God is love, Love is not Jealous, God is a Jealous god???

[Bradskii]

God did not consent. It's still adultery.

So is cohabiting with another person in a long term relationship. To which God wouldn't consent either. If you sleep with someone else, it's cheating. If you have your partner's consent, it ain't.

Have you ever used a phrase similar to 'Hey, guess I might have been wrong there' at any time?

 

[Bradskii]

You are not persuaded there are "cattle," therefore "cattle" must not exist.

What? Is that a non sequitur prior to you answering the question or one instead of answering the question. Because the question still stands.

 

[Paulomycin]

So is cohabiting with another person in a long term relationship. To which God wouldn't consent either. If you sleep with someone else, it's cheating. If you have your partner's consent, it ain't.

Who made that up?

Have you ever used a phrase similar to 'Hey, guess I might have been wrong there' at any time?

I'll only admit to being wrong about objective opinions. That's the only thing that counts. You're not quite there yet.

 

[Paulomycin]

What? Is that a non sequitur prior to you answering the question or one instead of answering the question. Because the question still stands.

You're still conflating, "one that defers to something that is right" with "one who is right."

I don't claim to be the one who's always right. I defer to an external source of right.

 

[Bradskii]

Who made that up?



I'll only admit to being wrong about objective opinions. That's the only thing that counts. You're not quite there yet.

Let's focus. The question has been laying there unanswered for quite some time. You have a habit of bouncing around with nonsequiturs and made up phrases to avoid answering simple questions that will progress the conversation.

Here it is again:

'So...still waiting to know if the information that you get from God means that you are always right. Or whether you make your own mind up on occasion.'

Give it your best shot please.

 

[Bradskii]

You're still conflating, "one that defers to something that is right" with "one who is right."

I don't claim to be the one who's always right. I defer to an external source of right.

So you accept what God tells you. And I'm agreeing with you that God is always right. And that you accept ('defer to' if you like) his decision. So I ask you about a moral problem: Is the answer A or B? Having checked with God, you say that B is the right answer.

So you, deferring to God each time, will always be right. Agreed?

 

[Paulomycin]

If you sleep with someone else, it's cheating. If you have your partner's consent, it ain't.

^ Who made that up?

Let's focus. The question has been laying there unanswered for quite some time. You have a habit of bouncing around with nonsequiturs and made up phrases to avoid answering simple questions that will progress the conversation.

I think you're assuming it can be answered only one way.

'So...still waiting to know if the information that you get from God means that you are always right. Or whether you make your own mind up on occasion.'

Moral information? No.

^ That's my actual answer. Please deal with it as I stated it.

 

[Paulomycin]

So you, deferring to God each time, will always be right. Agreed?

^ This literally doesn't make any sense. If I'm deferring to another source of morality, then I'm not the one that's "right." DUH?!??

 

[Bradskii]

^ This literally doesn't make any sense. If I'm deferring to another source of morality, then I'm not the one that's "right." DUH?!??

OK, no problem. You didn't do the hard yards working out an answer But you'll have the right answer to said problem because it comes from God.

Agreed?

 

[Paulomycin]

OK, no problem. You didn't do the hard yards working out an answer But you'll have the right answer to said problem because it comes from God.

Agreed?

But that doesn't make me a primary "source" or an "oracle" in any sense.

 

[Bradskii]

But that doesn't make me a primary "source" or an "oracle" in any sense.

No. But you'd have the right answer. Agreed?

 

[Paulomycin]

No. But you'd have the right answer. Agreed?

Pfft, a secondary source at best.

 

[Bradskii]

Pfft, a secondary source at best.

Good grief man. Yes. God is the primary source. And you are therefore the secondary.

OK. We have that sorted.

So if the primary source - God, can never be wrong, then if He gives you the answer to any given problem then you will then have the right answer.

OK. We have that sorted as well.

And if you, as the secondary source, have this correct answer then I can check with you to see what it is.

