I've said this before and it is private revelation, but I used to be Presbyterian.

Sometime after I'd become Catholic, my Presbyterian pastor (who had died several years before) turned up one night in a vision and said "The Catholic Church is CLOSEST to the truth", with a distinct emphasis on the word "closest". He didn't say it had all the truth or was necessarily correct in everything, but was CLOSEST to the truth.

That was all he said, and then he just disappeared again.

We had discussed Catholicism and Protestant divisions while he was still alive, and he was getting cynical about Protestant division, saying at one time "When it comes to theology, Protestants couldn't agree how far to spit!"

But that was my experience.

You need to work through your decision for yourself and RCIA is the way to start. It's the only way actually as it is a necesary step in the journey.

Guojing said:

And there is a reason why the Acts church followed Luke 12:33 literally, and sold all their belongings to give to the common pool (Acts 2:44-45, Acts 4:32).

Why do you think no church does that today?

Peter was not joking when he told the lame beggar in Acts 3 "silver and gold I have none"

Click to expand...

Sure, there are certain sign-acts of the Apostles with a certain applicability as the gospel events unfolded.
I agree 100%.

But again, we know Peter and John went out from Jerusalem, and we suspect from history that more apostles then joined them later.

Again - what is the point? Even if I grant that they never left Jerusalem except for Cornelius.

What is the point you are trying to make, and how does it relate to escahtology?

Guojing said:

You realized no one in Israel was "surprised" that Jesus was born?

Click to expand...

Please demonstrate that "Israel" as such went "Oh yeah, here's our Messiah, right on time!?"
First - I apologist as I posted too soon - and then went back to editing it.
There are points there you have not been able to address.

Now - about Israel not being "surprised". What on earth? Of course they were!?
And they rejected Jesus - generally speaking.
Otherwise, why did Jesus weep over Jerusalem?

Luke 19
41 As he approached Jerusalem and saw the city, he wept over it 42 and said, “If you, even you, had only known on this day what would bring you peace—but now it is hidden from your eyes. 43 The days will come upon you when your enemies will build an embankment against you and encircle you and hem you in on every side. 44 They will dash you to the ground, you and the children within your walls. They will not leave one stone on another, because you did not recognize the time of God’s coming to you.

Guojing said:

Mary certainly didn't reply to Gabriel "What, how come God suddenly want to send his son to Earth?"

Click to expand...

Mary's humble obedience is a model for our own godliness, not a litmus test of the NATION's faith.

Guojing said:

The 69th week is the week of the cross, where the Messiah is cut off, so as Peter said in Acts 2:16-21, Israel were certainly aware that they were at the "last days" which is the 70th week.

Click to expand...

Except that's you reading into Daniel (where many theologians I respect think it might be about Antiochus the Third).
I've also heard it being Jesus. None of them work out literally, even with the mathematical wiggle-room of asking which particular decree of the Persians let them go home, etc. None work. So it's a symbolic use of time, and there are examples of Jewish writers doing that.


So you've taken one view, and are reading it into Peter's mind, when Peter is quoting

Then you're reading it into Peter, when he's actually quoting Joel!

Guojing said:

You think he said Acts 2:16-21 for the sake of it? Read it literally and tell me what is it saying.

Click to expand...

Um - no.
I will not read Apocalyptic Symbolism literally.
That is not how you are meant to read it!

Factotum said:

I think that it stands to reason, your great idea pertains to peaceful maritime cruise across the seas. I can't see how it also protects pirates, drug runners, etc... when using the seas as a tool to break the law. Especially when they are cognizant of how their criminality kills multitudes of humans.

Click to expand...

Good heavens, man. We're not talking about someone whose yacht has hit a reef. We are talking about how it is illegal even in wartime to kill shipwrecked survivors. Would you argue against this sort of cold blooded killing if it was on land? Why ever would you? The principle is the same. It's bad guys delivering drugs.

What difference does it make blowing up their truck as opposed to their boat? No warning. No due process. Just kill them all. And if a couple manage to survive, then give it an hour or so and if they're still alive then wander over and shoot them in the head.

stevevw said:

The US use to be the worlds police

Click to expand...

That wasn't meant as a compliment.

FromWesternCanada said:

What threat is NATO to Russia?

Click to expand...

What threat was Cuba to the USA? When you answer that question you will have answered your own question. (Look up the Cuban missile crisis)

FromWesternCanada said:

I know Russia is now threatening Nuclear war with Europe. But if the base of NATO being Christian, with Christian causes, what's the problem?

Click to expand...

NATO is not Christian. What ever gave you that idea?

FromWesternCanada said:

Sorry, I'm really ignorant to a lot of stuff.

Click to expand...

Unfortunately you are ignorant of a great deal.

FromWesternCanada said:

Edit- So, Putin's just mad he's being told what countries he can invade and what countries he can't?

Click to expand...

Putin wouldn't have invaded Ukraine if NATO had honoured their promise not to expand toward Russia. NATO officials have since publicly stated that they had no intention of honouring their side of the deal. Isn't lying for your advantage a principal of Islam? It certainly isn't a Christian principal.

