[email protected] - God bless.

He would be the first of the Apostles to be martyred in AD42 by Herod Agrippa.

@@roberthaddad7850 Thank you.

Thank you and God bless.

Of course you can lose and regain your salvation as a Catholic. What do you think the sacrament of confession is for.

@@Psalm_xxiii You're not 'saved' simply for having gone to confession... You're on the road to Salvation - but you're not there yet. Only in Heaven will you be in a position to claim that you have been saved... Baptism and Confession JUSTIFY us: they don't 'save' us. Now that you have been born spiritually through Baptism or 'reborn' through Confirmation, you must lead a saintly life for the Greater Glory of God, our Heavenly Father. This is called Sanctification and it is chiefly the work of the Holy Ghost - not ours - who is initially received in the Sacrament of Confirmation and whose Presence in our lives is deepened by Communion. Only when you have put this earthly life to good use will you be in a position to claim, IN RETROSPECT, that you have been saved

​@@superapex2128 Semantics. Without justification there is no salvation. So if you can lose your justification and restore it, then the same applies to your salvation.

@@Psalm_xxiii It is not just semantics: not differentiating the two is what makes Calvinism possible. Have you ever heard of ''Once saved' always saved'? Salvation ''security'' is a major component of Calvinism: we don't want to be using calvinist phraseology because it describes a state of affairs which simply does not exist. Why would you refute something which is embedded in the very language you use? If it's not true, don't use it yourself!

@@superapex2128 Because Dr Haddad is an apologist. He is using their terminology to prove a point. Obviously Catholics don't believe in the doctrine once saved always saved.

@Hupernike45 and Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit. In a loud voice she exclaimed: “Blessed are you among women, and blessed is the child you will bear! But why am I so favored, that the mother of my Lord should come to me? "Mother of my Lord" in scripture Luke 1:39. Now do you believe?

Dear Hupernike, thank you for your comment. Yes, those who belong to the Church Jesus Christ founded and acknowledge its teaching authority are obliged to believe. Those who belong to man-made denominations, of course, decide for themselves not to believe. They trust in their own scholarship rather than divine authority. God as God obviously does not have a mother but the Divine Person of the Word - Jesus Christ - does. There are numerous references in divinely-inspired Scripture that call Mary the Mother of Jesus: Matt 2:11; Matt 2:13, 14, 20, 21; Matt 12:46 & 47; Matt 13:55; Mark 3:31; Luke 2:33-34, 43, 48, 51; Luke 8:19; John 2:5, 12. Plenty of manuscript evidence in all this. Mary remained a perpetual virgin. Matt 1:25 really means that Joseph did not know her till the birth of Christ. Matthew's intention was to defend the conception of Christ by the Holy Spirit. Even Luther and Calvin hold this view, as well as Zwingli. The "brothers" of Jesus are his first cousins, the children of the "other Mary" married to Alphaeus (or Clopas). I can supply the Scripture references if you wish. The Scriptures mention nothing of Mary's end on earth. All the historical and patristic evidence contained in the manuscripts we possess speak of Mary's assumption, or dormition. I can quote various Church Fathers if you like. May I ask, which denomination do you belong to? Was it founded by Christ? Does it have teaching authority from God? Does it have infallible authority to interpret Scripture? If the answer to any of these questions is no, then I refuse to belong to it. I will belong to the Church that can show a direct link back to Christ and the apostles and has been visibly active and teaching ever since. That, sadly, excludes the entirety of Protestantism.

Yes.

You’re very wrong

1. St Paul's writing in the new testament are not a "Gospel", it is a book. So you're claim is incorrect. 2. St Paul WAS considered an apostle and an equal among the Apostle's. This is confirmed in the book of "Acts" of the "Apostle's". Where St Paul is named and supported by the rest of the Apostle's. Acts 14:14 14But when the apostles Barnabas and Paul heard of it, they tore their garments and rushed out into the crowd, crying out 3. If you believe that the New Testament is the inspired Word of God and was put together under the guidance and inspiration of the Holy Spirit, then you must except all of it, including St Paul's writings. You have no authority to remove any part of the Bible.

This is a very sad response. Firstly, the tone of voice is aggressive and lacks charity. You wish to be saved by faith alone but St Paul says that "If I have faith that can move mountains but do not have love I am nothing" (1 Cor. 13;2). Secondly, you left two important words out of the quote from Matt. 7, the words "of iniquity." Those Jesus condemns in Matt. 7 are those who perform works "of iniquity", not those who engage in works of love. You claim that it is better to be Christian and Biblical but it is best to be Catholic and Biblical, because as an informed Catholic I accept all the teachings of Christ contained in the Gospels regarding justification and salvation and do not ignore those passages which contradict unauthorised man-made theologies. I do not follow superstitious dogmas of sinful men, nor do I follow the hydra of contradictory heresies of unauthorised, self-sent pseudo--reformers. Justification and salvation is initially a work of God, but we must respond freely to his grace and invitation. We respond initially through faith, but we must subsequently also respond with hope and love. Works are necessary for both salvation and reward as is clear from Matt 19:17, Matt 25:31ff, Luke 10:25-28, John 5:27-28; Rom 2:6, 1 Cor 13:2, 2 Cor 5;10, Gal 5:6, Jas 2:20-24 and Rev 20:12-13. In the end, it is summed up by St Paul, who says, "what counts is a faith that works itself out in love" (Gal. 5:6). This is not faith alone. Matt 19;17 and Matt 25:31ff make it clear that works of love are not simply necessary for reward but also for life, salvation and heaven. You cannot be saved without love, love of God, neighbour and enemy. God bless.

