And it is commendable and a fruit of the Spirit to come into a thread and pretend to be about having a conversation or a debate when the real intention is to accuse and blame and offend? So Jesus lauds dishonesty as well as needless hostility.
And when you use offensive language with the intention of causing people to be offended and the targets of your abuse get offended it's their choice.
Wow.
I think we have a very different construction on reality.
Not that
that is a ragingly new or novel idea.
BTW,
THIS:
"as these are your defining heresies. The additional heresy of Predestination of the Reprobate is indeed found in a subgroup only."
is offensive language.
So what. It's also just annalex being annalex . . . doing what annalex thinks/feels is the most righteous thing for annalex to do. So what.
Yeah, I could rant and rave and feel all affronted about it--my choice.
I'd rather give annalex the freedom to be annalex and take for myself the freedom to respond as me . . . hopefully with some caring as well as some points and wording triggering thought and coming out of a caring as well as an affinity for vigorous fun exchanges without any chips on my shoulder.
Was that why Christ used offensive language? Was that His goal?
Not mine.
The desire is to be thought provoking, not offense provoking. I realize both tend to occur in many people together. Not exactly my problem.
I suspect Christ's desire was to be thought provoking.
In some persons and constructions on reality . . . being thought provoking is a major challenge. Perhaps offense has to come first, for many. Their psychology. Can't change their psychology. Perhaps their psychology can be a lever, though.
No guarantees, certainly. Many religious rulers walked away more outraged at Jesus than ever. Some few evidently woke up and were saved. Maybe He did something right--even in offending them.