27 Sep '17 02:52>
Originally posted by @josephwLiterally in a "book"?
Everything is being recorded. Literally. Make no mistake about that.
Originally posted by @josephwLiterally in a "book"?
Everything is being recorded. Literally. Make no mistake about that.
Originally posted by @fmfNot if you're worried about it.
Presumably, something or things I've said during my participation here in this community can be construed as unforgivable "blaspheming the Holy Ghost", especially when, having been a Christian, I was aware of Luke 12:10. Does that mean that no conversion, no change of heart, no return to my former faith, no epiphany, and no repentance on my part, according to your ideology, can "save" me from "damnation" now?
Originally posted by @josephwThis does not answer my question.
Not if you're worried about it.
The one who blasphemes the Holy Ghost doesn't care. IMO.
Originally posted by @fmfThey are books. Not books allegorically.
If they are not books as we humans know them, and the reference to them is in the languages that humans use, written by humans for humans (perhaps with inspiration from god), and they are "not the kind of books" that the word "book" refers to and are, instead, something beyond that which we can even imagine ~ then aren't we into the realm of allegory?
Originally posted by @fmfYes I would. I might even resort to using terms like "brood of vipers" or "whited wall" if necessary. 🙄
Can we expect you to call on others here - sonship, for example - an "idiot" and an "internet reprobate" if he should ever "compare verses with verses outside their immediate context"?
Originally posted by @fmfThe book says books after all. Why not?
Literally in a "book"?
Originally posted by @fmfNo FMF. I do not believe you are beyond the reach of God's grace.
This does not answer my question.
Do you believe that there is no conversion, no change of heart, no return to former faith, no epiphany, and no repentance on my part, according to your ideology, that can "save" me from "damnation" now?
You saying "Not if you're worried about it" in answer to that question is just a non-sequitur.
Originally posted by @josephwDescribe these "books".
They are books. Not books allegorically.
Can you imagine how big the "books" must be that have recorded in them all the works of the dead that they are judged according to?
I think you've missed the meaning of the scriptures by straining at a gnat.
FMF: Can we expect you to call on others here - sonship, for example - an "idiot" and an "internet reprobate" if he should ever "compare verses with verses outside their immediate context"?You will, then, if it happens?
Originally posted by @josephw
[b]Yes I would. I might even resort to using terms like "brood of vipers" or "whited wall" if necessary./b]
Originally posted by @josephwSo what people does Luke 12:10 apply to?
No FMF. I do not believe you are beyond the reach of God's grace.
Originally posted by @josephwWhy would you think I believed "God's grace" exists?
I do not believe you are beyond the reach of God's grace. Do you?
Originally posted by @josephwYou believe there is a literal "mark in the forehead", a literal "wine of anger/cup of wrath", a literal "tormenting" with literal "brimstone" while the loving Jesus of mercy and John 3:16, literally sits by and watches...
Quite so!
So what's the problem?
Originally posted by @josephwMe neither.
I'm not the one who's afraid of hearing the truth.
Originally posted by @josephwThe issue here is whether "the meaning of the scriptures" as they pertain to what we are talking about is delivered literally or allegorically.
I think you've missed the meaning of the scriptures by straining at a gnat.
Originally posted by @josephwBut weren't you using scripture out of context when you used it to publicly call me, another Christian an "enemy of god"?
Not without context.
But yes, they do. Explains a lot, no?