Search results

Alright, if we've worn those out, let's try this one... But I say to you that everyone who is angry with his brother shall be guilty before the court; and whoever says to his brother, ‘You good-for-nothing,’ shall be guilty before the supreme court; and whoever says, ‘You fool,’ shall be guilty...

"Respond the same way?" What does that mean? That I'd say, "Not so, dad, I'm not gonna not take out the garbage"?

That's not the case presented in the OP either. But admittedly I have had a few colorful discussions with Catholics about that one.

How did this get into it? The # here was based on what Peter said in Acts 10.

And I didn't say what Peter said was the same as what Jesus said. In spurring discussion-- and only that-- I asked how answering "Not so...." to a command is not speaking against. If your old man ever told you to take out the garbage and you replied "Not so, dad," that wouldn't be speaking...

The relevance is-- obviously-- did Peter blaspheme against the Holy Spirit by speaking against Him? If they mean the same thing in this context-- as you are claiming-- how is it otherwise?

Quit beating around the bush here. Yes or No: If one voted for Trump, is that one on the left hand of Christ? Yes or No: Is a true communist on the right hand of Christ because s/he advocated holding property in common and distributed by need? Yes or No: Is anyone, including the Apostles...

It is you, not I, who indicates strongly that one's political positions will determine whether one is on His right or left.

What?? You intertwine the judgment of Matthew 25 directly to who or what a person supports politically, and then accuse others of evil who separate the 2 and claim they combine them?!?

Welcome. I used to like Macbeth better than Hamlet, but now I'm not sure.

Okay those on the left will go into everlasting fire.

How about attempting to buy His power with money, as Simon the sorcerer tried to do [Acts 8]? Peter told him what he wanted was a great evil, yet Pete also said that he should pray and that maybe the intention of his heart could be forgiven. Thus, it was not the unforgivable sin, unless Peter...

Whether I understand that or not, the question here still comes down to this: do "blasphemy" and "speak against" mean the same thing. Yes or No. You seem to be saying it's Yes AND No.

According to you, it "carries the same meaning," yet means something different. Is that it? BTW what I post as to meaning does not necessarily mean it's my own view, but for discussion, especially about 'literalism.' You missed the last 6 words.

You're saying that the two terms "carry the same meaning," but one means one thing and the other something else? Okay. BTW what I post as to meaning does not necessarily mean it's my own view, but for discussion, especially about 'literalism.'

The question would be: 'is that Peter's point?' My point in this is that Peter said no to God and used the word "unclean" to what he was being told to do. Carelessness with how we respond is one point. But you don't address anything in this other than to keep saying Peter's words were just...

You see a lot more words in that passage than I do. And, if you think about it, Peter is implying that whoever is talking to him is telling him to do something evil, declaring he has never eaten anything "unclean."

V. 31 does use the word blasphemy, but v. 32 uses the term "speak against." Are they the same word/term actually [I don't know and I've never heard that]? But if the differ in degree, why would Jesus have used the lesser of the 2 when declaring whether forgiveness is possible?

Complaining isn't "speaking against" the one who instructs what one is complaining about?

Try to answer these, or instigate your own... When a prophet speaks in the name of the Lord, if the thing does not come about or come true, that is the thing which the Lord has not spoken. The prophet has spoken it presumptuously; you shall not be afraid of him [Deuteronomy 18:22]. So how is...