Prior Book | Prior Chapter | Prior Verse | Next Verse | Next Chapter | Next Book | Viewing NASB and Amplified 2015 | |
NASB | John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. |
AMPLIFIED 2015 | John 1:1 In the beginning [before all time] was the Word (Christ), and the Word was with God, and the Word was God Himself. [Gen 1:1; Is 9:6] |
Subject: how many unforgiven sins are there? |
Bible Note: Hello ebrain, It appears from your responses that I have upset or offended you. That was not my intention. My posts to you were sincere and an attempt to clarify what you were teaching about blasphemy of the Holy Spirit. I'll try again to make my point understood and gain clarification regarding your statements. By the way. Not only have I read the verses in question many many times, I have studied this topic somewhat in depth myself. Thus, the confusion regarding your statement as copied and pasted below for reference. You wrote: "In our Lord's day the unforgivable sin was to describe the Holy Spirit's work, as the work of the Devil, see Matthew 12:22-32, in our day it is calling the Holy Spirit a lier." Once again, whether your intention or not, the simple and plainly put statement clearly stipulates a change. It says, in that time that, and in this time this. You offer: "In resoponse to your latest post let me say that I have allready given you the verses you are asking for, they are 31, and 32 of Ch 12 of Matthew." Yet these verses do nothing to support your statement. There is no indication that blasphemy of the Holy Spirit changed from one thing to the other in one time vs. another. Now lets put the issue of common sense to rest here. As you stated in your post. You have referenced "common sense" before in response to others. Where teaching of scripture is concerned, if common sense is to be applied, it must be on the assumption that many who read the posts on this forum are not well grounded in scripture. For that matter, no offense to anyone, some may also be short on common sense as well. We both have met people in that category. So I think it more appropriate not to rely on the potential common sense (or something in our own "nature") of our readers. Instead, clearly articulated, responsible statements are in order. And if someone, anyone, doesn't understand and asks for clarification; a responsible and clear restructure of your statement or teaching should be given in response. My first post to you was not for my benefit. It was to call attention to a very short declaration of a more complicated subject as though that was all there was to say about it. It was also for the benefit of those readers who may have a difficult time applying their common sense to a topic they are minimally familiar with. Finally ebrain, Please don't be overcome with pride. If someone asks for clarification on your posts, simply assume that they need clarification. Don't assume they are attacking you and stubbornly stand by your original, apparently unclear statement. That isn't teaching. Simple question for clarification. Do you believe that blasphemy of the the Holy Spirit is exactly the same today as it was in the days Jesus walked the earth; or has the criteria changed? Here is an example of a simple and clear statement regarding the topic as offered by Easton's Bible Dictionary. 'Blasphemy against the Holy Ghost (Matt 12:31,32; Mark 3:28,29; Luke 12:10) is regarded by some as a continued and obstinate rejection of the gospel, and hence is an unpardonable sin, simply because as long as a sinner remains in unbelief he voluntarily excludes himself from pardon. Others regard the expression as designating the sin of attributing to the power of Satan those miracles which Christ performed, or generally those works which are the result of the Spirit's agency. (from Easton's Bible Dictionary, PC Study Bible formatted electronic database Copyright © 2003 Biblesoft, Inc. All rights reserved.) With all sincerity, Jeff |