FromWesternCanada said:

I know Russia needs to be nuked, before anywhere else. We must cut this thing off at the legs. That sounds horrendous 'Nuke Moscow'... but act before Putin, whatever that means.

Click to expand...

No, globalism needs to be cut off at the neck. After the Cold War ended, Russia was keen to become part of the West, however it was not in the interests of the industrial war machine to have Russia as a peaceful ally so they have always been painted as the aggressor (Russians are always depicted as evil in Hollywood).

I start the OCIA within 4 months. But my 'conversion' to understanding Catholicism, it was really just grasping Apostolic Succession, the Traditions that pre-dated the laymen building by many, many years. I just first thought, well, Apostolic Succession, that sounds like a God plan. It really is CRUCIAL to trusting the Bible. Then I got into the whole 'Schism' thing, and tried to understand how one would take sides. Then I understood that the Roman Catholic Church, God would have to have 'started poorly' for it to have taken off to the East. I'm not trying to be lazy in my words with 'started poorly', I just think it sums up the insanity of anything but Roman Catholicism. I've also got a Rosary, and it feels like there is some kind of change 'in the air' after Praying it. I always knew Christ was KING... and the 'evangelicals' I knew, weren't Christians I wanted to be. So, it really came down to the broadness of Evangelicism, or the 'umbrella' of Roman Catholicism. I think that makes sense. But yea, the Church is TRUE. I feel that just by showing admiration for Mother Mary in Prayer, and other ways I try to understand God. I started off on the right foot, knowing it was Jesus Christ of the Trinity. Another reason for the East to be questionable. I just think, God shows me things now, that He didn't before.

Guojing said:

You are aware of the order specified in Luke's version of the Great Commission Luke 24:47?

Click to expand...

Sure!

“This is what is written: The Messiah will suffer and rise from the dead on the third day, 47 and repentance for the forgiveness of sins will be preached in his name to all nations, beginning at Jerusalem. 48 You are witnesses of these things. 49 I am going to send you what my Father has promised; but stay in the city until you have been clothed with power from on high.”

Beginning in this context means starting, not staying.

In case there is any doubt, Acts 1:8 settles it. This is to the Apostles themselves!

8 But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit comes on you; and you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the ends of the earth.”

The apostles themselves received power.
The apostles themselves were to witness in Jerusalem.
The apostles themselves were to expanding out to neighbours, then people they didn't like very much, then the ends of the earth.

Beginning means exactly that.

And that as I have shown repeatedly - Peter and John went out - at least for some missions.
I'm still not really not sure what point you are trying to make?

Also - historical narratives indicate various apostles did go out - but I'm not an expert historian enough to figure out what might have some validity, and what is mere hagiography.

Guojing said:

The 12 were aware that the final week of Daniel's prophecy, the 70th week, will begin anytime after the cross (Acts 2:16-21), once Acts 7 happened and national Israel stoned Stephen, Peter was expecting that final week to begin anytime (1 Peter 1:5-9),

Click to expand...

I'm curious - as theologians I read find Daniel 9's 70 weeks to be some of the toughest Apocalyptic Symbolism to decode. Can you demonstrate that this is how the 12 read these passages?

Oh - and the whole Great Commission and Gospel itself is for love, but I guess what you are saying is they had a strategic mission focus.

RDKirk said:

The law does not require "physical surrendering gestures" for shipwrecked people. Being shipwrecked is sufficient...

Click to expand...

I think that it stands to reason, your great idea pertains to peaceful maritime cruise across the seas. I can't see how it also protects pirates, drug runners, etc... when using the seas as a tool to break the law. Especially when they are cognizant of how their criminality kills multitudes of humans.

Elijah.

I love reading about this guy

jacorian said:

What do people make of the soul of Mr. Putin who I'd currently say is the most evil person on the planet given he is holding some many cards. Here we are on this planet & we the people as imperfect as we are can never seem to get rid of these tyrants. The ebb & flow of death in all these wars on the globe not to mention the passing away of regular human beings, just disappearing from our lives forever.

Click to expand...

I don't find Putin all that bad compared to some of the other leaders who have been, such as Hitler & Stalin.
As far as leaders go for today I wouldn't recommend crossing some of these Chinese leaders.

RDKirk said:

It is actually reported that there is immorality among you, and of a kind that even pagans do not tolerate: Killing men who are survivors at sea.

Click to expand...

I can sympathize with you, and I wish you the best in handling your displeasure. I know elders who felt the same way in 2012, and especially in 2016 when Obama-Biden Afghanistan bombings killed about 100 innocent civilians incl. children and women.

Dave... said:

Hey T

I found that metro parks can do in a pinch. I used to have about a twenty minute to a half and hour hike every day in the metro parks before work. I really enjoyed that and looked forward to it. Sometimes these hidden Gems in the cities can be just as rewarding with less expense and travel time. It's a good place to think. There, and I do also do some of my best thinking while shooting hoops alone. BTW, I always wondered if Bigfoot lived in the big city sewer systems of NY. It sounds funny, but they could have access from where the sewers open up outside the city. I've heard stories...

