Of what worth is your God?

@fmf said
Bandying about the word "backslider" is just dodging. The question you are desperately trying to sidestep is being posed by an agnostic atheist.

An agnostic atheist, you don't even know what you are, only what you were.

@kellyjay said
An agnostic atheist, you don't even know what you are, only what you were.

I do know what I am. As you say, I am an agnostic atheist.

@kellyjay said
Please, when you get asked a question do put aside everything you know or believe to be true to answer the question? Give me a break, you got an answer, accept it or not.

I am just asking you to explain something you chose to say in public. If you slipped up by saying it, just say so.

@fmf said
I am just asking you to explain something you chose to say in public. If you slipped up by saying it, just say so.

You got an honest answer.

@fmf said
I do know what I am. As you say, I am an agnostic atheist.

Really, is this an honest answer or your dogma speaking?

@kellyjay said
Really, is this an honest answer or your dogma speaking?

It's the most accurate concise description I can come up with. Why would it not be "honest"?

@kellyjay said
You got an honest answer.

I read about your "spiritually speaking" something and the "doctrine is doctrine" thing and I read the reiteration of your religious dogma but you have been very pointedly dodging the question about what moral sense you admit to seeing in Ghost of a Duke's hypothetical.

@fmf said
I read about your "spiritually speaking" something and the "doctrine is doctrine" thing and I read the reiteration of your religious dogma but you have been very pointedly dodging the question about what moral sense you admit to seeing in Ghost of a Duke's hypothetical.

You have a habit of refusing to take plain speech and twisting it into anything other than just what was said. You lose perspective and ability to hear anyone by altering other people’s speech some psycho babble.

@kellyjay said
You have a habit of refusing to take plain speech and twisting it into anything other than just what was said. You lose perspective and ability to hear anyone by altering other people’s speech some psycho babble.

No psychobabble on my part. You are simply stonewalling.

@fmf said
No psychobabble on my part. You are simply stonewalling.

Than tell me the points I have already made. I am not asking for your rejecting babbling but tell me my points.

@kellyjay said
Than tell me the points I have already made. I am not asking for your rejecting babbling but tell me my points.

You have simply restated for the umpteenth time your religious beliefs which relate to "sin" and not morality.

Perhaps inadvertently, you conceded that Ghost of a Duke's hypothetical made some moral sense. Perhaps you regretted admitting that. Your behaviour suggests as much.

I have asked you to explain the moral sense it makes, albeit limited by it not being in line for your "doctrine is doctrine" religious beliefs, but you have sidestepped it and spammed me with generic dogma instead.

Now, your latest passive aggressive gimmick is to ask me to spend my time regurgitating YOUR doctrine back to you. I won't jump through that hoop.

If you stated clearly why you believe Ghost of a Duke's hypothetical made moral sense, show me which post it was in.

It should be a post where you indicate why it made moral sense and not a post where you went on and on and on about how it didn't make sense "scripturally speaking".

@fmf said
You have simply restated for the umpteenth time your religious beliefs which relate to "sin" and not morality.

Perhaps inadvertently, you conceded that Ghost of a Duke's hypothetical made some moral sense. Perhaps you regretted admitting that. Your behaviour suggests as much.

I have asked you to explain the moral sense it makes, albeit limited by it not being in line for ...[text shortened]... d not a post where you went on and on and on about how it didn't make sense "scripturally speaking".

Complaining without comprehension, you didn’t have to agree just understand what was said.

@kellyjay said
Complaining without comprehension, you didn’t have to agree just understand what was said.

I don't have any objection to you saying something I disagree with. However, in this case, I agree with you that Ghost of a Duke's hypothetical made moral sense.

Point out the post where you believe you explained why and how you thought the hypothetical made moral sense [your religious beliefs notwithstanding]. Stop acting like a rabbit caught in headlights.

@fmf said
I don't have any objection to you saying something I disagree with. However, in this case, I agree with you that Ghost of a Duke's hypothetical made moral sense.

Point out the post where you believe you explained why and how you thought the hypothetical made moral sense [your religious beliefs notwithstanding]. Stop acting like a rabbit caught in headlights.

I shared why, you dismissed it out of hand. Suggesting good and loving people are going to be judged and condemned, the claim suggests people really are or can be good and loving. This is where I said I can see his point when we judge ourselves by ourselves which you dismissed.

The thing about evil, it isn't feeling, it isn't a substance, it is something that is done. The evil one is one that does evil, and people do evil deeds as defined by God's standards not ours, but even we acknowledge the wrong we do too, so there is no escape there either by our own words we condemn ourselves. We condemn others for the wrongs we do, we excuse our bad behaving by casting blame elsewhere, and we are unthankful and so on.

I'm not the one babbling once the answer I asked for delivered that would be you. You fail to see things people say to you while you attempt to turn their words into gotcha statements as you psycho-analyzes motives.

@kellyjay said
I shared why, you dismissed it out of hand. Suggesting good and loving people are going to be judged and condemned, the claim suggests people really are or can be good and loving. This is where I said I can see his point when we judge ourselves by ourselves which you dismissed.

The thing about evil, it isn't feeling, it isn't a substance, it is something that is done. The ...[text shortened]... to you while you attempt to turn their words into gotcha statements as you psycho-analyzes motives.

I agree with you that Ghost of a Duke's hypothetical made moral sense.