04 Mar 17
Originally posted by apathistAhhh, no! Thrown out is not the same as leaving. Satan wanted to be like God, he wanted to be God and the perpetuation of this is seen in the garden with Adam and Eve when he lied to them.
The Christian God is busy harvesting souls. Lucifer was so disgusted he left the God realm.
And God cannot stop it.
Isaiah 14:11-13 King James Version (KJV)
11 Thy pomp is brought down to the grave, and the noise of thy viols: the worm is spread under thee, and the worms cover thee. 12 How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! how art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations! 13 For thou hast said in thine heart, I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God: I will sit also upon the mount of the congregation, in the sides of the north:
And God did stop it, he is the one in control.
Originally posted by FMFI asked you about your moral compass. It appears to be completely broken.
I asked you about your moral compass. It appears to be completely broken. You are deeming the murder of children ~ being deliberately sacrificed ~ in worship of "Satan" to be the moral equivalent of somebody not believing in the existence pf "Satan" and vowing to do no harm to children. Your moral compass does not enable you to differentiate. But I take it that you don't want to talk about that.
Do you believe everyones moral compass should work in the same way if it is working right and not 'broken'?
05 Mar 17
Originally posted by FetchmyjunkIf you have actually read and understood anything I have written on the subject of morality, you will already know my answer to this.
Do you believe everyones moral compass should work in the same way if it is working right and not 'broken'?
Originally posted by FMFI have and do. If you say that his moral compass is 'broken' then how do you know that yours isn't the one that's broken if he got his morals the same way that you got yours.
If you have actually read and understood anything I have written on the subject of morality, you will already know my answer to this.
Originally posted by FetchmyjunkI perceive his moral compass as broken - as compared to mine - for the reasons I explained in full on earlier threads when these matters were discussed in detail, and which you are obviously (and characteristically) now ignoring.
I have and do. If you say that his moral compass is 'broken' then how do you know that yours isn't the one that's broken if he got his morals the same way that you got yours.
If you're interested in my views on the issues surrounding people disagreeing about what is and isn't morally sound, see Thread 171350 or Thread 170817 among others.
I perceive your behaviour of asking me questions that you have already asked, ignoring the answers, and then asking about the same things again and again and again, as trolling.
FMF: If you have actually read and understood anything I have written on the subject of morality, you will already know my answer to this.If - as you claim - you have "read and understood" what I have written in the past, please summarize what my viewpoint is on disagreements on moral issues. If you get it more or less right, I will acknowledge that you have indeed "read and understood".
Originally posted by Fetchmyjunk
I have and do.
Originally posted by FMFI am not ignoring what you have said, I would like to know what you think justifies the idea that your moral sensibilities are correct and his are incorrect if both of you obtained your moral sensibilities from your nature and nurture respectively. In other words what makes your nature and nurture the correct place to get the correct morals from and his nature and nurture the incorrect place to get the correct morals from?
I perceive his moral compass as broken - as compared to mine - for the reasons I explained in full on earlier threads when these matters were discussed in detail, and which you are obviously (and characteristically) now ignoring.
If you're interested in my views on the issues surrounding people disagreeing about what is and isn't morally sound, see [threadid ...[text shortened]... oring the answers, and then asking about the same things again and again and again, as trolling.
Originally posted by FetchmyjunkI think you are just trolling me. If you're genuinely interested, go back and browse the two threads I gave you links to.
I would like to know what you think justifies the idea that your moral sensibilities are correct and his are incorrect if both of you obtained your moral sensibilities from your nature and nurture respectively.
Originally posted by FMFI am not trolling you. The question I am asking you is based on everything you have said so far about your own moral sensibilities. You got your moral sensibilities from your 'nature and nurture' he got his moral sensibilities from his 'nature and nurture', so why do you think that your nature and nurture provides you with the correct morals and his 'nature and nurture' provides him with the incorrect morals?
I think you are just trolling me. If you're genuinely interested, go back and browse the two threads I gave you links to.
Originally posted by FetchmyjunkCheckout the threads where we discussed this before.
I am not trolling you. The question I am asking you is based on everything you have said so far about your own moral sensibilities. You got your moral sensibilities from your 'nature and nurture' he got his moral sensibilities from his 'nature and nurture', so why do you think that your nature and nurture provides you with the correct morals and his 'nature and nurture' provides him with the incorrect morals?