Dave

Click to expand...

I do laps around the two metro parks near me on rollerblades. Doesn't feel the same as the one on the mountains.

The cost is not what's stopping me but time. There are mountain forests within 40 miles of my place and I reach them by bicycle but the round trip takes 5 to 6 hours without stopping and I can't be away from home more than 2 hrs. I used to do this every weekend when my sister lived with us as she can watch over my mom.

I don't bring money on these long trips by bicycle. If anything went wrong that my tools can't fix, I can't just call Uber and I have no one I can call to pick me up. I don't even bring food or snacks, just one half liter bottle of homemade electrolyte drink for the 60 to 80 mile trip.

It was nice while it lasted but I get the same fulfillment with rollerblading now. I figure, it's just a different "forest". In fact rollerblading has become my primary mode of transport around the city. It used to be bicycle. I don't do it because its easy but because it's hard!

Factotum said:

Thats intriguing. Although I disagree.

If there is video of any type that show humans doing any type of physical surrendering gestures... then I could could agree with your premise.
But if no humans were trying to surrender to the enemy that sent the armaments they just saw and felt, then that can disqualify Article 32.

Click to expand...

The law does not require "physical surrendering gestures" for shipwrecked people. Being shipwrecked is sufficient. In fact, the circumstances presume that if the persons shipwrecked were able to continue fighting, they would. That's why they're taken prisoner rather than treated as long-lost buddies.

Nithavela said:

Ever heard of the Laconia incident?

If shipwrecked people aren't meant to be gunned down in cold blood, why are they such easy targets?

Click to expand...

I came across it earlier when looking for examples of survivors at sea being killed or saved. Depressing.

stevevw said:

Its now been shown that they were not just innocents floating in the water. But they were actively still in the fight. Getting back on the boat, gathering the drugs back onto the boat and radioing through to other narcos to come.

Click to expand...

Nobody viewing the videos seems to have seen that except Tom Cotton. Everyone else reports seeing a vastly different picture.

Yttrium said:

From what I've seen so far, I'd say the Navy has enough to proceed with an Article 32 hearing to decide whether the case should go to court-martial. Conduct a proper military investigation. Trump could just pardon him if he's convicted, so no worries.

Click to expand...

Thats intriguing. Although I disagree.

If there is video of any type that show humans doing any type of physical surrendering gestures... then I could could agree with your premise.
But if no humans were trying to surrender to the enemy that sent the armaments they just saw and felt, then that can disqualify Article 32.

Always in His Presence said:

We’re the drug runners in a life boat?

Click to expand...

It is actually reported that there is immorality among you, and of a kind that even pagans do not tolerate: Killing men who are survivors at sea.

prodromos said:

No, you always claim we can only see so far, which is why you claim the sun 'appears' to rise and set.

Click to expand...

Yes I claimed that we only see so far but this was why we are on the earth.

prodromos said:

Now you want to claim we can see stars which are orders of magnitude less bright than the sun, at much greater distances.

Click to expand...

Yes & why wouldn't I ? BTW stars are closer than you think as is the sun & the moon.

Reluctant Theologian said:

Removing/deporting a legal immigrant is not denaturalisation - that's only removal of citizenship. Removing/deporting legal immigrants because of fraud or crime committed while being a legal resident is also standard procedure in other countries (a.o. Australia).

Click to expand...

I'm talking about denaturalization here. I'm not concerned about just revoking green cards in this thread.

Reluctant Theologian said:

In several countries where dual citizenship is allowed there are also laws that remove the acquired, second citizenship of the new host country in case of serious crimes like terrorism etc. (e..g in Europe in some countries). The person is then simply deported back to the country of this remaining citizenship.

Both categories make sense to me. Why allow residents if they prove to be a serious burden (or worse) to the guest country?

E.g. in Australia being seriously overweight or having some other serious medical condition can be valid reasons why visas are denied. Migrant quotas are limited so a country can be picky in who's allowed in.

When I'm organising a party it's wise not to invite those who thrash my place - or at least remove them when they do.

Click to expand...

Once they're citizens, they can trash the place and be arrested just like any other citizen.

Jimster55 said:

Hello there! Im new here myself so I am trying g to get used to being back on forums. I used to be part of a forum a long time ago, like 10-15 years ago. LOL its definitely been a while! But I came here to look for Christian fellowship and in hopes of making a new friend.

Click to expand...

Hello, friend.
I hope to locate that same type of fellowship you described.

Best of luck to you!

Jesus' gospel was of the Kingdom. It was about God overcoming all adversity. Certainly those in allegiance with Him may benefit... but its not all about us.

GoldenBoy89 said:

It's nice to know Americans can still agree on some things but just too bad this administration isn't really interested in what the American people think or feel about anything they're doing.

Click to expand...

I don't think that's true at all. Americans vary all the time regarding what administrations are doing. They never show interest in what everyone thinks or feels. Biden sure didn't. So don't try and say its just Trump.

And we can agree on some things despite our differences. And this is certainly one of them. No ground war on Venezuala. I honestly don't think there will be one.