Latest activity

Platte · Tuesday at 6:18 AM

Jipsah said:
Been over that, haven't we? Simply having light doesn't get you evenings and mornings. They require a sun, which according to Genesis wasn't created until Day 4. No good trying to jam in another "light source" providing evenings and mornings; it just isn't there. (You are at least claiming to be "sola scriptura", aren't you?) You're aground on your own doctrine.

You’re right. The light God created on day 1 was just a scrivener's error. Genesis is full of scrivener's errors.

JohnC101 · Tuesday at 6:16 AM

Muhan said:
Why would you want to God to bless them in all their endeavors?

I'm hoping that what they do is godly and that the end result of their endeavors would be a blessing to everyone else as well.

Kathleen30 · Tuesday at 6:13 AM

Confused-by-christianity said:
Yes - that's what im saying to everyone.

Repent or face the fiery indignation !!!

I also cut them out !!!

Cut them off you say . There have been those that have done just that throughout our histories. Being some extreme removing an eye along with other limbs . Cut it off you say. Confused one then there still be much trouble from God if all did. I dare say the God would hold you accountable for failing to go forth and multiply and replenish the earth

Aseyesee · Tuesday at 6:08 AM

BelieveItOarKnot said:
Picking at an extra every? Beneath you

Don't you think it odd that people read those scriptures, that man will live by every Word and come to an exact opposite conclusion for the majority?

Maybe it’s better stated as … How many words does it take to describe the word God …

More often than not, what we go into scripture looking for is what we find … which applies to a great many other things ... people will kill you for what they think the truth is ...

It (scripture) can be a bottomless pit … or an ascending/increase that has no end …

Hentenza · Tuesday at 6:03 AM

David Lamb said:
"Re-distribution" certainly is in the dictionary, as an alternative of "redistribution.":

"redistribution(n.)also re-distribution, "a dealing back, a second or new distribution," 1831, from French redistribution"

Certainly here in the UK many compound words that always used to be written with a hyphen are now written without one.

The poster that I replied to claimed:

“Re-distributed.

Which is different from redistributed.”

BelieveItOarKnot · Tuesday at 6:00 AM

The Righterzpen said:
If you believe in universal atonement; then no one is condemned and the question of how is destruction of the condemned to the glory of God is a moot question.

Universal is also merely an encompassing like term.

One can believe mankind is "universally" atoned for and still believe for example that devils are also "universally" condemned and not atoned for, which answers to your positions. You just left out that other party to the equations.

For the record many universalists do not believe there is Satanic salvation, but some, like the thread opening author do promote that.

I don't think it's feasible or necessary.

Christsfreeservant · Tuesday at 6:00 AM

“The Lord is my portion;

I promise to keep your words.

I entreat your favor with all my heart;

be gracious to me according to your promise.

When I think on my ways,

I turn my feet to your testimonies;

I hasten and do not delay

to keep your commandments.

Though the cords of the wicked ensnare me,

I do not forget your law.

At midnight I rise to praise you,

because of your righteous rules.

I am a companion of all who fear you,

of those who keep your precepts.

The earth, O Lord, is full of your steadfast love;

teach me your statutes!” (Psalm 119:57-64 ESV)

If the Lord is our portion, what should that look like in our day to day lives? It means he is our inheritance, our reward, someone in whom we partake, with whom we participate, that we have a share in, our treasure. So we have a part in this relationship. It isn’t all about what God/Christ does for us, but it includes what he requires of us, in return, as our part in this relationship. For faith in Jesus is a marriage relationship between us and our Lord.

So, what did the psalmist say? “The Lord is my portion; I promise to keep your words.” If we are of genuine biblical faith in Jesus Christ, our lives are no longer our own to be lived however we want to live them, but we now belong to Christ. We have been crucified with Christ in death to sin, and we have been raised with Christ to walk in newness of life in him, no longer to live as slaves to sin but now as servants of Christ and of his righteousness.

