How often should I sacrifice a beast to appease God?

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
Dino246 said:
Those are all dependent clauses; none stands on its own. If you want them to stand on their own, they must be written as, "He was focusing...", "She was focusing..." and "You are focusing..." or "You're focusing...".

Just accept the correction already.
Click to expand...
Nope. I think the issue being my sentence was complete. Perhaps I should have corrected it by saying something like:

'I was referring to your focusing on'

Or maybe 'I was referring to you're focusing on' would make better grammatical sense to you?
 
BuffyLou said:
I never claimed his death was a 'merely human effort...'.
Click to expand...
No, you didn't. However, you keep using a term that describes human effort to appease an angry god. I added the word, "merely" because the truth is that the death of Jesus on the cross was God's plan and it was not in any way a "human sacrifice" with the motivation of that practiced by the Aztecs and other groups.
 
  • Like
Reactions: EleventhHour
Dino246 said:
No, you didn't. However, you keep using a term that describes human effort to appease an angry god. I added the word, "merely" because the truth is that the death of Jesus on the cross was God's plan and it was not in any way a "human sacrifice" with the motivation of that practiced by the Aztecs and other groups.
Click to expand...
'Human effort to appease angry god' is not the definition of 'human sacrifice'.

However, was God not angry? Does he not need appeasing?
 
Dino246 said:
Meaningless gobbledegook. Try learning proper English.


Actually, you are, because the words, "parables the signified tongue of God" is not a word combination I would use except when quoting you, and it isn't in Scripture.


Yes; an incorrect understanding.


Scripture tells us plainly that parables were used to hide the truth from the unbelieving, not to "teach us how to hear God called walking by faith."

You have taken individual verses or statements from Scripture, discarded the context in which they were written or spoken, and made up your own beliefs around them. You need instruction in English, and then you need instruction in hermeneutics.
Click to expand...


If parables are not the signified tongue of God. . . the poetic language of faith . Then what is it as it is written? The literal tongue? And then no need to hide anything. Simply walk by sight and pretend the kingdom of God comes by observation?

Not today;) . I would rather mix faith in with the temporal things seen and heard .In that way I can rest in the (gospel) His finished labor of love. Hebrew 4)
 
BuffyLou said:
Nope. I think the issue being my sentence was complete.
Click to expand...
That's funny; there's another grammatically incorrect sentence. If you wrote, "I think the issue is that my sentence was incomplete," it would be correct.

BuffyLou said:
Perhaps I should have corrected it by saying something like:

'I was referring to your focusing on'

Or maybe 'I was referring to you're focusing on' would make better grammatical sense to you?
Click to expand...
The bolded version is closer to being grammatically correct, but that is not what you wrote. Even then, "your focus on" would be better.
 
garee said:
If parables are not the signified tongue of God. . . the poetic language of faith . Then what is it as it is written? The literal tongue? And then no need to hide anything. Simply walk by sight and pretend the kingdom of God comes by observation?
Click to expand...
Since you constantly refuse to learn from me, I am not going to waste time explaining what parables are, according to Scripture. Go and look it up for yourself.
 
Dino246 said:
That's funny; there's another grammatically incorrect sentence. If you wrote, "I think the issue is that my sentence was incomplete," it would be correct.


The bolded version is closer to being grammatically correct, but that is not what you wrote. Even then, "your focus on" would be better.
Click to expand...

The issue being THAT my sentence was incomplete.
 
Dino246 said:
That's funny; there's another grammatically incorrect sentence. If you wrote, "I think the issue is that my sentence was incomplete," it would be correct.


The bolded version is closer to being grammatically correct, but that is not what you wrote. Even then, "your focus on" would be better.
Click to expand...
As I said, my sentence was incomplete. I was not writing entirely formally. For example:

'How do you feel about dogs?'

'Don't like them'
 
  • Like
Reactions: Mii
Dino246 said:
No, it is not. Your following sentence demonstrates it; "You were focusing" is correct grammar for the past tense, and "You are focusing" is correct grammar for the present tense. "You're" is a contraction of "You are".


No, it doesn't.

"Your focusing having been interrupted, you demonstrated some irritation" would be correct, because it makes "Your focusing" part of a dependent clause. The sentence in question, "Your focusing on whom it was that had him killed," does not have "Your focusing" as part of a dependent clause.

"Your" is always possessive. "You're" is never possessive.

It's time to concede and accept the correction.
Click to expand...

Absolutely correct on the grammar. :);)
 
  • Like
Reactions: SoulWeaver
BuffyLou said:
I GOT IT FROM your focusing on whom it was that had him killed.
Click to expand...
Here are your words from post #89: "Are you suggesting Jesus did not intend to be arrested and executed? "

Yes, I explained that Jesus was killed by the Romans after being handed over by the Jews. I did not say or imply anything about Jesus' intentions in that post. Your question was a non sequitur.

BuffyLou said:
I don't see why 'you're' would make more grammatical than 'your' in that sentence.
Click to expand...
"Your" is possessive, and it makes the sentence incomplete. Although you may have been meaning "the focusing that I was doing" making the possessive sense valid, you still would have to add more words to make a complete thought. "You're" would be correct, given the other words you actually wrote. It's just that simple.

Many people are either ignorant or confused about the distinction; you are the first person I have encountered who has argued about it. Once you understand that the words don't mean the same thing at all, you likely will not make the same mistake.
 
Dino246 said:
Here are your words from post #89: "Are you suggesting Jesus did not intend to be arrested and executed? "

Yes, I explained that Jesus was killed by the Romans after being handed over by the Jews. I did not say or imply anything about Jesus' intentions in that post. Your question was a non sequitur.


"Your" is possessive, and it makes the sentence incomplete. Although you may have been meaning "the focusing that I was doing" making the possessive sense valid, you still would have to add more words to make a complete thought. "You're" would be correct, given the other words you actually wrote. It's just that simple.

Many people are either ignorant or confused about the distinction; you are the first person I have encountered who has argued about it. Once you understand that the words don't mean the same thing at all, you likely will not make the same mistake.
Click to expand...
Fine.

'I got it from you are focusing on whom had him killed'

Doesn't make any sense to me but okay.

Sorry.

THAT doesn't make any sense to me, but 'okay'.
 
BuffyLou said:
Fine.

'I got it from you are focusing on whom had him killed'

Doesn't make any sense to me but okay.

Sorry.

THAT doesn't make any sense to me, but 'okay'.
Click to expand...
Alright. I have given you the explanation consistent with what an English teacher would give you. How about you explain your understanding of your statement as you wrote it and of the grammatical rules that guide it.
 
BuffyLou said:
Fine.

'I got it from you are focusing on whom had him killed'

Doesn't make any sense to me but okay.

Sorry.

THAT doesn't make any sense to me, but 'okay'.
Click to expand...

You are confusing the noun focus and the verb focus.

Possessive would have been correct if it was a noun..

Example...................Your focus is on the wrong item.
 
Dino246 said:
Alright. I have given you the explanation consistent with what an English teacher would give you. How about you explain your understanding of your statement as you wrote it and of the grammatical rules that guide it.
Click to expand...

She has confused the noun and the verb..... "focus"
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dino246
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back