Comments
41 - 60 of 67 Comments Last updated Nov 28, 2013
Dave P

Morehead, KY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#43
Nov 13, 2013
 

Judged:

1

Mike_Peterson wrote:
<quoted text>
133 on Pentecost. The 12, which included Matthias, Blessed Mary, and 120 other disciples
Odd take. Always knew some said all 120 received it, but the 12 and Mary would have been included in that number. Here the battle has always been 12 vs. 120.

Since: Sep 13

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#44
Nov 13, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Dave P wrote:
<quoted text>
Odd take. Always knew some said all 120 received it, but the 12 and Mary would have been included in that number. Here the battle has always been 12 vs. 120.
Odd??? It could have been 132 if Blessed Mary was part of the 120.

Acts 1:13-14 doesn't mention the 120 but names the people, apostles, Mary, relatives and other women who were praying in the upper room.

Acts 1:15-26 stands up in the midst of the brothers (no women mentioned here) and 120 is stated as being in the one place (not the upper room or one room).

Acts 2:1-4 states they were all in one place and the wind filled the entire house when the tongues of fire appeared.
Annoying Proxy

Chicago, IL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#45
Nov 13, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Dave P wrote:
<quoted text>
Two- no one said that only the apostles received the Holy Spirit in Acts. The only ones who received the baptism of the Holy Spirit were the 12 on Pentecost, and the gentiles of Cornelius' house. That's the argument. You should state your thoughts a little clearer.
You might get a idea of the conversation before placing that foot of yours in your mouth. I suggest you start with the last sentence of Joe-the-Plumber as in post #1 which I posted below. What is it about you Catholics and comprehension? Even your fellow Catholic counted 133 instead of 12. Lay off the prayer beads and Mary chants, it may help.
Joe-the-Plumber wrote:
Enter the Baptist of the Holy Spirit. Jesus says this baptism was not like Johns baptism with water but a baptism with the Holy Spirit. Many claim this to be ongoing today but from Lukes mouth it seems isolated just for the apostles.

Since: Jun 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#46
Nov 13, 2013
 

Judged:

1

Dave how does it feel to be Sprouled?

Since: Sep 13

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#47
Nov 14, 2013
 

Judged:

2

1

1

Annoying Proxy wrote:
<quoted text>You might get a idea of the conversation before placing that foot of yours in your mouth. I suggest you start with the last sentence of Joe-the-Plumber as in post #1 which I posted below. What is it about you Catholics and comprehension? Even your fellow Catholic counted 133 instead of 12. Lay off the prayer beads and Mary chants, it may help.
<quoted text>
Everybody in the room received the Sacrament of Confirmation. I can live with 132 or 133. This was the first Confirmation.
Dave P

Morehead, KY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#48
Nov 14, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

MarkEden wrote:
Dave how does it feel to be Sprouled?
More manure for the compost heap?

I feel all dirty now ewww :[

lol
Dave P

Morehead, KY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#49
Nov 14, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Annoying Proxy wrote:
<quoted text>You might get a idea of the conversation before placing that foot of yours in your mouth. I suggest you start with the last sentence of Joe-the-Plumber as in post #1 which I posted below. What is it about you Catholics and comprehension? Even your fellow Catholic counted 133 instead of 12. Lay off the prayer beads and Mary chants, it may help.
<quoted text>
What is it about you and comprehension Sproul? I AM NOT CATHOLIC. You must see catholics behind every bush, even when they aren't there. Paranoid proxy perhaps?
Dave P

Morehead, KY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#50
Nov 14, 2013
 
Annoying Proxy wrote:
<quoted text>You might get a idea of the conversation before placing that foot of yours in your mouth. I suggest you start with the last sentence of Joe-the-Plumber as in post #1 which I posted below. What is it about you Catholics and comprehension? Even your fellow Catholic counted 133 instead of 12. Lay off the prayer beads and Mary chants, it may help.
<quoted text>
I was responding to YOUR post, not Joe's. I agree with Joe's take. I do not agree with yours. That was the point. Sproul.
Annoying Proxy

Chicago, IL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#51
Nov 14, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Joe-the-Plumber wrote:
Many claim this to be ongoing today but from Lukes mouth it seems isolated just for the apostles.
My post was in response to Joe that it seems Acts 1: 1-5 was just for apostles. Your claim that no one said it is Just false and your ego doesn't allow for that acknowledgment. This is a perfect reason that the bible should be allowed into the hands of the common man. The common man's soul depends upon it so he should be allowed to decide for himself. You seem to believe in the hands of common man is a mistake. I bet in your mind you are not one of the common men that the scriptures should be kept from and yet in this post is displayed the perfect reason to not allow scripture only in the hands of ones such as yourself.
Dave P wrote:
<quoted text>
Two- no one said that only the apostles received the Holy Spirit in Acts.
Dave P

Morehead, KY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#52
Nov 14, 2013
 
