The Blasphemy Thread
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
16-12-2014, 02:22 PM
RE: The Blasphemy Thread
(16-12-2014 02:06 PM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  I do not have a citation. I would say that over the past years, any commentary I've read online or off was in agreement.

The Holy Spirit is the one who convicts the individual of sin and the need for salvation.

The quotes you gave sometimes dovetail with my interpretation, sometimes don't, but are general. This is an example:

"By simply looking at the context it becomes apparent that blasphemy of the Holy Spirit is saying that Jesus did His miracles by the power of the devil. This is unforgivable."

How does the author know that is unforgivable? By reading the word unforgivable in the text. It's not Bible interpretation, it's just restating the verses. My interpretation includes the historical context of Talmudic thought. Jesus's arguments with the Rabbis are in this context and it's difficult to understand, for another example, the controversy about hand washing without the Talmud.
How can you so confidently assert, as you have in this thread, that none of us are "blaspheming the Holy Spirit" when you don't dispute the fact that the meaning of that phrase is a matter of interpretation and that Christian scholars are divided on this issue? Sure, that the sin is unforgivable is a matter of simply reading the text, but the issue of whether or not the sin can be committed today or what exactly this sin is (your interpretation, for instance, doesn't account for the reference in the Gospel of Luke, which you have yet to address) is up for interpretation.

We have our interpretation and you have yours. Deal with it.

[Image: 7oDSbD4.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Vosur's post
16-12-2014, 03:35 PM
RE: The Blasphemy Thread
(16-12-2014 02:22 PM)Vosur Wrote:  
(16-12-2014 02:06 PM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  I do not have a citation. I would say that over the past years, any commentary I've read online or off was in agreement.

The Holy Spirit is the one who convicts the individual of sin and the need for salvation.

The quotes you gave sometimes dovetail with my interpretation, sometimes don't, but are general. This is an example:

"By simply looking at the context it becomes apparent that blasphemy of the Holy Spirit is saying that Jesus did His miracles by the power of the devil. This is unforgivable."

How does the author know that is unforgivable? By reading the word unforgivable in the text. It's not Bible interpretation, it's just restating the verses. My interpretation includes the historical context of Talmudic thought. Jesus's arguments with the Rabbis are in this context and it's difficult to understand, for another example, the controversy about hand washing without the Talmud.
How can you so confidently assert, as you have in this thread, that none of us are "blaspheming the Holy Spirit" when you don't dispute the fact that the meaning of that phrase is a matter of interpretation and that Christian scholars are divided on this issue? Sure, that the sin is unforgivable is a matter of simply reading the text, but the issue of whether or not the sin can be committed today or what exactly this sin is (your interpretation, for instance, doesn't account for the reference in the Gospel of Luke, which you have yet to address) is up for interpretation.

We have our interpretation and you have yours. Deal with it.

Did any of your sources say "it's calling the Holy Spirit bad names"? They didn't, and here's why, because in at least one of the passages Jesus says God forgives mere name calling.

Of course you may have your Bible interpretations. Mine differ here.

I'm told atheists on forums like TTA are bitter and angry. If you are not, your posts to me will be respectful, insightful and thoughtful. Prove me wrong by your adherence to decent behavior.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-12-2014, 03:37 PM
RE: The Blasphemy Thread
(16-12-2014 03:35 PM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  Did any of your sources say "it's calling the Holy Spirit bad names"? They didn't, and here's why, because in at least one of the passages Jesus says God forgives mere name calling.

Of course you may have your Bible interpretations. Mine differ here.
Well, sort of.

"The unforgivable sin of blasphemy against the Holy Spirit is an act of resistance which belittles the Holy Spirit so grievously that he withdraws for ever with his convicting power so that we are never able to repent and be forgiven."
Source: http://www.desiringgod.org/sermons/beyon...the-spirit

Wouldn't you say that telling the Holy Spirit to suck my dick is belittling him? Consider

[Image: 7oDSbD4.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-12-2014, 03:57 PM
RE: The Blasphemy Thread
Q, you can ignore definitions in English and personal interpretations all you want, but as I pointed out in a previous post,

Quote:in Ancient Greek "blasphemy" meant speaking ill of someone or defaming them.

Ancient Greek happens to be the original language the New Testament was written in, and I happen to be a Greek who has studied Ancient Greek. It's funny that you chose to specifically ignore that post.

No matter what you say, no matter what your interpretations are, the word is Greek and there is no other way it could mean anything else than what I've just pointed out.

"Behind every great pirate, there is a great butt."
-Guybrush Threepwood-
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like undergroundp's post
17-12-2014, 03:03 PM
RE: The Blasphemy Thread
(16-12-2014 03:37 PM)Vosur Wrote:  
(16-12-2014 03:35 PM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  Did any of your sources say "it's calling the Holy Spirit bad names"? They didn't, and here's why, because in at least one of the passages Jesus says God forgives mere name calling.

Of course you may have your Bible interpretations. Mine differ here.
Well, sort of.

"The unforgivable sin of blasphemy against the Holy Spirit is an act of resistance which belittles the Holy Spirit so grievously that he withdraws for ever with his convicting power so that we are never able to repent and be forgiven."
Source: http://www.desiringgod.org/sermons/beyon...the-spirit

Wouldn't you say that telling the Holy Spirit to suck my dick is belittling him? Consider

"An act of resistance" is not name calling per se. This is my context-resisting the Spirit's conviction of sin and the need to trust Jesus.

