• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Do bible gods moral laws ever change?

Valjean

Veteran Member
Premium Member
No thanks. In debate forums, I don't invest more effort into a claim than the claimant exerts in explaining themselves.
Debate fora allow little space to explain issues. You want a good answer. Sometimes that involves more than just a few paragraphs. Sometimes an issues been explained by others, in essays or YouTube videos, that would save me an hour of composition.
Quibbling about source formats leads me to believe that understanding an issue isn't the goal of the interrogator.
 

ppp

Well-Known Member
Debate fora allow little space to explain issues. You want a good answer. Sometimes that involves more than just a few paragraphs. Sometimes an issues been explained by others, in essays or YouTube videos, that would save me an hour of composition.
If you have ever read a scientific journal, or a philosophical treatise, or a simple literary theists, then you should know that the basics of a position can be outlined in a few paragraphs by anyone who understands what they are saying well enough. Explicit details and arguments may take volumes; but a basic thru line of reasoning should always be condensable to five paragraphs or fewer. If it takes longer, you are probably conflating about two or more separate subjects.

Don't believe me? Read the abstract and methodology sections of papers in journals of science or philosophy.

Quibbling about source formats leads me to believe that understanding an issue isn't the goal of the interrogator.
You may see it as quibbling, but I see offloading your interlocutor to a third party before establishing that you have a basic understanding of the subject and position that you are schilling as being the proverbial Big Ol' Red Flag :triangularflag::triangularflag::triangularflag:.

You are free to see this as unreasonable or out of line. I won't try to force you.
 
Top