Sorry, you gave me authorisation to speak for you when you went on a public forum and said something incorrect. That's how it works.I don't remember giving you authorization to speak for me.
Yes, you are. Wrong in quite a lot of ways. First, although China is technically a Communist country, take it from one who's lived here for many years that Chinese people are not actually Communists. They don't really care about Communism, and they probably don't know anything about Marx except that he was someone they had to study in school.But of course, I can understand that you'd be tempted to do so since you're likely existing and breathing upon a Bolshevik cigarette. Am I wrong to surmise this? Am I wrong to not demand that both you and cvanwey come clean on your respective positions on why this matter is so very important?
Second, I'm not Chinese myself, I just live here.
And third, it doesn't actually matter where we come from or why we think what we think. Play the ball, not the man, and all that.
Actually, what he said was that he wasn't addressing the moral implications in that post - not that this thread should not discuss them. Didn't take us long to get to morality, though; and, as usual, it didn't take you long to throw in the red herring of "you're not allowed to say anything until you've met Philo's standards".I love the way you accuse me of doing what it is that you, yourself, are doing. And if the Bible does indeed 'endorse' slavery as you say, then am I by all means to affirm the consequent that you allege exists, especially when @cvanwey in his OP has stated that this thread is supposed to avoid discussing "the moral implications"?
Yes to both of those. There is no Communistic chutzpah, you are using simple apologetic tactics. Slavery is endorsed by the Bible, the character "The God of the Bible" does obviously approve of it, and yes, this is a problem for Christians who need to believe that the Bible teaches ethical behaviour.No, I'm rather sitting here witnessing the travesty of interlocution that you and cvanwey are attempting to bring about here. And do I call it a travesty? Yes, because nothing is really as "simple" as you would like to make it out to be for the common masses. Can you assure me that there is no Communistic chutzpah or other atheistic obfuscating banter being plied here on your account, IA? Or will your retort "simply" be to chalk up my response as typical "apologetics tactics," as cvanwey is often prone to do?
Upvote
0