I made too much assumptions? How about yourself?
Did your arguments even come with substance in the first place?
Then what makes you think that I will not go to heaven even I am rich? Are you here to judge?

What makes you think I have no money?
Did I even say you are poor? On the other hand, you seems that you are discouraging someone who intend to build wealth while yourself is wealthy?

I mean is your dreams really special? There are much greater dreams then just being rich and being healthy.
Does my dreams really special have anything to do with you? Well, maybe I might not have big dreams like you... as I like to keep my profile low.
As I mentioned in my previous post, everyone has different dreams to pursue, be it big, small or great dreams.

Your view is a shallow one actually even from a secular perspective.
Yes, I may not be as educated as you.
Anyhow, your arguments seems to be full of contradictions and inconsistencies and lack substance.

I really wonder do you always judge people just based on assumptions???

Dude, you are really slowpoke. JK. Its available on Pureflix. kinda like Netflix. It caters Christians movies and such. I don't think its available in Malaysia.

The danger is not losing salvation.. the danger is WHAT IS your salvation.. and if it's even yours to lose it to begin with (of course i've showed from the Bible numerous and multiple verses where salvation is assured.. and with all due respect to Mr.Wong, whatever verses that he claimed to be showing that your salvation can be lost, I have explained how it was misinterpreted..

James 2:19,
Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble.

Also an explanation to Mr.Wong... when James talked about Faith with works, he was referring to this!
James WAS NOT talking about losing your salvation, in fact, James was referring to whether a person has salvational faith (which eventually brings out works)...

Romans 5:18,19
18 Therefore as by the offence of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life.

19 For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous.

The biggest issue with those thinking salvation can be lost.. is that they think salvation was their own works and their own merit.. without the realization that salvation was and always is God's mighty grace towards us.. it was NEVER our own doing.. God doesn't judge sin on us anymore not ONLY because we believed in Jesus Christ, but MORE IMPORTANTLY, because of what Jesus Christ DID FOR US.. as described clearly in Romans 5:19..

God is forgiving our past, present, and future sins, NOT BECAUSE we are obedient.. because no matter how obedient we are, we WILL NEVER be sufficient to save ourselves..or for this matter; to sustain our salvation (to debunk those who still believe salvation can be lost...).. RATHER... it was Jesus Christ's obedience that mattered.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/feb/...-childrens-game
Why the heck are they even prosecuted under Sharia laws? Isn't that for Muslims?

These Talibans...

I've read the Indonesian version. So there's no lost in translation as well. 

Does his post seems anything wrong? I don't see any argument or false teaching, he's just sharing his views and he did not force anyone to read it, don't like it just ignore it, or stay out from this thread then

Prosperity does exist but the Gospel it's does exist but the Gospel teaching is not about money but about family and blessings

Prosperity also means blessing

Sorry De Luffy, I'm not trying to argue but will point out some inconsistencies.

2 Timothy 3:16 no where mentioned Bible alone. It means it is "profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness". The problem is some people adding "alone" 1500 years later. 2 Thes 2:15 says "Therefore, brethren, stand fast; and hold the traditions which you have learned, whether by word, or by our epistle"

"Praying to the dead" is vastly different from "praying FOR the dead". And if you mean asking the Blessed Virgin and the saints and departed Christians to pray for us because they are dead, perhaps they are only dead physically but they are certainly ALIVE IN CHRIST.

FYI, God already has an image when He became incarnate as Man about 2000 years ago.

John 20:20 Jesus told His Apostles: "Whose sins you shall forgive, they are forgiven them; and whose sins you shall retain, they are retained. " If someone does not confess their sins, how will they know which sins to forgive?

Regarding celibacy: Even today celibacy is not the rule for all Catholic priests. In fact, for Eastern Rite Catholics, married priests are the norm, just as they are for Orthodox and Oriental Christians. Even in the Eastern churches, though, there have always been some restrictions on marriage and ordination. Although married men may become priests, unmarried priests may not marry, and married priests, if widowed, may not remarry. Moreover, there is an ancient Eastern discipline of choosing bishops from the ranks of the celibate monks, so their bishops are all unmarried. Nowadays with the Anglican Ordinariate, we also have married priests who converted from Anglicanism. Not everyone is called to the priesthood, just because you want to, doesn't mean you can. It is a calling, a vocation.

