s chosing Jacob and not Esau, Paul says it was not because of anything that Jacob or Esau had done, but simply in order that God’s purpose of election might continue.

Though they were not yet born and had done nothing either good or bad, in order that God’s purpose of election might continue not because of works but because of his call, she was told, “The elder will serve the younger.” As it is written, “Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated.” (Rom. 9:11–13)

Regarding the fact that some of the people of Israel were saved, but others were not, Paul says: “Israel failed to obtain what it sought. The elect obtained it, but the rest were hardened” (Rom. 11:7). Here again Paul indicates two distinct groups within the people of Israel. Those who were “the elect” obtained the salvation that they sought, while those who were not the elect simply “were hardened.”

Paul talks explicitly about God’s choice of believers before the foundation of the world in the beginning of Ephesians.

“He chose us in him before the foundation of the world that we should be holy and blameless before him. He destined us in love to be his sons through Jesus Christ, according to the purpose of his will, to the praise of his glorious grace.” (Eph. 1:4–6)

Here Paul is writing to believers and he specifically says that God “chose us” in Christ, referring to believers generally. In a similar way, several verses later he says, “We who first hoped in Christ have been destined and appointed to live for the praise of his glory” (Eph. 1:12).

He writes to the Thessalonians, “For we know, brethren beloved by God, that he has chosen you; for our gospel came to you not only in word, but also in power and in the Holy Spirit and with full conviction” (1 Thess. 1:4–5).

Paul says that the fact that the Thessalonians believed the gospel when he preached it (“for our gospel came to you … in power … and with full conviction”) is the reason he knows that God chose them. As soon as they came to faith Paul concluded that long ago God had chosen them, and therefore they had believed when he preached. He later writes to the same church, “We are bound to give thanks to God always for you, brethren beloved by the Lord, because God chose you from the beginning to be saved through sanctification by the Spirit and belief in the truth” (2 Thess. 2:13).

 

[MonoBiblical]

So, contrary to your false accusation - THIS Catholic knows his Greek . . .

Then it is likely you are not a priest.

 

[MonoBiblical]

According to the Protoevangelium of James, Joseph was a widower with children when he married Mary.

Noncanonical scriptures don't prove anything, but it tells me where that theology came from. Alwell proves the weakness the source.

 

[Ronald Nolette]

Baptism is REQUIRED . . .

Mark 16:16
Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned.

John 3:5
Jesus answered, “Very truly I tell you, no one can enter the kingdom of God unless they are born of water and the Spirit.

1 Pet. 3:21
Baptism, which corresponds to this, NOW SAVES YOU, not as a removal of dirt from the body but as an appeal to God for a good conscience, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ

Baptism is required, but not for salvation. Peter shows it is not water baptism, but the baptism of the spirit which cleanses the conscience

Jesus was talking about natural and spiritual birth. He even further explained it in the next verse!

Paul never said baptism was needed for salvation!

also the baptism a believer must go through is dunking in water.

Correct.
Nobody can pluck you out of His hand.

However – as the Bible warns YOU can choose to leave . .

Sorry but Jesus said He would NEVER leave us oir forsake us. so if we try to walk away, He walks with us still.

What is tragic is you are so focused on you having to be good to stay saved, you do not realize you are teaching that the blood of Jesus did not pay for all your sins.! According to your false doctrine, There can come a time when you rsalvation is yanked from you, for sinning one time too many. Noe I am 100% in agreement with Paul iin romans 6 so please do not accuse me of saying it is okay to sin.

What is even more tragic is that you , being a very intelligent and devout man, do not even realize what jesus accomplished for you and the massive transformation a person experiences the moment they trust in the deatha nd physical resurrection of Jesus for their full sin debt. that is the real tragedy here.

 

[BreadOfLife]

I already did many times. Maybe you were asleep when you read those posts. but in NT Greek it never means a relative. And the o0ther accepted by Greek speaker definitions do not fit in the context of when the rabbis spoke of James, Joses, Simpon and Judaj being Jesus brethren, especially weeing as those rabbis knew the family and knew that a relative would be syngenes or synapsios.

Your claim above in RED is not only a LIE – it has already been debunked.

We see Mary’s relative (adelphe), who is also named “Mary” standing near the cross with her: She is the wife of Clopas/Alphaeus and the mother of the “adelphoi of Jesus (James, Joses.)

What do the Scriptures have to say about the women standing at the cross and their children?
- 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".
She is NOT a uterine sibling of Mary, but a relative.

Acts 1:15 speaks of the 120 brothers (adelphoi), gathered to choose a successor to Judas. Why wasn’t the word “disciples” (math-ayt-yoo'-os) used??

SWo it is your failure.

Once again if you read my posts sober and awake you would have seen them. I also showed Jospeh and marry had sex after jesus was born but you are incapable of accepting that biblical truth.

Another LIE – what a surprise. This was also debunked several posts ago . . .

Matt. 1:25 says, "... but kept her a virgin until she gave birth to a Son; and he called His name Jesus."

Did Mary have other children after Jesus? The Bible does NOT support this idea. Let’s see what the Scriptures say about the use of the word, “until”.

- 2 Samuel 6:23 tells us: Therefore Michal the daughter of Saul had no child UNTIL the day of her death.
Are we to assume that Michal had children after she died?

- 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??

- 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? YOUR problem here is your failed attempt to apply 21st century English to Hebrew and Greek from a culture thousands of years ago.

You LOSE . . .

 

[BreadOfLife]

And you are wrong. The Roman church is not 100% right 100% of the time. Jesus is the truth, but the ekklesia or called out p[eople (not a denomination) are not.

If Jesus is truth itself and the Church is the FULLNESS of Him and the “pillar and foundation of truth” (1 Tim. 3:15) – then YOU are wrong.

You are correct about ONE thing – the Catholic Church is not a denomination . . .

 

[BreadOfLife]

And who are Jesus' brothers, mothers, father and sisters as future children hint hint?

Thank you for PROVING my point that “adelphos” doesn’t always means uterine sibling . . .