Furtiveness

If the questions posted to you this forum cause you to be furtive in your replies, what do you think that says about you and your beliefs?

@divegeester said
If the questions posted to you this forum cause you to be furtive in your replies, what do you think that says about you and your beliefs?

Ironic coming from one of the most furtive posters in this forum.

I think a lot of users here try to hang one another publicly for small disagreements about the wording of things and huge extrapolations from the initial posts.... So people try to be careful in what they say, and that makes them seem furtive.

In a real sense, though, we are judging someone from afar when we make these accusations.

And that isn't good.

@secondson said
Ironic coming from one of the most furtive posters in this forum.

Do you have anything of substance to contribute other than your dislike for me?

@philokalia said
I think a lot of users here try to hang one another publicly for small disagreements about the wording of things and huge extrapolations from the initial posts.... So people try to be careful in what they say, and that makes them seem furtive.

In a real sense, though, we are judging someone from afar when we make these accusations.

And that isn't good.

This is a debate forum and I try very hard to bring specific topics into laser focus with the intention of driving unequivocal responses. I am more than happy for people to take the same approach with me.

@divegeester said
If the questions posted to you this forum cause you to be furtive in your replies, what do you think that says about you and your beliefs?

Says you respond to talk rather than understand

@secondson said
Ironic coming from one of the most furtive posters in this forum.

What definition of "furtive" are you using when you claim this about divegeester?

@fmf said
What definition of "furtive" are you using when you claim this about divegeester?

The same definition I used when I asked divegeester if he was being furtive in my last post in the compounded error thread.

The same definition divegeester used when he accused sonship of being furtive. The definition found in a dictionary. 🙄

@secondson said
The same definition I used when I asked divegeester if he was being furtive in my last post in the compounded error thread.

The same definition divegeester used when he accused sonship of being furtive. The definition found in a dictionary. 🙄

What is the definition you are using? I suspect you aren't using it properly. divegeester is demonstrative, his ideas out in the open, he tends to be unequovical, candid, forthright perhaps to a fault. But "furtiveness"? Huh? What definition are you using? Type it here on this thread about "Furtiveness".

@divegeester said
Do you have anything of substance to contribute other than your dislike for me?

You've accused me of disliking you before sometime ago.

I think now that it's because you're projecting that sentiment onto me because that's how you feel about me.

You're not my favorite poster, and I am in disagreement with you on many levels, but I assure you that I have no negative feels toward you on a personal level.

I'm sure you're a perfectly respectable person in the real world.

@secondson said
You've accused me of disliking you before sometime ago.

I think now that it's because you're projecting that sentiment onto me because that's how you feel about me.

You're not my favorite poster, and I am in disagreement with you on many levels, but I assure you that I have no negative feels toward you on a personal level.

I'm sure you're a perfectly respectable person in the real world.

Thank you.

@divegeester said
This is a debate forum and I try very hard to bring specific topics into laser focus with the intention of driving unequivocal responses. I am more than happy for people to take the same approach with me.

I do not think that you are actually doing that, though.

You are forcing the covnersation into specific sets of words that are not appropriate to the circumstance, and you are ignoring the nuances of others.

This is actually the exact opposite of the proper sort of focus that you should have in a discussion.

You are only focusing on your own perspectives and trying to cram everyone else's ideas into your own perspective. That is not how a debate should unfold.

@philokalia said
I do not think that you are actually doing that, though.

You are forcing the covnersation into specific sets of words that are not appropriate to the circumstance, and you are ignoring the nuances of others.

This is actually the exact opposite of the proper sort of focus that you should have in a discussion.

You are only focusing on your own perspectives ...[text shortened]... ng to cram everyone else's ideas into your own perspective. That is not how a debate should unfold.

In politics and in economics there can be much blurring of the edges in debate; in religion, where the stakes are eternal life in heaven or eternal life in hell, there cannot be any unequivocality whatsoever.

Answers to questions about salvation qualifications, such as believing or not in the trinity (or any other doctrine) must always start with a YES or a NO, there can be no other way. A qualification or explaination may follow, but it’s YES of NO to start. Clear, unambiguous, no furtiveness.

What you see with sonship in the “calling out thread” is a Christian equivocating over an eternal life issue. There is no excuse for it and I’ll give no quarter over it.

When it comes to salvation it’s is always a YES or a NO.

@divegeester said
In politics and in economics there can be much blurring of the edges in debate; in religion, where the stakes are eternal life in heaven or eternal life in hell, there cannot be any unequivocality whatsoever.

Answers to questions about salvation qualifications, such as believing or not in the trinity (or any other doctrine) must always start with a YES or a NO, there ...[text shortened]... or it and I’ll give no quarter over it.

When it comes to salvation it’s is always a YES or a NO.

But there remains within theology and religion a significant amount of complexity, correct?

How would demanding "yes" and "no" answers actually be so valid?

@divegeester said
Thank you.

🙂