Is it possible to lose salvation?

[BreadOfLife]

Then it is likely you are not a priest.

Every priest I know too at least 3 years of Greek in the seminary . . .

 

[BreadOfLife]

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

The Protoevangelium is a historical record – not Scripture. And it was the Catholic Church who made that decision under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit.

As for the “weakness” of the source – do you feel the SAME way about other historical records like –
- Luther’s 95 Theses?
- the Declaration of Independence?
- The Rise and Fall of the Roman Empire?

 

[BreadOfLife]

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!

That’s a childish understanding of John 3:5.

Jesus answered, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God.”

He didn’t say: “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born from his mommy, he cannot enter the kingdom of God.
That would include EVEERY person who ever existed . . .

- In the first Chapter, we see the Baptism of Jesus. What TWO elements are spoken of here?
WATER and the Holy Spirit (John 3:32-34).

- In Chapter 2, we see Jesus at the Wedding at Cana. AGAIN, we see the use of WATER which is transformed into wine

- In the third Chapter, Jesus answers Nicodemus's question about how to be born AGAIN. What does Jesus tell Him?
That we must be born again of WATER and the Spirit (John 3:5). Gee - that looks just like HIS Baptism.

- Finally - after Nicodemus leaves, WHERE does Jesus go? He goes with His Apostles to BAPTIZE people in the Judean countryside (John 3:22).

The first 3 chapters of John's Gospel are literally DRENCHED in the transforming waters of Baptism.

Paul never said baptism was needed for salvation!

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

The Bible never makes this claim . . .

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

And He will never leave OR forsake us.
It is US who can leave and forsake HIM. It happens ALL the time.

Open your eyes . . .

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.

No - what is tragic is your refusal to accept the Word of God.

We are told over and over again to “stay good”. This idea that we are “saved”, so we can behave ANY way we because “Jesus has out back” want is heresy. Contrary to YOUR objections - we are SUPPOSED to live a good and godly life (Rom. 6:12-14, Eph. 4:26-32, James 4:17, 1 John 3:6-9).

Wake up . . .

 

[MonoBiblical]

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 . . .

If Jesus came soon and he did, does that mean he is not with the Roman Catholics?

 

[MonoBiblical]

The Protoevangelium is a historical record – not Scripture

The Protoevangelium of James, also known as the Gospel of James, is a second-century infancy gospel that narrates the miraculous conception of Mary, her upbringing, and her marriage to Joseph. It details the journey to Bethlehem, the birth of Jesus, and events following his birth. This text is significant as it asserts the perpetual virginity of Mary, influencing Christian Mariology despite being classified as apocryphal by the Church. The Protoevangelium serves as a prequel to the birth narratives found in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke, providing additional context to the Nativity story.

In other words, this gnostic document claims Mary had a regenerating virginity.

 

[MonoBiblical]

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

No thank for proving that Jesus redefined for would be children of God.

Every priest I know too at least 3 years of Greek in the seminary . . .

Liar. Pastors perhaps, but priests are generally speaking, morons. I think you mean the Greek Orthodox who don't tolerate Rome's heresies. And she isn't tolerated lately.

 

[BreadOfLife]

If Jesus came soon and he did, does that mean he is not with the Roman Catholics?

Your question doesn’t make any sense as written.

Care to try again?

 

[BreadOfLife]

The Protoevangelium of James, also known as the Gospel of James, is a second-century infancy gospel that narrates the miraculous conception of Mary, her upbringing, and her marriage to Joseph. It details the journey to Bethlehem, the birth of Jesus, and events following his birth. This text is significant as it asserts the perpetual virginity of Mary, influencing Christian Mariology despite being classified as apocryphal by the Church. The Protoevangelium serves as a prequel to the birth narratives found in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke, providing additional context to the Nativity story.

In other words, this gnostic document claims Mary had a regenerating virginity.

No – it simply supports the idea that she remained a virgin her whole life.

 

[BreadOfLife]

No thank for proving that Jesus redefined for would be children of God.

MY position all along has been that “adelphos” doesn’t always means uterine sibling . . .

YOUR statement about what Jesus said in Matt.12:50 and Mark 3:35 solidified my position.

Liar.

Ahh, yes.
Accuse your opponent of "lying" when you have NO comeback . . .

Pastors perhaps, but priests are generally speaking, morons. I think you mean the Greek Orthodox who don't tolerate Rome's heresies. And she isn't tolerated lately.

Once again – NOT the priests I know.

In YOUR case, however - maybe it’s true what they say. That people usually gravitate toward their OWN kind . . .

 

[MonoBiblical]

Your question doesn’t make any sense as written.

Care to try again?

The second coming has already happened 2000 years ago, yet the "original" church does not believe what is in Revelation.

 

[MonoBiblical]

No – it simply supports the idea that she remained a virgin her whole life.

That's not what that document says. It says a cherry regenerated. Besides even without having sex, a woman will still lose her virginity being full grown. Did you want me to say that?

 

[MonoBiblical]

MY position all along has been that “adelphos” doesn’t always means uterine sibling . . .

But it most certainly does in most contexts.

 

[BreadOfLife]

The second coming has already happened 2000 years ago, yet the "original" church does not believe what is in Revelation.

Care you show me some actual evidence for this for this outlandish claim?

 

[BreadOfLife]

But it most certainly does in most contexts.

Actually, that’s NOT true.

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.

Soooo, in the overwhelming majority of instances (74%), it is NOT used to describe uterine siblings . . .

 

[BreadOfLife]

That's not what that document says. It says a cherry regenerated. Besides even without having sex, a woman will still lose her virginity being full grown. Did you want me to say that?

I have this document in my possession. NOWHEERE does it contain the text that YOU are claiming.
Care to show me your source - with the excerpt?

 

[MonoBiblical]

Care you show me some actual evidence for this for this outlandish claim?

[Rev 3:11 KJV] 11 Behold, I come quickly: hold that fast which thou hast, that no man take thy crown.
[Rev 22:7, 12, 20 KJV] 7 Behold, I come quickly: blessed [is] he that keepeth the sayings of the prophecy of this book. ... 12 And, behold, I come quickly; and my reward [is] with me, to give every man according as his work shall be. ... 20 He which testifieth these things saith, Surely I come quickly. Amen. Even so, come, Lord Jesus.

Inflected:	ἔρχομαι
Root:	ἔρχομαι
Strong's:	G2064
English:	come I
Code:	V-PNI-1S
Long:	Verb - Present Middle or Passive Deponent Indicative - 1st Person Singular

Speech:	Verb
Tense:	Present
Voice:	Middle or Passive Deponent
Mood:	Indicative
Person:	1st Person
Number:	Singular

Inflected:	ταχύ
Root:	ταχύ
Strong's:	G5035
English:	quickly.
Code:	ADV

Speech:

Adverb

 

[MonoBiblical]

Actually, that’s NOT true.

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.

Soooo, in the overwhelming majority of instances (74%), it is NOT used to describe uterine siblings . . .

It is used of fathered siblings but not uterine siblings; hence the special NT usage refering to the adoption of progeny by God, a promise of afterlife.

 

[MonoBiblical]

I have this document in my possession. NOWHEERE does it contain the text that YOU are claiming.
Care to show me your source - with the excerpt?

Care to describe what clit means in Latin? It is not the same as in English.

 

[Big Boy Johnson]

Care to describe what cult means in Latin?

It means catholicism

 

[MonoBiblical]

It means catholicism View attachment 73609

I meant clit as in c****y.