We should be those for whom obedience to God/Christ is our practice, and sin should no longer be our habit. And following the Lord in obedience to his commands should be our delight, not a drudgery. And we should not be those who try to find loopholes (excuses, escapes) to try to “worm our way out of” (cleverly and dishonestly) having to obey the Lord and his teachings. Our heart’s true desire should be to want to do what is pleasing to God.

Even if the wicked use clever means to try to ensnare us, to try to get us to compromise our faith and convictions, and to back down from moral purity or walks of obedience to our Lord, we should be those who hold on tight to our Lord and to his teachings, that we might remain steadfast in faith and in obedience to his commands. Our commitments to our Lord should be so strong that we will be willing to rise even at midnight to give our Lord praise.

And all of us should have the fear of God within us, believing God and what he teaches us in his word, including believing his warnings to us and his restrictions and his commands, and what he teaches us regarding the consequences of unrepentant sins, continued deliberate and habitual sin, and negligence and/or refusal to obey his commandments (New Covenant). For he says we will not have eternal life with him if sin is what we practice.

And this fear of God is giving him honor, respect, worship, veneration, loyalty, devotion, obedience, reverence, adoration, and commitment, believing his word and following him in obedience to his will and to his ways. This is what he requires of us if we are to have salvation from sin and eternal life with God. But this is a lifetime process of spiritual growth and maturity as we are being molded into the likeness of Jesus Christ by God.

And all of this stems from the Love of God which he has for us. For “love” is not being a permissive parent who allows their children to live however they want to live. As a loving God, he sets boundaries and limits for us, and he exercises divine discipline and correction to keep us on the right path. And he empowers us and he strengthens us to resist the devil, and to flee temptation, and to follow him in walks of surrender to his will for our lives.

Gospel:[Matthew 7:13-14,21-23; Luke 9:23-26; John 10:27-30; Acts 26:18; Romans 2:5-10; Romans 6:1-23; Romans 8:1-14; 1 Corinthians 10:1-22; Galatians 5:16-24; Ephesians 2:8-10; Ephesians 4:17-32; Ephesians 5:3-6; Titus 2:11-14; Hebrews 3:1-19; Hebrews 12:1-2; 1 Peter 2:24; 1 John 1:1-10; 1 John 2:3-6; 1 John 3:4-10; Revelation 2:1-29; Revelation 3:1-22]

Oh, to Be Like Thee, Blessed Redeemer

Lyrics by Thomas O. Chisholm, 1897
Music by W. J. Kirkpatrick, 1897

Oh, to be like Thee! blessèd Redeemer,
This is my constant longing and prayer;
Gladly I’ll forfeit all of earth’s treasures,
Jesus, Thy perfect likeness to wear.

Oh, to be like Thee! full of compassion,
Loving, forgiving, tender and kind,
Helping the helpless, cheering the fainting,
Seeking the wandering sinner to find.

O to be like Thee! lowly in spirit,
Holy and harmless, patient and brave;
Meekly enduring cruel reproaches,
Willing to suffer others to save.

O to be like Thee! while I am pleading,
Pour out Thy Spirit, fill with Thy love;
Make me a temple meet for Thy dwelling,
Fit me for life and Heaven above.

Oh, to be like Thee! Oh, to be like Thee,
Blessèd Redeemer, pure as Thou art;
Come in Thy sweetness, come in Thy fullness;
Stamp Thine own image deep on my heart.

Login to view embedded media
Caution: This link may contain ads

When I Think on My Ways
An Original Work / September 2, 2025
Christ’s Free Servant, Sue J Love

DaisyDay · Tuesday at 5:54 AM

Vambram said:
The Trump University fraud and the Foundation fraud have all been legally taken care of.

They were committed which is the point; Trump committed them, to be less passive.

Vambram said:
The NYS business fraud are completely and totally bogus.

Nope, they were also committed - there is a plethora of publicly available.

Vambram said:
The only ones who don't believe those are bogus are probably only the left wing liberals.

And people who believe actual evidence. But such Republicans have largely been booted from the party.

Vambram said:
But, for the sake of discussion. Let us assume that all of the progressive liberal attacks against President Trump are actually true.

