Видео

Joseph, thanks for your comment. I am Catholic.

No, I am not saying that Jesus is lying. I am saying that Protestantism in its many various and contradictory forms is misreprsenting Scripture. Firstly, did you watch the whole 60 secoind video or not? If so, how do explain the Scripture verse(s) I put forward? Secondly, all the verses (bar one) you put forward speak of believing in Christ as the necessary condition for eteranl life, but none of these verses speak of any guarantee of perseverance in belief. Neither do any of these verses guarantee Heaven for those who wilfully sin after coming to Christ. 'Once saved always saved' makes a mockery of Christianity, teaching that we can abandon Christ or wilfully sin after coming to Christ and still be saved.

@@roberthaddad7850 wilfully sin, tell me is there any other type of Sin? read the scriptures in context friend! Are you telling me that what Jesus did at the cross waw not enough, and so you need to help Jesus in your salvation? Unbelievable!

@@brohuggie2978 Firstly, your one of voice is aggressive. Why the aggression? You should respect others you engage, especially if you claim to be a follower of Christ. As for "willfully sinning", look up Heb. 10:23-27, it is there, as well as the warning that those who choose to sin after "receiving the knowledge of the truth" face "a fearful prospect of judgment." This certainly contradicts "once saved, always saved." As for your other comment, I am not telling you that Jesus' Cross was not enough, in fact, the opposite. Catholicism teaches that Christ's Cross was infinitely meritorious, in contrast to much of Protestantism which limits Christ's merit to merely being sufficient for the elect. Furthermore, in doing works of love, we are not helping Christ to save us, we are responding under God's prevenient grace to obey what Christ himself taught, that is, "if you wish to enter into life, keep the Commandments" (Matt 19:17),, or as St Paul says, living a "faith that works itself out in love" (Gal. 5;6). This is the true Gospel, justification and salvation by faith, hope and love, not faith alone. See also Matt 25:31; Luke 10:25-28; John 5:28-29; Rom 2:6; 1 Cor 13;2; 2 Cor 5;10; James 2;20-24; Rev. 20:12-13. God bless.

@@roberthaddad7850 My apology if I sound harsh and seem disrespectful. I just get frustrated at times when reading comments that just do not make sense, and are twisting scripture. How? For example, you just mentioned Hebrews 10:23-27. The Hebrew writer is not warning anybody Just making a point, a point. This is why He included himself! Read it in context friend! Anyone that receives the KNOWLEDGE the what? the KNOWLEDGE of the truth, it never said salvation, or the Spirit of God, or Redemption. Just the knowledge of the truth then continues in. their life as nothing and obviously wilfully sinning like the rest of us, BUT without the cleansing of the Blood of Christ; well there is no more sacrifice that can help that person, why? because Jesus is the only one with the sacrifice that was accepted by God for the remission of all SINS. Very simple friend. read it in context. The Hebrew writer knew there was people that were hearing the truth of the gospel, but yet still believed in animal sacrifices and thought just to make sure. The same today people thinking they can lose their salvation, so they struggle in life because they continue to doubt the work of the Cross and the blood of Christ, by thinking they need to do something or not do things to stay saved, work , work, work for their salvation.

Denis, I would say give it another 6 months and if you still feel called then give it a go. I wouldn't worry about "woke mindsets." Things can only change if good people get involved. When I first came into Catholic education 35 years ago I was warned about the "progressives." God has looked after me. He will look after you if you are prudent in how you do and respond to things. God bless.

@@roberthaddad7850 thanks Robert I'm in a tricky predicament so I'll await another signal grace, your advice is greatly appreciated the first grace was about three years ago and second was a few months ago, I don't feel my local priest (a very good and understanding man) would be encouraging me to pursue it, but I'll follow your advice and wait six months whatever Our Blessed Mother wants me to do I'll do. "Jesus I trust in you."

Some do and they become 'church leader's,' leading others on the wide road, I do think ofen of the mercy that might be extended to them on their death according to Saint Faustina people get three chances after death it seems even to the most hardened sinner Jesus comes and asks " Do you accept my love? Do you accept my mercy? do you accept my justice?" A soul has this opportunity to accept or reject Our Lord after death so for those who believe once saved always saved do what I like there is a chance but of course a soul may be obdurate as Saint Faustina said. Let's pray that they accept his justice.

Dear Superapex, thank you for your contribution. However, the one major problem with your core argument is that it even precludes me from asking any of my living Christian friends to pray for me. Why waste my time asking friends and relatives to pray "indirectly" to Jesus when i can better spend my time praying directly to Jesus? Yet, St Paul regularly asked for prayers of his Christian friends for his intentions. My argument is that these friends can also include our brothers and sisters in Heaven. God bless.

@@roberthaddad7850 Dear Mr. Haddad, No, it doesn't preclude you from asking anyone, dead or alive, to pray for you: I did write that 'Asking someone to pray for you in passing is fine' - this is so because their prayers will be ADDED to ours. According to your logic, we should spend ALL of our time asking friends to pray for us: the more people will pray for us, the better! You're absolutely right about saint Paul asking for prayers but, once again, it was IN PASSING and not as a substitute for his own. The Communion of saints, as I understand it, simply means that Christ, as the Head his Body, is the source of Graces for all of us: if we open up when Christ knocks at the door, He will come and dine with us, meaning that He will share His Divinity with us - this is the 'Communion' of 'saints', i.e. those who, by having accepted the Cross, are willing to sacrifice everything for the Love of that which is Good, that is to say, for the Love of God. Like I said, the Rosary did not exist in the first centuries and that did not preclude Christians from changing the very foundations of the civilized world. The insistence of the hierarchy that we pray the Rosary, in and of itself, is bizarre: how can this be better than spending time in spiritual communion with Christ?

@@roberthaddad7850 And what if Protestants were right? What if the Church HAD been infiltrated by pagans who worship !sht*r under the veil of Mary - this would certainly not have occurred in the first centuries but much later, sometime at the end of the Middle Ages? Would they not have us pray to their idol rather than God? And if you think that's impossible, ask yourself: who would have thought that a known heresy - namely, Modernism - would ever be tolerated IN the Church? The Church is very sick indeed - perhaps much more so than people think...

@@roberthaddad7850 And what if Protestants were right? What if the Church HAD been infiltrated by pagans who worship !sht*r under the veil of Mary - this would certainly not have occurred in the first centuries but much later, sometime at the end of the Middle Ages? Would they not have us pray to their idol rather than God? And if you think that's impossible, ask yourself: who would have thought that a known heresy - namely, Modernism - would ever be tolerated IN the Church?

@@roberthaddad7850 And what if Protestants were right? What if the Church HAD been infiltrated by p@gans who worship !sht*r under the veil of Mary - this would certainly not have occurred in the first centuries but much later, sometime at the end of the Middle Ages? Would they not have us pray to their idol rather than God? And if you think that's impossible, ask yourself: who would have thought that a known h3resy - namely, M"dern!sm - would ever be tolerated in the Church?

roberthaddad64@gmail.com - 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.