Annoying Proxy wrote:
<quoted text>My post was in response to Joe that it seems Acts 1: 1-5 was just for apostles. Your claim that no one said it is Just false and your ego doesn't allow for that acknowledgment. This is a perfect reason that the bible should be allowed into the hands of the common man. The common man's soul depends upon it so he should be allowed to decide for himself. You seem to believe in the hands of common man is a mistake. I bet in your mind you are not one of the common men that the scriptures should be kept from and yet in this post is displayed the perfect reason to not allow scripture only in the hands of ones such as yourself.
<quoted text>
Did you read what you posted? You mentioned that some think only the apostles received the Holy Spirit. NO ONE SAID THAT. Some think only the apostles received the BAPTISM of the Spirit, with speaking in tongues and things. That is why I said you need to clarify your thinking and what you posted.
Dave P

Morehead, KY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#53
Nov 14, 2013
 

Judged:

1

Annoying Proxy: I think the book of Acts itself shows us that the Holy Spirit is given to others besides the apostles Acts 10:45, 13:9, 19:6. The claim that it was only the eleven I don't believe holds water, so to speak. There are a lot of false teachings out there for the sole purpose of justifying false doctrine.

Dave- if you are speaking of the BAPTISM of the Holy Spirit, you should have mentioned that. No one thinks only the apostles received the Holy Spirit. But some do think only the apostles received the BAPTISM of the Spirit.

Does this help your comprehension?

Since: Jun 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#54
Nov 14, 2013
 

Judged:

1

Dave P wrote:
<quoted text>
More manure for the compost heap?
I feel all dirty now ewww :[
lol
Sprouls have this little defrocked presbyterian paedocommunionists cult denomination with 12 churches in it.
Annoying Proxy

Chicago, IL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#55
Nov 14, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Dave P wrote:
Annoying Proxy:
Dave- if you are speaking of the BAPTISM of the Holy Spirit, you should have mentioned that. No one thinks only the apostles received the Holy Spirit. But some do think only the apostles received the BAPTISM of the Spirit.
Does this help your comprehension?
If? Maybe you should know of what you speak? I am perfectly with letting the posts speak for themselves in cyber eternity. I think they show who has a problem, I think with ego mo so than comprehension, at least I hope that is the case.
Annoying Proxy

Chicago, IL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#56
Nov 14, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Joe-the-Plumber wrote:
“In my former book, Theophilus, I wrote about all that Jesus began to do and to teach 2 until the day he was taken up to heaven, after giving instructions through the Holy Spirit to the apostles he had chosen. 3 After his suffering, he presented himself to them and gave many convincing proofs that he was alive. He appeared to them over a period of forty days and spoke about the kingdom of God. 4 On one occasion, while he was eating with them, he gave them this command:“Do not leave Jerusalem, but wait for the gift my Father promised, which you have heard me speak about. 5 For John baptized with water, but in a few days you will be baptized with the Holy Spirit.”
Is Luke opening here with the notion that a book was called Theophilus or just pointing to his gospel. The context seems to imply Luke was speaking of his gospel as the former book where he speaks of Jesus and his instructions for the apostles. Jesus seems to select the apostles apart from other people for something special. Enter the Baptist of the Holy Spirit. Jesus says this baptism was not like Johns baptism with water but a baptism with the Holy Spirit. Many claim this to be ongoing today but from Lukes mouth it seems isolated just for the apostles.
Annoying Proxy wrote:
<quoted text>The only thing you can expect from the Catholics on here is disruption of any bible discussion. They lost control of Christianity when the Protestants were allowed to have the bible, yet they still insist they are the only ones that can say what it means even though what they do is not in the bible and many times their actions contradict it. Just watch what I mean by their disruptive input on this thread all the while the absence of meaningful discussion. Mike, Dave, and Mark, the three Catholic stooges will arrive shortly.
I think the book of Acts itself shows us that the Holy Spirit is given to others besides the apostles Acts 10:45, 13:9, 19:6. The claim that it was only the eleven I don't believe holds water, so to speak. There are a lot of false teachings out there for the sole purpose of justifying false doctrine.
Dave P wrote:
<quoted text>
One- for the hundreth time this week, I am not catholic. I am a coc preacher who is actually listening to what everyone is saying. I do not agree with much of catholicism, but on this forum, they make much more sense than the other "protesters" on here currently.
Two- no one said that only the apostles received the Holy Spirit in Acts. The only ones who received the baptism of the Holy Spirit were the 12 on Pentecost, and the gentiles of Cornelius' house. That's the argument. You should state your thoughts a little clearer.
Read and decide for yourselves if someone has a problem with comprehension.
Dave P

Morehead, KY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#57
Nov 14, 2013
 
Annoying Proxy: I think the book of Acts itself shows us that the Holy Spirit is given to others besides the apostles Acts 10:45, 13:9, 19:6. The claim that it was only the eleven I don't believe holds water, so to speak.

Dave- again, if you are speaking of the baptism of the Spirit, speaking in tongues, etc then mention it. Don't just say "the Spirit is given to others besides the apostles" then say everyone else has a comprehension problem. When the real issue is lack of clarity from your post.

Again, you also generalize falsely. Most people generally accept that the baptism of the Spirit occurred at least twice, and the Ephesian disciples of John being very similar. The real argument is whether the baptism of the Spirit is for believers today or not, with the speaking of tongues accompanying.

