Search results

Blue Letter Bible?

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

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...

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

That is much too simplistic. Does punish by merit? Some sins are worse than others. Don't kid yourself with James.

But you still know nothing as a Canadian. You sound like a Soros paid protester.

At certain times, but his friends were much worse.

Who is the all?

Job was a righteous man, the opposite of a sinner. His friends were the bad example.

I believe they work themselves there, but all are supposed to be sinnners, because an all or the all have sinned. I don't believe Job feel short the glory of God most of the time. God is a fan of mankind, not Satan.

Technically, most assume it was not in the way angels procreate. Some angels are virgins per Revelation and will have children. Marriage is actually a property contract in the OT/Tenak, but now women demand to own the house. Marriage is not a good translation of the Greek and Hebrew cognates.

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

Then it is likely you are not a priest.

Should we tolerate migrant freeloaders?

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

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

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.

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.

Or perhaps the NT originally had the tetragrammaton rather than kurios.

No, it isn't. The earlier copies are thought to have the Hebrew name of God in them, which in fact have instead of kurios. The consensus is imaginary at the least on your part.