(January 6, 2018 at 8:43 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote: The OP doesnt answer his question at all:

(January 3, 2018 at 8:13 pm)Gawdzilla Sama Wrote: I don't mean someone who claims to be a Christian and can't tell you what that means. I mean someone who lives exactly like the NT says they should live.

It's one fucking sentence. Have someone read it to you.

(January 6, 2018 at 8:53 pm)Gawdzilla Sama Wrote:

(January 6, 2018 at 8:43 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote: The OP doesnt answer his question at all:

(January 3, 2018 at 8:13 pm)Gawdzilla Sama Wrote: I don't mean someone who claims to be a Christian and can't tell you what that means. I mean someone who lives exactly like the NT says they should live.

It's one fucking sentence. Have someone read it to you.

You're acting like a real nut job.

(January 6, 2018 at 6:28 pm)Gawdzilla Sama Wrote:

(January 6, 2018 at 5:46 pm)RoadRunner79 Wrote: Of what???  Did you make a falsifiable claim that I missed?

And to re-enforce what I said previously.  I make no claims of being perfect, or following perfectly.  I'm sure that I am wrong on things, I fail to do what I should often, as well as want things and give into desires which are not of God.  If this is what you are talking about, then I am guilty. 

What I understand, as a cafeteria Christian is different though;  not all Christians that  I see pick and choose what they want or have that kind of view.  It's not all about me, and I'm not always right.

You deny being a cafeteria christian. And you'll dance all night to avoid facing the facts.

To the best of my knowledge yes... I don’t believe that this is true. If it is, then I want to address and correct the issue.

You are making very broad and vague generalizations. I don’t think your accusation of dancing around the facts have much substance, if you don’t offer some type of facts or at minimum a falsifiable claim. At best you have a feeling and a seemingly poorly defined one at that.

I think you just digging a deeper hole, if you don’t address what others say, and keep doubling down on, with little of anything of substance.

(January 6, 2018 at 8:51 pm)Neo-Scholastic Wrote: Right, the OP says living exactly like the NT says a Christian should life. Well, Gawzilla...what exactly do you think it says? If you're incapable of giving us your executive summary and maybe an example or two then don't blame our reading skills. You haven't written anything! We cannot read you mind.

Yeah, not sure why he won't answer or why he keeps acting as though we can't read it lol.

(January 6, 2018 at 9:00 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote:

(January 6, 2018 at 8:53 pm)Gawdzilla Sama Wrote: It's one fucking sentence. Have someone read it to you.

You're acting like a real nut job.

Nope, I ask a single question. Your dunk-and-weave is completely expected.

---

(January 6, 2018 at 9:02 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote:

(January 6, 2018 at 8:51 pm)Neo-Scholastic Wrote: Right, the OP says living exactly like the NT says a Christian should life. Well, Gawzilla...what exactly do you think it says? If you're incapable of giving us your executive summary and maybe an example or two then don't blame our reading skills. You haven't written anything! We cannot read you mind.

Yeah, not sure why he won't answer or why he keeps acting as though we can't read it lol.

If you can read one sentence then you can answer that sentence.

---

(January 6, 2018 at 9:02 pm)RoadRunner79 Wrote:

(January 6, 2018 at 6:28 pm)Gawdzilla Sama Wrote: You deny being a cafeteria christian. And you'll dance all night to avoid facing the facts.

To the best of my knowledge yes... I don’t believe that this is true. If it is, then I want to address and correct the issue.

You are making very broad and vague generalizations. I don’t think your accusation of dancing around the facts have much substance, if you don’t offer some type of facts or at minimum a falsifiable claim. At best you have a feeling and a seemingly poorly defined one at that.

I think you just digging a deeper hole, if you don’t address what others say, and keep doubling down on,  with little of anything of substance.

It's not vague, it's quite succinct. You're inability to reply is just the entertaining part.

Oh... in that case; I’ll keep my answer succinct.
Yes.

(January 6, 2018 at 9:15 pm)Gawdzilla Sama Wrote:

(January 6, 2018 at 9:00 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote: You're acting like a real nut job.

Nope, I ask a single question. Your dunk-and-weave is completely expected.

---

(January 6, 2018 at 9:02 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote: Yeah, not sure why he won't answer or why he keeps acting as though we can't read it lol.

If you can read one sentence then you can answer that sentence.

---

(January 6, 2018 at 9:02 pm)RoadRunner79 Wrote: To the best of my knowledge yes... I don’t believe that this is true. If it is, then I want to address and correct the issue.

You are making very broad and vague generalizations. I don’t think your accusation of dancing around the facts have much substance, if you don’t offer some type of facts or at minimum a falsifiable claim. At best you have a feeling and a seemingly poorly defined one at that.

I think you just digging a deeper hole, if you don’t address what others say, and keep doubling down on,  with little of anything of substance.

It's not vague, it's quite succinct. You're inability to reply is just the entertaining part.

You know exactly what you're doing with dodging our question and trying to turn it around on us saying we are not "reading the OP correctly." Extremely immature of you.

Anyway, clearly you are not interested in discussion. I would suggest RR and Neo not waste their time.

(January 6, 2018 at 9:20 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote:

(January 6, 2018 at 9:15 pm)Gawdzilla Sama Wrote: Nope, I ask a single question. Your dunk-and-weave is completely expected.

---

If you can read one sentence then you can answer that sentence.

---

It's not vague, it's quite succinct. You're inability to reply is just the entertaining part.

You know exactly what you're doing with dodging our question and trying to turn it around on us saying we are not "reading the OP correctly." Extremely immature of you.

Anyway, clearly you are not interested in discussion. I would suggest RR and Neo not waste their time.

Yeah... I’ll change my answer to goodbye!

The first one to flee.

The problem here is whether or not the believers will lie or face the truth.

If they answer "yes", then we know they're lying. If they answer "no", then they admit they're cafeteria christians.

The really funny part is that this was given to me by a Jesuit. Nothing like 'em for nasty questions.

Oh, and the waffling and personal attacks we've seen here were predicted by the good priest back in 1973.

I think it's funny that some atheists here think they know what the bible says, argue with some theist who doesn't know what the bible says, then the atheist gets to argue from both ends such as erroneous paradox's (and this thread)