All of them? Or only the proven ones?

Vambram said:
What does that say about Kamala Harris and the leadership of the Democratic Party which was roundly rejected by the vast majority of the voters in 31 states in the 2024 election?

It means we live in a dystopian society where a criminal serial sex abuser grifter is selected to dismantle our democracy as per Project 2025.

BelieveItOarKnot · Tuesday at 5:47 AM

Jamdoc said:
but it's a an orthodox doctrine that believers are sealed by the Holy Spirit and cannot be possessed by devils.

One does not have to be "possessed" to be tempted internally, which places the tempter where?

Romans 11:32
For God has bound everyone over to disobedience so that he may have mercy on them all.

Paul had a devil in his own flesh, temptation. It's not viewed as possession. 2 Cor. 12:7, Gal. 4:14

Jamdoc said:
What then? It's not a demonic possession, it's the old natural self

That's the accuser of the brethren's methodology. Blame anyone and anything BUT the devil

Man is the hiding places of devils

prudent_commenter · Tuesday at 5:38 AM

johansen said:
I was also protected in strange ways for a long time(20 to 25 years). As i have been maturing that protection is being removed.

I have to drive the speed limit now because i no longer have premonitions of where all the cops are at. I have never been given a speeding ticket. Just two warnings, both in 2010.

I have to wear safety glasses when cutting or grinding steel. I didn't use to, the sparks would never hit my eyeballs. But one day i heard the words "i am not with you" when i was cutting some steel (to be honest i should not have been doing it that way) and since then i have actually had 4.5" angle grider cut off blades get jammed and torn off in the cut. Never had that happen before. And no i dont use the guard.

I have to religiously remove every nail from boards when demoing buildings so i or someone else doesnt accidentally step on one. Etc, etc.

However, to some extent i enjoy the added responsibility.

What im not looking forwards to: is the legal aspect of things. I should get an attorney on retainer, a financial manager, wills written up, retirement funds managed properly..

Back in 2016 i distinctly heard what i suspected was a guardian angel, it said "i will leave you soon" while it brought to my mind several instances where it had protected me either supernaturally or by giving me knowledge to avoid danger.

My immediate reaction was not "oh no what did i do" but: "oh good, im all grown up now".

That was an interesting read. I believe it is true. But I think this maturity is something that we do. Your actions determine whether you are ready for maturity or not. And, they determine whether or not you need to be mature. What happens if you live your life in a manner where maturity is not required? Remain a child, with child-like innocence for the rest of your life? I wonder if this would preserve it.

I've received voices in my head when justice has been done to me. It was said "It is done" when justice has been served to my oppressor(s).

Truthfully, I don't want it to go away. I need it, and rely on it.

DaisyDay · Tuesday at 5:36 AM

Desk trauma said:
That’s the thing, there is no “need to” there is no imperative here, only some dead kids. We have proven we’re willing to go through the motions of how awful this is rend our garments then wait for it to happen again over and over for decades. This isn’t a movie, things don’t change just because they’re awful.

There can always be more awful.

HIM · Tuesday at 5:21 AM

1Pet 2:24 Who his own self bare our sins in his own body on the tree, that we, being dead to sins, should live unto righteousness: by whose stripes ye were healed.

Normandt · Tuesday at 5:16 AM

218. Through our heart

Jesus tells us as in John’s text:

“You also are now in anguish. But I will see you again, and your hearts will rejoice, and no one will take your joy away from you.” John, chapter 16, verse 22

Jesus seems to be saying, “Yes, maybe now you are wondering, you don’t see clearly, you throw some grain in the wind and it doesn’t seem to fall into a fertile land. But your heart will rejoice, you will be happy, because you will follow me and you will have done the will of my Father under the influence of the Holy Spirit. Be confident! Do not be afraid!”

Then Jesus adds:

“On that day you will not question me about anything. Amen, amen, I say to you, whatever you ask the Father in my name he will give you.” John chapter 16, verse 23

Questions are no longer needed when Jesus goes through our life, through our heart, when we’re connected to the source.

