@fmf saidWhy should I ask him?
Why don't you ask him? He has been stonewalling this kind of thing for years and years.
I am curious, why does the question of his belief on this tickle you so much?
@philokalia saidYou also thought Romans1009 was one of the best posters ~ in fact, THE best poster here out of those who posted high volume. Thanks for your evaluations. Very interesting.
Sonship is one of the best posters here, and he does it at a very high volume while being attacked & nit picked.
@philokalia saidIt's a debate and discussion forum. Two things, among many other things, that I find interesting are: [1] the effect that religiosity can have on a person's integrity in terms of intellectual and interpersonal behaviour, and [2] people who propagate morally incoherent creeds because of their superstitious nature [i.e. their belief in supernatural causality]. These things come together in discussions about this belief about torture and ideology and morality and - what often seems to me to be - unprincipled groupism.
I am curious, why does the question of his belief on this tickle you so much?
@fmf saidYou might actually want to consider that people do not want to engage with those who think they are just going effort trolls.
It's a debate and discussion forum. Two things, among many other things, that I find interesting are: [1] the effect that religiosity can have on a person's integrity in terms of intellectual and interpersonal behaviour, and [2] people who propagate morally incoherent creeds because of their superstitious nature [i.e. their belief in supernatural causality]. These things come tog ...[text shortened]... about torture and ideology and morality and - what often seems to me to be - unprincipled groupism.
Thus, when people choose to not interact with someone in a certain way it is not actually a dubious move meant to protect their ideology but rather just a choice to not get bogged down in another person's muck.
And that's healthy. No one should be subjected to trolls.
Indeed, you find these words in the mouth of our savior, and I think they sum up tthis sort of situation well:
Give not that which is holy unto the dogs, neither cast ye your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn again and rend you.
Matthew 7:6
Sometimes a person chooses to be standoffish or disengages not because the arguments are problematic but because the soruce of the arguments cannot be trusted to act in good faith.
@philokalia saidPeople can engage with whoever they want. It's also your prerogative to call people "trolls" if you so wish. One of the biggest, creepiest "trolls" this community has ever seen was Romans1009. I said so at the time. Go ahead: engage whoever you want and call people "trolls". It's the internet.
You might actually want to consider that people do not want to engage with those who think they are just going effort trolls.
@philokalia saidYou're right, maybe I should ignore other people's superstitious "muck" and ideologies sometimes. I am more active at certain times; less so at others. There are people I choose to not interact with too.
Thus, when people choose to not interact with someone in a certain way it is not actually a dubious move meant to protect their ideology but rather just a choice to not get bogged down in another person's muck.
@philokalia saidTheir silence or evasiveness or reluctance - these things are all part of the discourse. People can make of it what they want. People can make what they want of my stances and what I say and don't say.
Sometimes a person chooses to be standoffish or disengages not because the arguments are problematic but because the soruce of the arguments cannot be trusted to act in good faith.
I always 'act in good faith', so to speak, when I post here and I always have. I am candid; I am consistent; I take responsibility for everything I say - stretching back however many years you want; I don't reply in kind when I cop trash talk ~ like chaney3's, or sonship's or Suzianne's or Romans1009's earlier this year. People are well advised to 'act in good faith' and be true to themselves in a community like this.
@philokalia saidchaney3 is a "troll" when he's drunk. Romans1009 was a "troll" 90% of the time. Duchess64 is a "troll", I reckon. I agree that nobody should be subjected to those kinds of posters. Ah yes, but you rated Romans1009 as the best poster on the Spirituality Forum. I suppose one community's "troll", is another man's "best poster". But I agree in principle, no one should be subjected to "trolls".
No one should be subjected to trolls.
@divegeester
I think you are really beating a dead horse.
But since I have both voluntarily linked to Statements of Faith and commented on your specimen of a Belief Statement from 1978, I REQUEST THAT YOU RECIPROCATE.
May we see a Belief Statement with the Christians that YOU have met with or meet with ?
Have you NEVER met with Christians with whom you could share some kind of Statement of Beliefs ?