Since: Nov 13

Chicago, IL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#58
Nov 14, 2013
 
Annoying Proxy wrote:
<quoted text>My post was in response to Joe that it seems Acts 1: 1-5 was just for apostles. Your claim that no one said it is Just false and your ego doesn't allow for that acknowledgment. This is a perfect reason that the bible should be allowed into the hands of the common man. The common man's soul depends upon it so he should be allowed to decide for himself. You seem to believe in the hands of common man is a mistake. I bet in your mind you are not one of the common men that the scriptures should be kept from and yet in this post is displayed the perfect reason to not allow scripture only in the hands of ones such as yourself.
<quoted text>
I should have been more clear. In the veress I posted I mean they were directed at the apostles.
Annoying Proxy

Chicago, IL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#59
Nov 15, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Dave P wrote:
Annoying Proxy: I think the book of Acts itself shows us that the Holy Spirit is given to others besides the apostles Acts 10:45, 13:9, 19:6. The claim that it was only the eleven I don't believe holds water, so to speak.
Dave- again, if you are speaking of the baptism of the Spirit, speaking in tongues, etc then mention it. Don't just say "the Spirit is given to others besides the apostles" then say everyone else has a comprehension problem. When the real issue is lack of clarity from your post.
Again, you also generalize falsely. Most people generally accept that the baptism of the Spirit occurred at least twice, and the Ephesian disciples of John being very similar. The real argument is whether the baptism of the Spirit is for believers today or not, with the speaking of tongues accompanying.
Generalize falsely? What is that? You were made topix police in your mind only, the post wasn't addressed to you so if you don't like it, don't read it. I intend to let the posts speak for themselves just as I said (which is the reason I posted them as I did). I think that will show us a perfect example of someone that has their head up their ass. I hope that is not to "general" for you.

Since: Sep 13

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#60
Nov 15, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Annoying Proxy wrote:
<quoted text>Generalize falsely? What is that? You were made topix police in your mind only, the post wasn't addressed to you so if you don't like it, don't read it. I intend to let the posts speak for themselves just as I said (which is the reason I posted them as I did). I think that will show us a perfect example of someone that has their head up their ass. I hope that is not to "general" for you.
What you think about what anything in the Bible means is as useless as teats on a boar hog.

It was written and put together by Catholics and it amazes me the tens of millions of low end prots have now clue about that. What if every low prot Pastor would tell their community the truth about the history of Christianity and the Bible.

High end Prots basically know the history. They just think Jesus failed with his first Church but we all know Jesus never fails.
Annoying Proxy

Manassas, VA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#61
Nov 15, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Mike_Peterson wrote:
<quoted text>
What you think about what anything in the Bible means is as useless as teats on a boar hog.
It was written and put together by Catholics and it amazes me the tens of millions of low end prots have now clue about that. What if every low prot Pastor would tell their community the truth about the history of Christianity and the Bible.
High end Prots basically know the history. They just think Jesus failed with his first Church but we all know Jesus never fails.
I look at teats on a boar hog being called useless by Catholics as proof that God does not show everything to them. You would think since God created those teats there was surely a purpose just because he is God if no other reason. But then again Catholics don't seem to have a need for God. They create their own Christ and their own bible. The scriptures God gave the church the Catholics claim to have invented. They also claim they forgive sins and apparently don't think God knows how to do that either. So maybe since you Catholics don't think God is capable of providing purposeful teats on boar hogs, a Christ, scriptures, or forgiveness of sins in a useful manner makes you superior in any way to low enders could be blind sheep syndrome on your part. Have you thought of asking a Prot what teets on a boar hog are for?

Since: Sep 13

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#63
Nov 15, 2013
 

Judged:

3

2

1

Annoying Proxy wrote:
<quoted text>I look at teats on a boar hog being called useless by Catholics as proof that God does not show everything to them. You would think since God created those teats there was surely a purpose just because he is God if no other reason. But then again Catholics don't seem to have a need for God. They create their own Christ and their own bible. The scriptures God gave the church the Catholics claim to have invented. They also claim they forgive sins and apparently don't think God knows how to do that either. So maybe since you Catholics don't think God is capable of providing purposeful teats on boar hogs, a Christ, scriptures, or forgiveness of sins in a useful manner makes you superior in any way to low enders could be blind sheep syndrome on your part. Have you thought of asking a Prot what teets on a boar hog are for?
Sins: Why did Jesus give his Church the authority to forgive sins?

The men who wrote the scriptures were Catholic. The Church existed before the first scripture was written, so the writers had to be Catholic.

I am not superior,the Church is. I am just obeying Jesus to be part of his Church and not divide up the Kingdom of God.

Remember, it is a kingdom, not a democracy. The sheep doesnt tell the Shepherd that they know the truth themselves because they can read.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

•••
•••
•••
•••

Chatmoss Jobs

•••
Enter and win $5000
•••
•••

Chatmoss People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••

Chatmoss News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Chatmoss
•••

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]
•••