The new American Bible, 2011-2014

Book: Let’s evangelize, Normand Thomas

stevevw · Tuesday at 5:06 AM

Hans Blaster said:
There's that "scientists keep out the things they don't like" complaint. Sigh. That ain't how science works.

Thats right because its some of the scientists themselves, the academics, the gate keepers of the science that are doing it. Especially those in powerful positions with influence.

This has been known for some time.

Daniel Carlton · Tuesday at 5:05 AM

Join them or you die, heretics!

Kathleen30 · Tuesday at 4:50 AM

Bro.T said:
Now that we have established that homosexuality is considered a sin, let’s take a look at the Lord’s wrath being poured out because of this abomination. Let us direct our attention to Genesis 18:17.

And the LORD said, Shall I hide from Abraham that thing which I do; (Genesis 18:17)

Why did the Lord stop to talk to Abraham? Make a special notation of the next few scriptures.

Seeing that Abraham shall surely become a great and mighty nation and all the nations of the earth shall be blessed in him? For I know him, that he will command his children and his household after him, and they shall keep the way of the LORD, to do justice and judgment; that the LORD may bring upon Abraham that which he hath spoken of him. (Genesis 18:18-19)

The statement offered above gives us the explanation of why the Lord stopped to talk to Abraham. The reason is this, “that he will command his children and his household after him, and they shall keep the way of the LORD, to do justice and judgment; that the Lord may bring upon Abraham that which he hath spoken of him.” Brothers and sisters if we do justice and judge righteously the Lord will also reveal His secrets to us. If we keep the commandments then we will be able to do justice.

Let’s continue:

And the LORD said, “Because the cry of Sodom and Gomorrah is great, and because their sin is very grievous; I will go down now, and see whether they have done altogether according to the cry of it, which is come unto me; and if not, I will know.” (Genesis 18:20-21)

Sisters and brothers, note what the verse says, “their sin is very grievous.” What is sin? Sin is the transgression of the law (I John 3:4). This indicates to us that the law was around long before the Prophet Moses came into the picture.

Let’s continue:

And the men turned their faces from thence, and went toward Sodom: but Abraham stood yet before the LORD. And Abraham drew near, and said, Wilt thou also destroy the righteous with the wicked? Peradventure there be fifty righteous within the city: wilt thou also destroy and not spare the place for the fifty righteous that are therein? That be far from thee to do after this manner, to slay the righteous with the wicked: and that the righteous should be as the wicked that be far from thee: Shall not the Judge of all the earth do right? And the LORD said, If I find in Sodom fifty righteous within the city, then I will spare all the place for their sakes. And Abraham answered and said, Behold now, I have taken upon me to speak unto the Lord, which am but dust and ashes: Peradventure there shall lack five of the fifty righteous: wilt thou destroy all the city for lack of five? And he said, If I find there forty and five, I will not destroy it. And he spake unto him yet again, and said, Peradventure there shall be forty found there. And he said, I will not do it for forty's sake. And he said unto him, Oh let not the Lord be angry, and I will speak: Peradventure there shall thirty be found there. And he said, I will not do it, if I find thirty there. And he said, Behold now, I have taken upon me to speak unto the Lord: Peradventure there shall be twenty found there. And he said, I will not destroy it for twenty's sake. And he said, Oh let not the Lord be angry, and I will speak yet but this once: Peradventure ten shall be found there. And he said, I will not destroy it for ten's sake. And the LORD went his way, as soon as he had left communing with Abraham: and Abraham returned unto his place. (Genesis 18:22-33)

Abraham was pretty bold don’t you think? Let’s go right into the 19th chapter and see this grievous sin that was being committed.

