(September 20, 2012 at 9:50 pm)MysticKnight Wrote: I would...is different then I will.
I would means he would have if he debated you.
Hi MysticKnight,
I know what you are saying but let's look at what godschild said:
Quote:The little boy was the one who challenged me to a debate on scripture, I let him know what swords I would bring to the debate. He took a dive under his round table when he saw the translations I would use. Then he deflects his original statement with this junk. I use the NASB and the ESB because they are recognized as two of the best translations of scripture.
He said "would" because it's in the past tense. "The little boy was [past tense] the one who challenged me.... I let [past tense] him know what swords I would [past] bring to the debate." He could not have written "will" because of what grammarians call "concord" or "agreement of tenses". He was in fact saying he would have a debate with me (he distinctly said he would bring to the debate his silly Bible versions NASB and ESB). That quotation means precisely what it says as clearly as the blazing sun but RaphielDrake refuses to see this because he has a personal vendetta against me from a previous post. Even genkaus saw Raphiel's error and tried to correct him earlier in the thread (if you would look past the dross strewn by RaphielDrake on this thread).
