Appropriate Communication for a Spirituality Forum

@fmf said
Here you are, blaming others. Oh, so I failed to elicit an "understanding" from you. You didn't fail to make yourself understood. No. Not that. Instead, I... er... "dismally failed" to get you to make yourself understood. Priceless!

@petewxyz said
The reason I quote Ghost's post is to make it quite clear that I could be understood by somebody who chose to seek my meaning. He did, you did not.

@FMF

Earlier on in that thread when asked to give a definition of "true atheist" he answered:

"I think that admittedly badly worded sentence is being taken out of context of the post it was in. - In that context I am using it to mean somebody who truly believes there is nothing more to come after death. Somebody who truly believes that all there is now is to cope with their final moments."


I think that was a perfectly reasonable explanation that I was willing to accept. Why wasn't that the end of that particular line of questioning?

@ghost-of-a-duke said
@FMF

Earlier on in that thread when asked to give a definition of "true atheist" he answered:

"I think that admittedly badly worded sentence is being taken out of context of the post it was in. - In that context I am using it to mean somebody who truly believes there is nothing more to come after death. Somebody who truly believes that all there is now is to cope with their final moments."

@petewxyz said
I think you'll find this thread was started in response to @divegeester suggesting that what I was saying in a different thread should have a thread of it's own. I listened to his reasonable suggestion and followed it.

@petewxyz said
@FMF
Here is an understanding in one post. An understanding that you dismally failed to illicit in 8 pages due to a style of questioning so appalling it caused me to feel the need to start this thread.

@ghost-of-a-duke said
@FMF

Earlier on in that thread when asked to give a definition of "true atheist" he answered:

"I think that admittedly badly worded sentence is being taken out of context of the post it was in. - In that context I am using it to mean somebody who truly believes there is nothing more to come after death. Somebody who truly believes that all there is now is to cop ...[text shortened]... ation that I was willing to accept. Why wasn't that the end of that particular line of questioning?

@fmf said
And yet, despite that, complete with the utterly disingenuous 'I have been taken out of context' old chestnut, he basically stuck to his guns page after page, obfuscating and blaming others.

The takeaways were he didn't seem to understand atheism and he didn't seem to understand religious belief. All that left was a rather pretentious kind of turgid self-righteousness.

Di ...[text shortened]... ng self pitying OPs like this, knock yourself out. Go for it. Different strokes for different folks.

@divegeester said
Because he doubled down for 6-8 pages and made a complete fool out of himself. You tried to correct him twice but you backed off when his vanity-vortex looked like it was going to drag you down too.

@ghost-of-a-duke said
I disagreed with Pete's proposition, yet accepted his explanation of a badly worded sentence and ascertained his true meaning. If you don't want to do that in your interactions, knock yourself out. Go for it. Different strokes for different folks.

@ghost-of-a-duke said
To clarify. In the other thread, you scolded me for 'answering for Suzianne' and yet here you are answering for FMF?!

@ghost-of-a-duke said
To clarify. In the other thread, you scolded me for 'answering for Suzianne' and yet here you are answering for FMF?!

@fmf said
I am sure petewxyz is happy to have your support for now as a fair weather friend. I thought he displayed less integrity than KellyJay on that thread, a similar seemingly willful lack of coherence, a similar pridefulness and resort to blaming others for his fumbling, and he seemed to have a similar dose of victimhood going on. And we all know what you thought of KellyJay and how you interacted with him. I am at least consistent.

@ghost-of-a-duke said
Pete is a splendid fellow. Happy to have him as a friend.

@divegeester said
I didn’t scolded you, don’t be so sensitive.

I asked you why you, an atheist, were answering a personal faith based question which was directed at another Christian.

Suzianne predictably didn’t come back to answer, just as she didn’t when you last jumped in to (let’s call it what it is) defend her. I thought your behaviour, and her’s was interesting in this forum and where it happened before.

But I think you already know all this, don’t you.