And there came two angels to Sodom at even; and Lot sat in the gate of Sodom: and Lot seeing them rose up to meet them; and he bowed himself with his face toward the ground; And he said, Behold now, my lords, turn in, I pray you, into your servant's house, and tarry all night, and wash your feet, and ye shall rise up early, and go on your ways. And they said, Nay; but we will abide in the street all night. And he pressed upon them greatly; and they turned in unto him, and entered into his house; and he made them a feast, and did bake unleavened bread, and they did eat. But before they lay down, the men of the city, even the men of Sodom, compassed the house round, both old and young, all the people from every quarter: (Genesis 19:1-4)

Abraham could have asked the Lord if there was one righteous. Notice the verse states, “people from every quarter.” We see that there were none considered righteous and all were worthy of death.

And they called unto Lot, and said unto him, where are the men which came in to thee this night? bring them out unto us, that we may know them. And Lot went out at the door unto them, and shut the door after him, And said, I pray you, brethren, do not so wickedly. Behold now, I have two daughters which have not known man; let me, I pray you, bring them out unto you, and do ye to them as is good in your eyes: only unto these men do nothing; for therefore came they under the shadow of my roof. (Genesis 19:5-8)

Lot offered his virgin daughters to these sodomites? That’s deep! Let’s see what happen next.

And they said, Stand back. And they said again, This one fellow came in to sojourn, and he will needs be a judge: now will we deal worse with thee, than with them. And they pressed sore upon the man, even Lot, and came near to break the door. Genesis 19:10 But the men put forth their hand, and pulled Lot into the house to them, and shut to the door. And they smote the men that were at the door of the house with blindness, both small and great: so that they wearied themselves to find the door. (Genesis 19:9-11)

Note what the verse says, “they smote the men that were at the door of the house with blindness, both small and great: so that they wearied themselves to find the door.” They still made an attempt to break the door down to sodomize Lot and the two angels, after they were blinded. This is an example of James 1:14, where it states, “But every man is tempted, when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed. Then when lust hath conceived, it bringeth forth sin: and sin, when it is finished, bringeth forth death.” By the way brothers and sisters, if an individual commits any sin continually, after they have been informed or have the knowledge that it is sin; the Lord may kill an individual with the first death, which Adam past onto us all. And after that He may wake up the same individual in the second resurrection and will have an angel throw them into the lake of fire. So, we see that the men of Sodom were involved in homosexual activity. Let’s see this death that was brought about by the Lord because of sin. Let’s skip down to the 24th verse.

Then the LORD rained upon Sodom and upon Gomorrah brimstone and fire from the LORD out of heaven; And he overthrew those cities, and all the plain, and all the inhabitants of the cities, and that which grew upon the ground. (Genesis 19:24-25)

The Lord destroyed all the inhabitants of the city and all the plain, nothing escaped but Lot and his two daughters. Why? Because of sin, which brings about death?

Bro homosexuality has been around for a long time be it with men or woman . Heterosexual relationships don’t fare much better with the laws of God when it comes to sex before marriage. Actually there wouldn’t be too much left of western civilisation today if God acted upon those laws to their fullest extent. The power of sexual union is one of the most pleasurable and spiritual experiences known to humanity. So much so that not many keep consistent with the many biblical laws you mention be they heterosexual, homosexual or lesbian

HIM · Tuesday at 4:49 AM

Confused-by-christianity said:
Every single person i came across got cut out.

Once i started the audit - no one got through.

Pretty much everyone i came across had sins on them that they
1) didn't accept was a sin and so refused to repent,
2) repeated the sin after repenting - like a pattern
3) sin shifted. did a sin, then repented and did a different sin, then repented and did another different sin and repented again. so their repentance was meaningless.

Now, here i am in my metaphorical castle - enjoying righteousness on my own - looking down at all you fools who cant get your act together !!!!

Repent, for if we are sinning willfully there remains no more sacrifice for sin, Only judgement and fiery indignation.

Richard T · Tuesday at 4:40 AM

Yes, it is possible that it is enough as is. However, Ukraine is losing some ground. I suppose the stalemate could last many more years or that Ukraine could turn the tide.

stevevw · Tuesday at 4:40 AM

sjastro said:
The ruins of the Karnak religious complex is from the New Kingdom and beyond into Roman times. There are no Old Kingdom ruins standing today.
The architectural style and more importantly the religion of the New Kingdom has shaped what is found at Karnak today.