I'm told atheists on forums like TTA are bitter and angry. If you are not, your posts to me will be respectful, insightful and thoughtful. Prove me wrong by your adherence to decent behavior.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-12-2014, 03:06 PM
RE: The Blasphemy Thread
(16-12-2014 03:57 PM)undergroundp Wrote:  Q, you can ignore definitions in English and personal interpretations all you want, but as I pointed out in a previous post,

Quote:in Ancient Greek "blasphemy" meant speaking ill of someone or defaming them.

Ancient Greek happens to be the original language the New Testament was written in, and I happen to be a Greek who has studied Ancient Greek. It's funny that you chose to specifically ignore that post.

No matter what you say, no matter what your interpretations are, the word is Greek and there is no other way it could mean anything else than what I've just pointed out.

Sorry, did not see that post. "Blaspheme" is indeed what you say in Greek. We have the curious conjunction, however, of Jesus saying you can speak against Him but not the Holy Spirit. The context is as I said, the Pharisees had the Spirit of God tugging on them as they say Jesus perform a mighty miracle.

If it has to do with name calling per se, then a Christian with eternal security could say bad thing by accident or in their sleep and lose their assurance and so on, something that is nonsensical.

I'm told atheists on forums like TTA are bitter and angry. If you are not, your posts to me will be respectful, insightful and thoughtful. Prove me wrong by your adherence to decent behavior.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-12-2014, 03:11 PM
RE: The Blasphemy Thread
(17-12-2014 03:06 PM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  
(16-12-2014 03:57 PM)undergroundp Wrote:  Q, you can ignore definitions in English and personal interpretations all you want, but as I pointed out in a previous post,


Ancient Greek happens to be the original language the New Testament was written in, and I happen to be a Greek who has studied Ancient Greek. It's funny that you chose to specifically ignore that post.

No matter what you say, no matter what your interpretations are, the word is Greek and there is no other way it could mean anything else than what I've just pointed out.

Sorry, did not see that post. "Blaspheme" is indeed what you say in Greek. We have the curious conjunction, however, of Jesus saying you can speak against Him but not the Holy Spirit. The context is as I said, the Pharisees had the Spirit of God tugging on them as they say Jesus perform a mighty miracle.

If it has to do with name calling per se, then a Christian with eternal security could say bad thing by accident or in their sleep and lose their assurance and so on, something that is nonsensical.

Semantically and pragmatologically, anyone who has "spoken ill of" the Holy Spirit in here has blasphemed then.

Are you trying to change the meaning of the word?

"Behind every great pirate, there is a great butt."
-Guybrush Threepwood-
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like undergroundp's post
17-12-2014, 03:13 PM
RE: The Blasphemy Thread
(17-12-2014 03:03 PM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  "An act of resistance" is not name calling per se. This is my context-resisting the Spirit's conviction of sin and the need to trust Jesus.
How would you suggest we verbalize that act of resistance, if not in the manner that can be observed in this thread?

(17-12-2014 03:06 PM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  The context is as I said, the Pharisees had the Spirit of God tugging on them as they say Jesus perform a mighty miracle.
No, that's not entirely accurate. That's the context for Mark and Matthew, but not for Luke. I have pointed this out to you twice and you have chosen to ignore it twice. Third time lucky, eh? Laugh out load

(17-12-2014 03:06 PM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  If it has to do with name calling per se, then a Christian with eternal security could say bad thing by accident or in their sleep and lose their assurance and so on, something that is nonsensical.
An omnipotent God should be capable of telling the difference between an intentional remark and an accidental one, no?

[Image: 7oDSbD4.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Vosur's post
17-12-2014, 03:20 PM
RE: The Blasphemy Thread
(17-12-2014 03:11 PM)undergroundp Wrote:  Semantically and pragmatologically, anyone who has "spoken ill of" the Holy Spirit in here has blasphemed then.

Are you trying to change the meaning of the word?

Can't hear you over the ringing of angel trumpets that happens whenever he experiences a moment of cognitive dissonance Dodgy

We'll love you just the way you are
If you're perfect -- Alanis Morissette
(06-02-2014 03:47 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  And I'm giving myself a conclusion again from all the facepalming.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 6 users Like morondog's post
22-12-2014, 01:22 PM
RE: The Blasphemy Thread
(17-12-2014 03:11 PM)undergroundp Wrote:  
(17-12-2014 03:06 PM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  Sorry, did not see that post. "Blaspheme" is indeed what you say in Greek. We have the curious conjunction, however, of Jesus saying you can speak against Him but not the Holy Spirit. The context is as I said, the Pharisees had the Spirit of God tugging on them as they say Jesus perform a mighty miracle.

If it has to do with name calling per se, then a Christian with eternal security could say bad thing by accident or in their sleep and lose their assurance and so on, something that is nonsensical.

Semantically and pragmatologically, anyone who has "spoken ill of" the Holy Spirit in here has blasphemed then.

Are you trying to change the meaning of the word?

No, but the word is contextualized by the concept of something unpardonable and the context of "every blasphemy may be forgiven". The unpardonable sin is the rejection of Christ as Savior.

I'm told atheists on forums like TTA are bitter and angry. If you are not, your posts to me will be respectful, insightful and thoughtful. Prove me wrong by your adherence to decent behavior.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: