Theism and Moral Realism are separate concepts

[Harbal]

Interesting. Christ cannot. You can. Okay.

It's a long time since Christ was allegedly here, and things have changed a lot, so who is to say what he would have to say in this day and age? I don't doubt that you will know what he would have to say, of course.

No, I'll leave you to make things up. I don't need to: I know exactly what He already said. The Christian route is to judge by the fruit.

Well, then, you're in no real position to make any claims about "Christians," right?

I think of myself more as being in no position to tell anyone they are not a Christian if they say they are one.

Understandable, since you don't know what one is, and you reject the test given by Christ Himself. I wouldn't expect you to know anything about it, then, and you don't, it seems.

I don't know what scriptures say,

And yet I quoted them to you exactly. And still, you claim not to know what they say.

For hundreds of years, and probably even now, the Catholic Church has been the ultimate Christian authority,

No, the Catholic Church has been an authority for Catholics. For dissenters, whether Cathars, Gnostics, Waldensians, Protestants...and the many, many other groups that took exception to Catholic violence and the autocratic imposition of arbitrary teachings by the clergy, they've been an authority for precisely nothing. And one Person over whom the RC's have never had the slightest authority is Christ.

As a Christian, I naturally believe Christ, not the Pope, and not modern relativists, who can't even locate a real Christian.

Well, as this stuff seems to matter to you a lot, and it doesn't matter to me at all, the reasonable thing for me to do is allow you to have your own way on the matter.

[Immanuel Can]

It's a long time since Christ was allegedly here, and things have changed a lot, so who is to say what he would have to say in this day and age? I don't doubt that you will know what he would have to say, of course.

No, I'll leave you to make things up. I don't need to: I know exactly what He already said. The Christian route is to judge by the fruit.

I think of myself more as being in no position to tell anyone they are not a Christian if they say they are one.

Understandable, since you don't know what one is, and you reject the test given by Christ Himself. I wouldn't expect you to know anything about it, then, and you don't, it seems.

I don't know what scriptures say,

And yet I quoted them to you exactly. And still, you claim not to know what they say.

For hundreds of years, and probably even now, the Catholic Church has been the ultimate Christian authority,

No, the Catholic Church has been an authority for Catholics. For dissenters, whether Cathars, Gnostics, Waldensians, Protestants...and the many, many other groups that took exception to Catholic violence and the autocratic imposition of arbitrary teachings by the clergy, they've been an authority for precisely nothing. And one Person over whom the RC's have never had the slightest authority is Christ.

As a Christian, I naturally believe Christ, not the Pope, and not modern relativists, who can't even locate a real Christian.

Well, as this stuff seems to matter to you a lot, and it doesn't matter to me at all, the reasonable thing for me to do is allow you to have your own way on the matter.

Well, if somebody told you "Yorkshiremen are X," wouldn't you ask if they had any idea what a "Yorkshireman" was? And if you found out that to them, "Yorkshireman" meant anybody who knew where York was, would you have any further questions?

You probably should.

[Harbal]

No, I'll leave you to make things up. I don't need to: I know exactly what He already said. The Christian route is to judge by the fruit.
Understandable, since you don't know what one is, and you reject the test given by Christ Himself. I wouldn't expect you to know anything about it, then, and you don't, it seems.


And yet I quoted them to you exactly. And still, you claim not to know what they say.
No, the Catholic Church has been an authority for Catholics. For dissenters, whether Cathars, Gnostics, Waldensians, Protestants...and the many, many other groups that took exception to Catholic violence and the autocratic imposition of arbitrary teachings by the clergy, they've been an authority for precisely nothing. And one Person over whom the RC's have never had the slightest authority is Christ.

As a Christian, I naturally believe Christ, not the Pope, and not modern relativists, who can't even locate a real Christian.

Well, as this stuff seems to matter to you a lot, and it doesn't matter to me at all, the reasonable thing for me to do is allow you to have your own way on the matter.

Well, if somebody told you "Yorkshiremen are X," wouldn't you ask if they had any idea what a "Yorkshireman" was? And if you found out that to them, "Yorkshireman" meant anybody who knew where York was, would you have any further questions?

You probably should.

No, I can't say I care much about anyone's opinion of what a Yorkshireman is; why do you think I should?

[Immanuel Can]

Well, as this stuff seems to matter to you a lot, and it doesn't matter to me at all, the reasonable thing for me to do is allow you to have your own way on the matter.

Well, if somebody told you "Yorkshiremen are X," wouldn't you ask if they had any idea what a "Yorkshireman" was? And if you found out that to them, "Yorkshireman" meant anybody who knew where York was, would you have any further questions?

You probably should.

No, I can't say I care much about anyone's opinion of what a Yorkshireman is; why do you think I should?

Because if you can't, then you're like one of those people who claim men can "be women," but can't say what a "woman" is.

[Harbal]

Well, if somebody told you "Yorkshiremen are X," wouldn't you ask if they had any idea what a "Yorkshireman" was? And if you found out that to them, "Yorkshireman" meant anybody who knew where York was, would you have any further questions?

You probably should.

No, I can't say I care much about anyone's opinion of what a Yorkshireman is; why do you think I should?

Because if you can't, then you're like one of those people who claim men can "be women," but can't say what a "woman" is.

I might not think a man can be a woman, but if it makes someone else happy to think of himself as a woman, why should I care? As for being a Yorkshireman; being acknowledged as one does not give me any extra rights or entitlements, so it wouldn't really affect me in any significant way to not be thought of as one. You probably don't care whether I am a Yorkshireman, just as I don't care whether you are a Christian.

[Alexiev]

We all know that the Pope is a Catholic, not a Christian, and that the final arbiter of who is a Christian and what is moral or immoral is Mr. Can.

That's because morality is objective, and Senor Can knows the Mind of God. There is no interpretation involved, except for the "you shall not suffer a witch to live" bit, which has been transcended by the New Covenant.

Also Allah and Marx are irredemiably evil, according to the Real God, to whom Mr. Can has a biblical hot line.

[Immanuel Can]

I might not think a man can be a woman, but if it makes someone else happy to think of himself as a woman, why should I care?

You maybe don't. And really, your "caring" is irrelevant.

But if you don't know what a "woman" is, you're in no position at all to make statements anymore about "women." You're speaking not just from "not caring," but from total insufficiency of information, as well.

[Immanuel Can]

We all know that the Pope is a Catholic, not a Christian...

Well, we know because the Pope is not only a role never spoken of in Scripture at all, but also because he stands in direct contravention to the explicit words of Scripture by presenting himself as the intermediary between God and man (1 Tim. 2:5). But if we don't read Scripture, "we" don't know any of that.

[Alexiev]

We all know that the Pope is a Catholic, not a Christian, and that the final arbiter of who is a Christian and what is moral or immoral is Mr. Can.

That's because morality is objective, and Senor Can knows the Mind of God. There is no interpretation involved, except for the "you shall not suffer a witch to live" bit, which has been transcended by the New Covenant.

Also Allah and Marx are irredemiably evil, according to the Real God, to whom Mr. Can has a biblical hot line.

[Immanuel Can]

We all know that the Pope is a Catholic, not a Christian, and that the final arbiter of who is a Christian and what is moral or immoral is Mr. Can.

That's because morality is objective, and Senor Can knows the Mind of God. There is no interpretation involved, except for the "you shall not suffer a witch to live" bit, which has been transcended by the New Covenant.

Also Allah and Marx are irredemiably evil, according to the Real God, to whom Mr. Can has a biblical hot line.

Yeah, you said that. I ignored the majority of the hogwash about "hot lines" and "witches", and answered the tiny bit that was relevant. I'm still doing that.

[Harbal]

I might not think a man can be a woman, but if it makes someone else happy to think of himself as a woman, why should I care?

You maybe don't. And really, your "caring" is irrelevant.

But if you don't know what a "woman" is, you're in no position at all to make statements anymore about "women." You're speaking not just from "not caring," but from total insufficiency of information, as well.

There is probably a biological definition of "woman", and also a medical and legal definition, but I am aware of no definition of "Christian" that anyone is under any requirement to recognise.

[Immanuel Can]

There is probably a biological definition of "woman", and also a medical and legal definition, but I am aware of no definition of "Christian" that anyone is under any requirement to recognise.

I said you were "like" one of those people. Not that you "were" one. You probably know what a "woman" is...as, in truth, does everybody. The biological definition is excellent...and in that matter, biology is king.

Who is the most qualified person to say who a "Christian" is? I opt to believe Christ. I have no idea who you would opt to believe...apparently, it's everybody; because anybody who says they, or somebody else "is a Christian" convinces you.

I'm just glad you're smarter than to use the same procedure with women.

[Harbal]

Who is the most qualified person to say who a "Christian" is? I opt to believe Christ. I have no idea who you would opt to believe...apparently, it's everybody; because anybody who says they, or somebody else "is a Christian" convinces you.

But anyone is completely free to call himself a Christian, in the same way he is free to call himself an astrologer, or a Manchester United fan, and there is no reason that I can see why anyone who is not a Christian, or an astrologer, or a Manchester United fan, should give a damn about what qualifies them to claim to be such.

Anyway, I've completely forgotten why I set off down this road. Can you remember what point I was trying to make?

[Immanuel Can]

But anyone is completely free to call himself a Christian,...

Not truthfully. Not according to Christ Himself.

Can you remember what point I was trying to make?

You were objecting to me questioning the worthiness of Torquemada as a "Christian." Kind of a hard case to make, actually.

[Harbal]

But anyone is completely free to call himself a Christian,...

Not truthfully. Not according to Christ Himself.

Can you remember what point I was trying to make?

You were objecting to me questioning the worthiness of Torquemada as a "Christian." Kind of a hard case to make, actually.

Was I really? Strange, because I didn't even know who he was until I googled him.