Is death just another life?

[Derf]

Why do you do this? I know you understand the point.

You're lazy with the words you use. You say such openly self-contradictory thing as a person's actions demonstrate that justification does not rely on one actions because you don't think as you type. Even if the point you're trying to make is a valid one, you're lack of care for HOW you say it gets in the way of your ability to communicate.

The point is that you shouldn't settle for "good enough". If you're wrong a lot then correct yourself a lot. If you're wrong a little then correct yourself a little. If you're not wrong at all then push to find better ways to communicate. There is always some sort of way to improve but only if you care about improving yourself.

Maybe it's his lazy way of asking you to clarify.

 

[Gary K]

Why do you do this? I know you understand the point.

You're lazy with the words you use. You say such openly self-contradictory thing as a person's actions demonstrate that justification does not rely on one actions because you don't think as you type. Even if the point you're trying to make is a valid one, you're lack of care for HOW you say it gets in the way of your ability to communicate.

The point is that you shouldn't settle for "good enough". If you're wrong a lot then correct yourself a lot. If you're wrong a little then correct yourself a little. If you're not wrong at all then push to find better ways to communicate. There is always some sort of way to improve but only if you care about improving yourself.

I have a lazy way of understanding what point? Remember I don't believe in dispensationalism.

 

[Clete]

I have a lazy way of understanding what point? Remember I don't believe in dispensationalism.

Gary, I keep trying with you and keep finding myself literally dumbfounded. No one ever said anything about you having a lazy way of understanding anything and haven't said a single syllable to you that would make anyone believe that I was even slightly alluding to dispensationalism, of all things.

As I and at least one other person has explicitly explained to you already, I was simply pointing out the self-contradictory manner in which you chose to word one of your posts.

If you don't get it then you're either stupid or are trying to be obtuse. In either case, I don't care to discuss it any longer.

 

[Gary K]

Gary, I keep trying with you and keep finding myself literally dumbfounded. No one ever said anything about you having a lazy way of understanding anything and haven't said a single syllable to you that would make anyone believe that I was even slightly alluding to dispensationalism, of all things.

As I and at least one other person has explicitly explained to you already, I was simply pointing out the self-contradictory manner in which you chose to word one of your posts.

If you don't get it then you're either stupid or are trying to be obtuse. In either case, I don't care to discuss it any longer.

Nope. I don't get it.

 

[Clete]

Nope. I don't get it.

Liar

 

[Gary K]

Liar

You're such a good guy.

 

[Gary K]

Liar

Another mind reader?

 

[JudgeRightly]

You're such a good guy.

You're too nice!

Another mind reader?

“Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravenous wolves. You will know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes from thornbushes or figs from thistles? Even so, every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit. A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, nor a bad tree bear good fruit. Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. Therefore by their fruits you will know them.

Bible Gateway passage: Matthew 7:15-20 - New King James Version

You Will Know Them by Their Fruits - “Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravenous wolves. You will know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes from thornbushes or figs from thistles? Even so, every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree...

www.biblegateway.com

 

[Clete]

You're such a good guy.

You're such a fool.

 

[Clete]

Another mind reader?

On the contrary, Gary. It's called discernment. If you were actually stupid enough not to get such a childishly simple point, you wouldn't be able to use the keyboard to type your posts. You're just being stubbornly idiotic and doing so on purpose.

 

[Gary K]

On the contrary, Gary. It's called discernment. If you were actually stupid enough not to get such a childishly simple point, you wouldn't be able to use the keyboard to type your posts. You're just being stubbornly idiotic and doing so on purpose.

Thanks for the compliment.

 

[JudgeRightly]

Thanks for the compliment.

Don't be a troll, Gary.

 

[Derf]

Don't be a troll, Gary.

Neither you, @Clete.

@Gary K made a reasonable comment to your reasonable comment, asking you a question, and you can give a reasonable answer. Give each other the benefit of the doubt for a moment and wrestle to understand each other's points before lapsing into nonsense and name-calling.

 

[Right Divider]

Neither you, @Clete.

@Gary K made a reasonable comment to your reasonable comment, asking you a question, and you can give a reasonable answer. Give each other the benefit of the doubt for a moment and wrestle to understand each other's points before lapsing into nonsense and name-calling.

Clete gave Gary K many, many chances to respond reasonably and he failed time and time again.

Gary K seems to think that any two opinions are equally valid. He cannot understand the most basic concepts regarding logic and reason.

Don't be like Gary.

 

[Clete]

Neither you, @Clete.

@Gary K made a reasonable comment to your reasonable comment, asking you a question, and you can give a reasonable answer. Give each other the benefit of the doubt for a moment and wrestle to understand each other's points before lapsing into nonsense and name-calling.

I explained it as clear as day as did at least one other person and his response is "Nope. Don't get it."

He's an idiot.

 

[Derf]

Clete gave Gary K many, many chances to respond reasonably and he failed time and time again.

Gary K seems to think that any two opinions are equally valid. He cannot understand the most basic concepts regarding logic and reason.

Don't be like Gary.

Reminded me of the Be Like Bill meme generator:

 

[Derf]

I explained it as clear as day as did at least one other person and his response is "Nope. Don't get it."

He's an idiot.

@JudgeRightly explained it fairly clearly, but you never did. But JR wasn't quite getting @Gary K's point (meaning Gary could have been clearer before getting his own panties in a wad). Here's his post:

What the thief was demonstrating in his actions on the cross is that Jesus forgives us and sanctifies us at the same time and that it is impossible to separate the two. This also demonstrates that justification does not rely on what we do, but on what Jesus did for us.

His point was that the thief's application of salvation to himself (forgiveness of our sins and changes to our mindset based on that forgiveness, or sanctification), while recognizing he deserved his fate (confession of sins) and calling on Christ for mercy, demonstrates that justification is not by anything we can do, but purely on Christ's sacrifice on the cross.

 

[Gary K]

@JudgeRightly explained it fairly clearly, but you never did. But JR wasn't quite getting @Gary K's point (meaning Gary could have been clearer before getting his own panties in a wad). Here's his post:

His point was that the thief's application of salvation to himself (forgiveness of our sins and changes to our mindset based on that forgiveness, or sanctification), while recognizing he deserved his fate (confession of sins) and calling on Christ for mercy, demonstrates that justification is not by anything we can do, but purely on Christ's sacrifice on the cross.

I figured the point was so clear it was self explanatory.

 

[Clete]

@JudgeRightly explained it fairly clearly, but you never did.

Yes, I did.

I put the two contradicting statements in bold letters to begin with, which was plenty clear enough to begin with and then explained what I was getting at further in a later post.

But JR wasn't quite getting @Gary K's point (meaning Gary could have been clearer before getting his own panties in a wad). Here's his post:

His point was that the thief's application of salvation to himself (forgiveness of our sins and changes to our mindset based on that forgiveness, or sanctification), while recognizing he deserved his fate (confession of sins) and calling on Christ for mercy, demonstrates that justification is not by anything we can do, but purely on Christ's sacrifice on the cross.

His point ISN'T the point! As I explained very clearly to him!

The point is that, regardless of whatever the point is he's trying to make, his own mental laziness gets in the way of his ability to communicate that point!

 

[Clete]

I figured the point was so clear it was self explanatory.

No you didn't! You didn't even think through what you were saying at all!

I guarantee that you think that I was refuting the point you made!