Believers, Non-Believers & Morality

Originally posted by @fmf
I don't think I have made a fool of myself.

You haven't. - 2 things are abundantly clear:

1. Romans doesn't understand the concept of 'notion.'
2. Becker doesn't understand the concept of 'lying.'

Every rational person on the planet (excluding the chuckle brothers) can differentiate between an unintentional error and a lie, and comprehend immediately that when an atheist says he has no notion of divine law he is saying he has no belief in such a thing.

Originally posted by @ghost-of-a-duke
Yes, you tried this tactic when it was discovered you had created a 2nd account. Your ridiculous argument was that if you hadn't admitted your deception no one would have known, as if somehow that made you honest. (And which ignored the fact that you only admitted it after you had been exposed).

How was I exposed?

Originally posted by @dj2becker
How was I exposed?

Three people called you out in public for being the same person who had posted as Fetchmyjunk. And they were right. So you were exposed.

Originally posted by @fmf
A lie is a deliberate untruth. This conventional definition is unaffected by your personal need to define the word in a different way ~ apparently so that you are then able to deal with people who tell you things that are not true.

Ah yes let's only stick with the first part of the definition and ignore the rest. Let's pretend that the part you quoted is the only definition and correct use of the word and that all the other definitions don't exist and their usage is incorrect. FMF obviously should have been consulted before the dictionary was printed. 😵

Originally posted by @dj2becker
Ah yes let's only stick with the first part of the definition and ignore the rest. Let's pretend that the part you quoted is the only definition and correct use of the word and that all the other definitions don't exist and their usage is incorrect. FMF obviously should have been consulted before the dictionary was printed.

Ghost of a Duke did not use the idiom "I tell a lie" when he corrected his unintentional mistake - as you seemed to suggest earlier on this thread - I asked you about it more than once but you dodged it - and you did not use the word "lie" idiomatically when you accused him of telling one.

Almost every single question and observation I have made on this thread about your silly assertion about your deliberately out of context meaning of the word "lie" ~ and the circumstances which may have given rise to your error and ignorance ~ you have simply sidestepped and blanked out.

All this speaks volumes about both you and your nonsensical, trolling accusation that Ghost of a Duke "lied" on page 1 of this thread.

Originally posted by @fmf
Three people called you out in public for being the same person who had posted as Fetchmyjunk. And they were right. So you were exposed.

How would they have proven it? People have called me out for being Romans. Were they right?

Originally posted by @dj2becker
How would they have proven it? People have called me out for being Romans. Were they right?

To clarify, you consider yourself honest,....for admitting you deceived people when confronted with your deception? 🙄

Does that come from the same book that equates an unintentional error as a lie?!

Originally posted by @dj2becker
How would they have proven it? People have called me out for being Romans. Were they right?

Why would they have to prove it?

It was obvious "dj2becker" the same poster as used "Fetchmyjunk".

They called you out.

You dodged the fact you were being called out for a while.

But you were unable to sustain the deceit.

You admitted it.

So they were right.

You were therefore exposed.

What is the relevance of whether people were right or wrong about something else?

Originally posted by @fmf
Why would they have to prove it?

It was obvious "dj2becker" the same poster as used "Fetchmyjunk".

They called you out.

You dodged the fact you were being called out for a while.

But you were unable to sustain the deceit.

You admitted it.

So they were right.

You were therefore exposed.

What is the relevance of whether people were right or wrong about something else?

For Becker, a freely acknowledged mistake is the same as a lie, but a deliberate attempt to mislead people isn't a lie, if the guilty party doesn't admit to it.

How very odd.

-Removed-

And you are undeniably the biggest scamp at Shetland Primary, with your best chum Kiddo a close second.

Originally posted by @fmf
Why would they have to prove it?

It was obvious "dj2becker" the same poster as used "Fetchmyjunk".

They called you out.

You dodged the fact you were being called out for a while.

But you were unable to sustain the deceit.

You admitted it.

So they were right.

You were therefore exposed.

What is the relevance of whether people were right or wrong about something else?

Just like I am being called out for being Romans, who I am not. In your mind have I been exposed as being Romans?

Originally posted by @dj2becker
Just like I am being called out for being Romans, who I am not. In your mind have I been exposed as being Romans?

Yeah, do you still think I’m Romans?

Originally posted by @dj2becker
Just like I am being called out for being Romans, who I am not. In your mind have I been exposed as being Romans?

No, not as Romans1009. We're talking about when you went from being Fetchmyjunk back to being dj2becker.

Originally posted by @fmf
No, not as Romans1009. We're talking about when you went from being Fetchmyjunk back to being dj2becker.

If I had denied being Fetch, just like I am denying that I am Romans, how would you prove that I was lying?