On what basis do you claim this. You say the architecture style and yet the architecture style of at least some of the pillars and granite works are more in line with old kingdom works.

We know for a fact that there were works from the old kingdom in Karnak because we have the pillar bases under the existing pillars. One which has a priests name on it from the 4th dynasty. So we know that there was a Temple at Karnak as early as the 4th dynasty and maybe earlier.

The fact is we find sandstone copies from the new kingdom and we rarely find such large granite works from the new kingdom. Look at all the works and we will find the majority and best examples in granite from the old kingdom.

sjastro said:
In the Old Kingdom, Amun was a local god of southern Egypt and the religious centres were in the north such as Heliopolis and Memphis where the major gods were Ra, Osiris and Ptah.
Amun became the principal god of Egypt by the time of the New Kingdom and the Karnak religious complex was a dedication to him.
Using your example of the obelisk highlights the architectural differences between the Old and New Kingdoms. Obelisks from the Old Kingdom were smaller, less decorated and made from limestone instead of granite. These obelisks are not found at Karnak.
So if the pharaohs from the 19th dynasty and beyond were forging their name on monuments it was on New Kingdom constructions.

The point is they are found in abundence at Karnak and other similar sites from the new kingdom. The very obelisk we are talking about is in pink granite and not sandstone or limestone which the new kingdom used. The same with the pillars and statues and other fine works.

Which compared to new kingdom works is far superior. As though there are two destinct industries at the same site. One being of high quality and in the hardest stones and the other less quality in softer stone trying to copy these earlier works. In fact we see this through all the new kingdom sites.

It seems logical like we see with most of these sites that there is always a previous works being built over or added to. Ramesses II was notorious for rebuilding and using other pharoahs works. Its no coincident that his name is often found on works that were not his.

Statue of Ramesses II
The statue was usurped by Ramesses VI (1143-1136 BC) and later by Pinedjem a High Priest (1070- 1032).

https://discoveringegypt.com/karnak-temple/karnak-temple-great-court/

Not that it matters as this does not change that even middle or new kingdom Egyptians had use of some circular saw to make those fine cuts. Even you said the same signature in the other example must have come from a modern tool like a circular saw to be able to cut into the stone. Rather than try to pass through it with a saw which would need access from both sides.

sjastro said:
Needless to say none of this addresses nor supports the idea of the Egyptians using some superior technology.

Why. Lets just compare the old kingdom works with the new kingdom works. Here we clearly see two different signatures. One in the hardest stones and near perfect from the old kingdom. The other in softer stone and less perfect from the new kingdom.

This suggests superior knowledge and tech. It would be silly to say they both used the same tools or that the new kingdom has better tools with steel and yet produced completely different qualities.

In fact the old kingdom superior works have never been repeated in later time. The exact opposite of what we would expect with the progression of tech and knowledge.

So it implies a superior knowledge of some sort to achieve such a high level of quality in the very first dynasties that has never really be repeated by all the later dynasties.

This is why when we see a high quality granite works on a new kingdom site whose signature is in softer stone and less quality we have to question that this is not actually an old kingdom works. Flinders Petrie who was the first archeologists at the site described Ramesses II as the great usurper as his name was stamped on obvious old kingdom works.

Look at his poor work on these ancient precision boxes. You would think if the original maker was so perfect on the box they would at least get the lines straight when putting their signature on it lol.

We have these 100 ton boxes in the Sarapeum which are precise in all geometric relations within 1,000ths of an inch. Then we get some pharoah come along later and scribble his name on it like kids have done it with crooked and broken lines and claims they made the box. Two completely different levels of tech.

sjastro said:
Here is the area of interest as circled.

View attachment 369441

The slit was created after the relief, if you want to believe this is an overcut and part of the artistic rendition dream on, in the real world it is an act of vandalism performed at a much later date when it was possible to make sharp cuts.