@@roberthaddad7850 Nice dissertation. Nice justification. If you think "works are necessary for salvation" you are falsely representing the Lord Jesus Christ. You are right, you cannot be saved without the love of God, Who sent Jesus Who paid for ALL OF YOUR SALVATION HIMSELF and offers you a FREE GIFT you insist on still working to achieve. That is blindness!! That is assured damnation. Grace cannot be earned. Yes, your works can relate to your reward. But claiming WORKS are part of you salvation is HERESY and demonic occultism, as nobody can EVER be sure they are doing enough.

​ @ApatiEktetheimenos This is an even sadder response. Firstly, we are all loved by God but we must return that love. Faith is only the beginning, initiating justification. It must be followed by hope and love to remain in God's grace. Love is distinct from faith and greater than faith (1 Cor. 13:13). How can we be pleasing to Christ without love? Therefore, we cannot be saved by faith alone. Christ paid for our salvation by being a sacrificial, not penal substitute. This is why he is the "Lamb of God." He opens Heaven and wins for us the forgiveness of sins. Salvation is a free gift from God but we are free to accept or reject it (I am not a Calvinist). We accept initially through faith but then must also respond with hope and love. I do not insist on working to achieve my salvation but I do insist on obedience to Christ for salvation. How can one be blind and assured of damnation when one is listening to Christ and willing to obey him? Was Christ teaching heresy and demonic occultism when he commanded us to obey the Commandments to enter into life? (Matt 19:17). Was Christ teaching heresy when he taught that the goats are sent to hell for failing to practice love of neighbour? (Matt 25:31ff)? Are the judgement scenes in Luke 10:25-28, John 5:27-28, 2 Cor 5:10 and Rev 20:12-13 heretical and demonic because they state clearly that we will be judged for our works, good and bad? Was St Paul a heretic and demonic when he taught that what counts is a faith that works it self out in love? (Gal 5:6). Finally, it is not about whether we do enough works to be saved; it is about whether we are loving God above all things and our neighbour as ourselves subject to a God who is loving and gracious in his judgements.

@@roberthaddad7850 Does Jesus know you personally, Robert? Are you both close personal friends?

Thank you. God bless.

God is goodness and love, itself. When you reject God, you are making yourself superior to Him. A place without God, cannot have any good or love in it. Be careful what you wish for.

It's not a cage. It's a grill that protects the coffin with the effigy of St Charbel Makhlouf, which contains the relic of his rib. God bless.

@@roberthaddad7850 OH! in that case yes, protect them!

Reflecting on this question again, I would say that Francis' consecration was the closest so far as per Our Lady's requests but still falls short on intention, meaning that Our Lady's original request was that the consecration should aim for Russia's conversion which would result in peace, not for the intention simply of securing a peace without Russia's conversion.

​Thanks so much.

Heresy? For example? The first step would be to accept that the Petrine Office was established by Christ and is essential to the legitimate teaching authority of the Church (Matt 16:18-20; Luke 22:31 ff; John 21:15ff), something many canons of the early Church Councils, Fathers and saints recognised by Eastern Orthodoxy also recognised.

@@roberthaddad7850 for literal hundreds of years the primacy of the pope was not wildly accepted and the church was ran through councils not one man. The Filioque was the breaking point and that is a heresy

The filioque isn't heresy, western fathers taught it before the schism. The filioque is a theological necessity ​@@keko7198

@@keko7198who do i believe the holy Catholic Church which is the ONLY CHURCH or the orthodox CULTS. What you say is the heresy and it’s arrogant to think your right and the two thousand year old holy Catholic Church is wrong! Protestant’s including the orthodox say with Satan WE WILL NOT SERVE the infallible Magisterium of the holy Catholic Church therefore they are anathema - outside of salvation! There’s NO salvation outside the holy Catholic Church because it’s the ONLY CHURCH

@@roberthaddad7850you have the holy Catholic Church. You have 48,000 protestant CULTS including the orthodox CULTS. The Bible a Catholic book condemns protestantism and the orthodox and the orthodox have NO sacrament’s. God bless. Praise Jesus and Mary always!!!

As a Protestant on the outside it’s beyond obvious that the Orthodox Church historically has the best claim to being the one true church, the way the church was ran wasn’t an issue until the schism when Rome decided the pope alone has authority. Catholicism is directly responsible for the reformation happening and all of the Protestant denominations due to its greed and heresies

Is that why there’s 300 million still around?

Yes, Wesley House in Ashfield.