And that's been agreed. We're going great here...

Now, here is (at so very long last) the nitty gritty question: Do you always act as the secondary source OR are you, on ocassion, the primary source? That is, do you make decisions yourself?

 

[Paulomycin]

Now, here is (at so very long last) the nitty gritty question: Do you always act as the secondary source OR are you, on ocassion, the primary source? That is, do you make decisions yourself?

Can you even remember the petty "gotcha" you were trying to push to begin with?

 

[Bradskii]

Can you even remember the petty "gotcha" you were trying to push to begin with?

I don't do gotchas. What I do is ask people questions and see where it leads.

So far we have got to a point where you (secondary source) have the correct information from God (primary source) to a given problem - assuming that you have been given it.

Now the obvious follow up from that is how do we know you are right if you have made a decision on a similar problem yourself. If I'm asking you for advice, is the answer from God via you or is it just from you?

Now this is blazingly simple. Don't answer this question with another. No non sequitors. Don't uproot the goalposts again. I'd honestly appreciate an answer. It's a question that I've asked many times before over the years and I've never really got a straight up and down, honest to God answer.

You could be the first!

 

[Clizby WampusCat]

Then they can take it up with me personally.

This is something that can and should be discussed. It's actually an entire category of Christian apologetics itself. I'm not afraid of it. Should I be? Let's go.

No one said you are but I don't think you get to make the rules here. It is against the rules for me to go into why I believe God is not good. I am not going to talk about it.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

Good grief man. Yes. God is the primary source. And you are therefore the secondary.

OK. We have that sorted.

So if the primary source - God, can never be wrong, then if He gives you the answer to any given problem then you will then have the right answer.

OK. We have that sorted as well.

And if you, as the secondary source, have this correct answer then I can check with you to see what it is.

And that's been agreed. We're going great here...

Now, here is (at so very long last) the nitty gritty question: Do you always act as the secondary source OR are you, on ocassion, the primary source? That is, do you make decisions yourself?

Actually, I'd think that a basic Christian who lives today in 'America' is on a tertiary level at best when it comes to sources, being that the Bible is not only ancient, but foreign in both language and culture.

And unless a Christian is of the more 'charismatic' strain, she would be very hard pressed to say that she has a direct hotline to God for "correct information" that is in any way relevant, let alone comprehensive, for addressing all of life's little epistemological and axiological inquiries that most of us might have ... ... ...

 

[Bradskii]

Actually, I'd think that a basic Christian who lives today in 'America' is on a tertiary level at best when it comes to sources, being that the Bible is not only ancient, but foreign in both language and culture.

And unless a Christian is of the more 'charismatic' strain, she would be very hard pressed to say that she has a direct hotline to God for "correct information" that is in any way relevant, let alone comprehensive, for addressing all of life's little epistemological and axiological inquiries that most of us might have ... ... ...

No argumemt there, 2Phil. But I can only go with what Paul is telling me.

 

[Paulomycin]

Now this is blazingly simple. Don't answer this question with another. No non sequitors. Don't uproot the goalposts again. I'd honestly appreciate an answer. It's a question that I've asked many times before over the years and I've never really got a straight up and down, honest to God answer.

Then you're playing gotcha. You're interpreting everything in the most snap-judgmental way possible.

Now the obvious follow up from that is how do we know you are right if you have made a decision on a similar problem yourself. If I'm asking you for advice, is the answer from God via you or is it just from you?

The straight answer: You ask me for the external citations in the Bible (the special revelation of God), if I fail to cite them already.

Why can't you figure that out? I'm a generic Bible-thumping fundie. What else would you expect me to say?

 

[Paulomycin]

No one said you are but I don't think you get to make the rules here. It is against the rules for me to go into why I believe God is not good. I am not going to talk about it.

THE rules are, "You don't get to ban an entire category of apologetics." Period. There must have been some sort of mistake.