Maybe, I don't know like I said. No one has come forward with any evidence that its a later addition. This is a signature of a modern tool like a circular saw that was not in existence until the 19th century.

Richard T · Tuesday at 4:30 AM

Thanks for your post. I will give a few thoughts related to Acts 2.

It is great that all were filled. It is exactly as Jesus said starting in
John 7:37-39 (KJV)
37 In the last day, that great day of the feast, Jesus stood and cried, saying, If any man thirst, let him come unto me, and drink.
38 He that believeth on me, as the scripture hath said, out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water.
39 (But this spake he of the Spirit, which they that believe on him should receive: for the Holy Ghost was not yet given; because that Jesus was not yet glorified.)

To me what is interesting is to compare this with what Jesus said to the woman at the well.
John 4:13-14 (KJV)
13 Jesus answered and said unto her, Whosoever drinketh of this water shall thirst again:
14 But whosoever drinketh of the water that I shall give him shall never thirst; but the water that I shall give him shall be in him a well of water springing up into everlasting life.

The John 4 experience is about salvation, the John 7 experience is about receiving the Holy Spirit. One is a well of water, (internal) the other is rivers of living water (external). many teach now that the experiences occur all at once. Others suggest that the filling of the Holy Spirit often may come subsequently after one is born again. They point to this scripture where Paul refers to these people as disciples.
Acts 19:2-3 (KJV)
2 He said unto them, Have ye received the Holy Ghost since ye believed? And they said unto him, We have not so much as heard whether there be any Holy Ghost.
3 And he said unto them, Unto what then were ye baptized? And they said, Unto John's baptism.

Other theological disagreements exist over whether tongues is evidence of the filling of the Holy Spirit. In Acts this was common, though some did prophesy when they were filled. In one instance Simon saw the gift being bestowed but it does not say what the gift was. A couple of instances where the Holy Spirit was given in Acts, the bible is silent about what occurred.
So, some churches believe tongues is given to all, as evidence of the Holy Spirit. Others believe everyone is filled when they are born again.

I find this also interesting about the 120 who were filled with the Holy Spirit.
Many believe that those Christians all spoke in foreign languages. That sounds simple but there are some possible differences that Acts is not crystal clear on. We do know there were 15 or so of these languages listed in Acts 2:8-11. It seems impossible to know though if they all were known foreign languages. So what were the possibilities?
1. With 120 filled, there could have been more languages that were not understood.
Acts 2:5 (YLT) 5 And there were dwelling in Jerusalem Jews, devout men from every nation of those under the heaven,
2. It is possible that every language was understood and there were more languages than were listed.
3. There could have been more than one person speaking the same foreign language.
3. It is possible that some were speaking languages that were not of this world.

I personally lean to the latter because some thought that those filled with the spirit were drunk. It could have been they really were acting drunk as occurs in some Pentecostal churches at times or perhaps it was because they were speaking in languages that no one understood at all. Remember too that it would be hard to match up the 120 tongue talkers to those that came from other nations and had the ability to listen. I mean that would require the pairing of 120 people speaking in foreign languages with at least one person who could understand that language. Which would take some amount of time just to get to the pairings. Some might lean toward not all speaking a known foreign language because so many who speak in tongues today speak syllables and other words and structure that do not sound like a full language. Of the small percent who have spoke in a known language in tongues, they also generally speak in tongues in an unknown or unrecognizable language at other times.
One explanation for this is that speaking in a known language via a tongue is part of the gift "various kinds of tongues" in I Cor 12. Meanwhile, the baptism of the Holy Spirit, with evidence of tongues is sometimes thought of not part of that gift but the ability of every believer. This becomes important because when Paul says in I Cor 12, "all do not speak in tongues," in context he is referring to the gift various kinds of tongues and likely not the baptism of the Holy Spirit.

Acts and the rest of the bible is clear; everyone can have the power of the Holy Spirit.
Acts 2:17 (KJV)
17 And it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh: and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams:

It seems highly unlikely that the prophesy was just fulfilled by the 120. It is a prophesy that we all can accept. The Holy Spirit was poured out in other examples in Acts and continues to be poured out today. Most Pentecostal/Charismatics do believe that all believers can speak in tongues. It includes millions of Charismatic Catholics that also speak in tongues.