So far from "commanding" marriage in 1 Corinthians 7, in that very chapter Paul actually endorses celibacy for those capable of it: "To the unmarried and the widows I say that it is well for them to remain single as I am. But if they cannot exercise self-control, they should marry. For it is better to marry than to be aflame with passion" (7:8-9). It is only because of this "temptation to immorality" (7:2) that Paul gives the teaching about each man and woman having a spouse and giving each other their "conjugal rights" (7:3); he specifically clarifies, "I say this by way of concession, not of command. I wish that all were as I myself am. But each has his own special gift from God, one of one kind and one of another" (7:6-7, emphasis added). Paul even goes on to make a case for preferring celibacy to marriage: "Are you free from a wife? Do not seek marriage. . . those who marry will have worldly troubles, and I would spare you that. . . . The unmarried man is anxious about the affairs of the Lord, how to please the Lord; but the married man is anxious about worldly affairs, how to please his wife, and his interests are divided. And the unmarried woman or girl is anxious about the affairs of the Lord, how to be holy in body and spirit; but the married woman is anxious about worldly affairs, how to please her husband" (7:27-34).

Paul’s conclusion: He who marries "does well; and he who refrains from marriage will do better" (7:38).

Paul was not the first apostle to conclude that celibacy is, in some sense, "better" than marriage. After Jesus’ teaching in Matthew 19 on divorce and remarriage, the disciples exclaimed, "If such is the case between a man and his wife, it is better not to marry" (Matt 19:10). This remark prompted Jesus’ teaching on the value of celibacy "for the sake of the kingdom":

"Not all can accept this word, but only those to whom it is granted. Some are incapable of marriage because they were born so; some, because they were made so by others; some, because they have renounced marriage for the sake of the kingdom of God. Whoever can accept this ought to accept it" (Matt. 19:11–12).

Notice that this sort of celibacy "for the sake of the kingdom" is a gift, a call that is not granted to all, or even most people, but is granted to some. Other people are called to marriage. It is true that too often individuals in both vocations fall short of the requirements of their state, but this does not diminish either vocation, nor does it mean that the individuals in question were "not really called" to that vocation. The sin of a priest doesn’t necessarily prove that he never should have taken a vow of celibacy, any more than the sin of a married man or woman proves that he or she never should have gotten married. It is possible for us to fall short of our own true calling.
https://www.catholic.com/tract/celibacy-and-the-priesthood

Only God can forgive sins. In Mark 2:1–12 we find what you are saying in the story of the healing of the paralytic. When Jesus saw the paralytic, he said to him, "Your sins are forgiven" (Mark 2:5). The scribes gave the same objection that you raised—that is, that only God can forgive sins. They asked, "Who can forgive sins except God alone?" And they were right. But notice how Jesus changes this later in the story. He performs the miracle of healing precisely to show that "the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins" (Mark 2:10). So what was once only in heaven is now on earth because Jesus has the authority to forgive.

In John 20:19–23. "On the evening of that day, the first day of the week, the doors being shut where the disciples were, for fear of the Jews, Jesus came and stood among them and said to them, ‘Peace be with you.’ When he had said this, he showed them his hands and his side. Then the disciples were glad when they saw the Lord. Jesus said to them again, ‘Peace be with you. As the Father has sent me, even so I send you.’ And when he had said this, he breathed on them and said to them, "Receive the Holy Spirit. If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven; if you retain the sins of any, they are retained."

A priest is not God, but the priest has the power to confer or convey the forgiveness of God—not by his own power but by the power that Christ conferred on his apostles that day recorded for us in John 20:19–23. A priest’s authority to convey forgiveness does not come from himself. It comes from Christ. By the power of the Holy Spirit, the priest stands in the place of Christ to declare the sinner forgiven. That is why the formula of absolution uses the pronoun I. The I is Christ speaking through the human priest. If Jesus had not come to earth, there would be no forgiveness on earth, and if he had not conferred on the apostles this ministry of reconciliation" (2 Cor. 5:18), we would have no forgiveness today. But we can thank God that Christ did indeed come and that he passed on his authority to the Church to reconcile sinners to God.

Oh well, that verse uses "ministry of reconciliation" not "ministry of preach the message". Of course Protestants are reluctant to see that if it doesn't gel with their doctrines.

19 For God indeed was in Christ, reconciling the world to himself, not imputing to them their sins; and he hath placed in us the word of reconciliation.
20 For Christ therefore we are ambassadors, God as it were exhorting by us. For Christ, we beseech you, be reconciled to God.

That's even clearer

If that's the case it doesn't make sense why Christ gave authority to certain people to forgive sins.

Coz I'm sad that this thread was taken over by hooligans  

Oh for sure it does.

Priests (presbuteroi) are also known as "presbyters" or "elders." In fact, the English term "priest" is simply a contraction of the Greek word presbuteros. They have the responsibility of teaching, governing, and providing the sacraments in a given congregation (1 Tim. 5:17; Jas. 5:14–15).

Each of us laity for sure only can forgive the sins committed against us personally. But those with authority from Christ to His Apostles and to subsequent people that they lay hands on (ordain) have the authority to forgive sins in the place of Christ.