A Serious Question For Theists

[Esquilax]

This is more of your bullshit - say "fair enough," then make aq defense. Was it a fair charge or not?

Oh, I can see why that would confuse you: it's called a "nuanced position," and what it means is that I accept that you're partly right, but I disagree with the severity of your charge, as I at least have supporting evidence for my position, making my stance not comparable to GC's.

I'll try to go simpler in future for you.

And I have my experience with you.

And the fact that you think they're at all similar is very amusing.

It was disparaging and aggressive, but it wasn't bullshit.

You think there was anything truthful in that childish insult-barrage? I think that says a lot about what you're trying to do, here.

No, GC did not propose that. You read that into a very brief post of his. If he had had a taker they might have had little difference in opinion regarding the actions of a Christian. We don't know. You engaged in elephant hurling - you asked for a laundry list of specific unambiguous details regarding a subject which you now admit is highly subjective.

The subject in general is highly subjective, but GC's beliefs about it aren't; he set himself up as the judge for this case, the least he could do is let us see the metric by which he'd be judging before he rendered judgment.

Actually think about what you're proposing here; if GC wasn't going to use his own criteria to judge who is and isn't a christian then the conversation becomes completely pointless. "Oh, well I did this and this and this when I believed, and that makes me a christian." "I don't think that makes you a christian, but I'm not going to judge you according to my standards." "Oh... okay then. So, does that mean anyone's a christian?"

If he wasn't going to judge by his standards then there's no failure state for the test he's proposing, only different kinds of personal success, and that's pointless. He isn't challenging anyone in that case.

And if he had committed that fallacy (although I think the fallacy itself is fallacious) it would have been appropriate to call him on it. He doesn't need to provide an exhaustive laundry list of details because you're afraid of what he might do.

Well, he kinda does, as it stops him moving the goalposts, as I think any atheist who has had any experience with this line of questioning suspects will happen. Don't you think it's weird, being asked to take a test without knowing what the questions are?

And why not? Again, someone who claims to have been a CHristian is presumed to have a good idea of what a Christian is. If there are differences they can be discussed and supported Biblically. If GC were then to move goalposts, you could have called him on it.

So, you basically wanted the conversation to devolve into exactly the sort of thing I was trying to prevent, and that the other atheists who responded were uninterested in: a lengthy argument about biblical interpretations that one side of the argument no longer believes to be true, and that neither side has any evidence for one way or the other, in terms of what the original intention was. If you wanted that, maybe you could go to any of the other threads in the christianity section; excuse me for trying to head off a shitshow before it begins and maybe get a different kind of conversation going.

He was properly responding to CD's statement, "it always comes down to "you were doing it wrong". How the holy fuck would you know?"

CD made it about actions ("doing it"). CD properly noted that we wouldn't know if he were doing it wrong or not, so GC asked him what he was doing.

Yeah, so then CD was wrong too, I guess. Cool? Or at least, he was perpetuating the wrong answers to the wrong question.

And maybe they would have come to that conclusion. you keep reading minds despite disparaging others for supposedly doing so.

Yeah, asking someone for a detailed explanation of their position before an argument starts is totally reading his mind.

Good thing you were here, though: to someone who was actually paying attention, it might look like I was trying to avoid making assumptions about someone else's position!