you took offense. Your response did not ask for clarification. Your first response was a very dismissive and insulting "Whaaaaaaa???. . . . . . Never mind.
Have a good day." I figured that hey, you were offended, and if I clarified what I meant, you wouldn't be offended any more...but "never...
It was an acknowledgement of what you said, and a further clarification that 'blasphemy against the Spirit" isn't a sin anybody ELSE could forgive one for, since such blasphemy wouldn't be harming one in any way. Sins against God (or the Holy Spirit) have nothing to do with what anybody else has...
Does it help any if you knew that the "you" being used here is the general 'you,' not you personally....because English doesn't have a plural 'you?' To restate it in the more awkward method, I could have written:
That...would be between them and God, and not anybody else's problem, yes...
I need to clarify this position.
You are saying that we none of us have a choice as to whether we commit murder?
The obvious result of this is that there should be no punishment for it; that when someone murders someone else, that we should all simply shrug and say something like 'boys will be...
That...would be between them and God, and not your problem, yes? Besides, it's not YOU that is required to punish or 'not forgive' anybody for 'blaspheming against the spirit." for one thing, how would you know?
Disagreeing with your opinions regarding God wouldn't qualify as blaspheming the...
Just from what you posted...I didn't look either reference up:
the difference SEEMS to be that 'if" word. That is, in the second sentence says that IF you don't forgive others, your Father won't forgive yours.
Therefore it's possible to repent. That is, as soon as you DO forgive others, then...
Los Angeles (and indeed, most of coastal California) hasn't been run by conservatives for a very long time now. Indeed, it is a pretty typical Liberal "I want the power and the votes and to hell with solving the problem" solution.
No, dragons as represented by dinosaur fossils never existed. NO firebreathers, no flyers and sitters upon hoards of gold.
Makes me sad.
A perfect world SHOULD have dragons in it.
And Legolas.
There you go.
this isn't about insulting atheists. It's ABSOLUTELY not about some dumb claim that all atheists are anti-theists. that's patently untrue and I've never claimed that.
It's about the proper use of the Engish language.
And you think the government does that?
Some cities in California figure that they are solving the homeless problem by giving them tents and a train ticket to my city. How is that 'looking at the sources and roots of the problem?"
Well, I'll have to take your word for that, because quite...
I never said that they do nothing. I WROTE that conservatives to more. As to 'skinflint,' etc., I was addressing that group of liberals who do the hypocritical thing. Since more liberals qualify for that than do conservatives, that could be a problem. I have also, remember, stated that I honor...
We've all been the victims of autocorrect.
One of the funnier ones I've seen (from an otherwise VERY intelligent and normally careful posters there) talked about how Mormons believed in a 'fiesta' god that bore no relationship to the God of the Bible (I said she was intelligent and normally...
Of course it is possible to be anti-OTHER theists. In fact, I've written that in almost every post. It is not possible for a theist to be anti-theist, the definition of which uses the same wording as the definition of 'atheist,' namely, an atheist is someone who lacks a belief in a god or gods...
Er...dinosaurs DID co-exist with 'simple mammals like squirrels" Not squirrels, of course, but 'simple mammals?" Sorry, but they did. It's why WE are here, because when the dinosaurs were wiped out in the Chixalub event, they weren't.
In fact, I BELIEVE that there may have been at least one...
You are going on my ignore list. Your last post to me, calling me an idiot because I don't think the same way you do is typical of your arguments, that's about as pure an ad hominem attack as there is, and is thus a fallacious argument. Argument by insult isn't going to change anybody's mind...