I encourage all to investigate this on their own. There are lots of unanswered questions. Like among Catholics, why is it that most who speak in tongues are from South America? What is it about them and other Pentecostal tongue talkers that make them have the ability to receive?

Why is it too that some receive tongues years after they are born again?

I would note too that some think tongues have ceased, that some tongues might be of the devil, or that tongues are of little or no use. But is certainly certain that the entire 120 did speak in tongues in Acts 2, that at least many if not all spoke on a known foreign language, and that subsequently the Holy Spirit was given to others that spoke in tongues or prophesied or ______? because the bible is not always specific about what occurred.

HIM · Tuesday at 4:12 AM

Niels said:
Which does not negate the fact that they remain our neighbors and we are called to love even our enemies. They are made in God's image like the rest of us.

A sinner that is not repentant is not necessarily our enemy. Be that as it may disfellowship is done with morning.
1Cor 5:2 And ye are puffed up, and have not rather mourned, that he that hath done this deed might be taken away from among you.

childeye 2 · Tuesday at 3:37 AM

Xeno.of.athens said:
The son of one of my friends - The son would be about 40 years old now - has been having a conversation with me about the meaning of unity, in the Church. He is a Calvinist christian doing studies in a Baptist-like theological school. As a part of his studies, he's been looking into the question of church unity, and disunity. And since he knows me, he's been asking me questions about the Catholic perspective on the issues he's studying. We have had several rounds of discussion already and it would be unfair of me to reproduce those discussions, without first consulting with him about whether he wants anything that he's written, to appear in this forum. So, I will reproduce only my most recent reply to him regarding The question of unity. It is shown below the line.

Thank you for your considered reflections. You rightly note that various ecclesial communities articulate differing conceptions of the Church’s nature and unity. However, from a Catholic perspective, the Church founded by Christ “subsists in the Catholic Church, which is governed by the successor of Peter and by the Bishops in communion with him” (Lumen Gentium, §8). This formulation affirms that while elements of sanctification and truth exist outside her visible structure, the fullness of Christ’s Church remains uniquely and enduringly present in the Catholic communion.

The Catholic critique of Protestant ecclesiology is not a dismissal of sincere faith or doctrinal convergence, but a theological response to the revealed structure of the Church. As Dominus Iesus (§16) clarifies, “the ecclesial communities which have not preserved the valid Episcopate and the genuine and integral substance of the Eucharistic mystery are not Churches in the proper sense.” This is not a polemical assertion but a doctrinal distinction rooted in sacramental and apostolic continuity. Unity, in Catholic understanding, is not merely mutual recognition but visible communion in faith, sacraments, and governance.

Your concern for ecumenical charity is well placed. The Church teaches that “many elements of sanctification and of truth are found outside of her visible structure” (Lumen Gentium, §8), and she earnestly seeks unity through dialogue and mutual understanding. Yet, fidelity to Christ’s intention for His Church requires clarity: unity must be more than doctrinal harmony—it must be sacramental and hierarchical, as instituted by Christ and perpetuated through apostolic succession.

When people ask me, "Of what faith are you?" <--- I see a loaded question. My response is usually ---> "As I see it, since there is a singular Creator of the universe that can be regarded as Thee Eternal Power, then objectively speaking there can only be one Faith". I believe the Holy Spirit gifted me this sight, that I count as wisdom.

Therefore, I don't mean to insult anyone's intelligence, but mind manipulation is a real thing, and I do not want to accept nor affirm the false premise in the question. Similarly, I see a sentiment of unity being expressed in the term Catholic objectively meaning the one universal church in unity through the Holy Spirit of Truth, but then I also see that there's also a subjective sentiment of disunity being expressed through the label ---> "I'm a Catholic".

Latest activity

Latest activity

Filter

Forum statistics

Share this page