What if...?

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
People change, their perspectives change, they live and learn, what they said in the past may have little bearing on what they profess at present.

Ok i quit as I dont really know what this thread is about.

I don't doubt that. Then that is all is needed to be said next time you get caught out. 🙂

The fact is no one else cares about 'retrospective trolling' except you. A man notorious for making it up as he goes along.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
People change, their perspectives change, they live and learn from their mistakes, what someone said in 1994 under particular circumstances has no bearing on what they may say now under similar conditions. As Freaky points out the motivation is not to lend itself to understanding but simply to discredit an individual and look at it anyway you like, that's trolling.

Very well. So, when they bring up the past, if it was a mistake, then simply admit it. If it was not, then defend it. If you feel you have defended it enough, say so, and ignore further attempts to discuss.

Anything but sit and cry 'I've been trolled! Oh gawrsh, those awful, nasty trolls just won't leave me alone!'

Also, an attempt to discredit an individual is not necessarily trolling. Sometimes that is the logical outcome of a debate.

Originally posted by SwissGambit
Except for that nagging bit about on-topic discussion. The questions are on-topic, yet somehow 'trolling'. Also, I don't agree with wiki's 'accidental'. I think it must be intentional. Otherwise, everyone who gets upset in a discussion has been 'trolled' and the word's application has been broadened beyond usefulness.

the word's application has been broadened beyond usefulness.
That kind of thing happens here literally all the time.

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
[b]It's ridiculous to put yourself in the position of following another's commands without using your own moral barometer to gauge their worth.
No one ever said anything in contrast to this sentiment.

That being said, as a Christian, I am not informed by morality, nor do I live my life by the shifting standards thereof.
The Christian has been call ...[text shortened]... ist--- until such time as the Church Age comes to a close and we are once again in His presence.[/b]

"Morals" are not any specific set of principles. Even the statement "I do what God commands" is a moral value (although its correctness is debatable). If you follow this principle, you are informed by morality, by definition - attempts at marketing/repackaging yourself aside.

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
[b]the word's application has been broadened beyond usefulness.
That kind of thing happens here literally all the time.[/b]

Doesn't make it right.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
wow retrospective trolling, how droll.

Is you saying "wow retrospective trolling" an example of you being expedient or unprincipled, or is it [because, as you yourself admitted, you are "not completely unprincipled"] an instance of you being principled?

Originally posted by SwissGambit
"Morals" are not any specific set of principles. Even the statement "I do what God commands" is a moral value (although its correctness is debatable). If you follow this principle, you are informed by morality, by definition - attempts at marketing/repackaging yourself aside.

How is this anything different than what I have already said?

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
You simply don't get it, do you?

If God has said one thing, but something/someone appears as God saying something else entirely--- something in complete contrast to what He has already said--- who, in their right mind, would listen to the second one?

are you saying you would not know if you were in the presence of the real god?????

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
How is this anything different than what I have already said?

You said you are not informed by morality; I hold that you are.

Originally posted by FMF
Is you saying "wow retrospective trolling" an example of you being expedient or unprincipled, or is it [because, as you yourself admitted, you are "not completely unprincipled"] an instance of you being principled?

perhaps this retrospective trolling is a little piece of self indulgence that you have granted yourself, after all, you dont usually give yourself as much license as other people, who can say?

Originally posted by stellspalfie
are you saying you would not know if you were in the presence of the real god?????

I know this must be so hard for you to comprehend, and I can appreciate how foreign it must be to you... but it doesn't change the fact that you and this reality are so far removed from one another that it's impossible for you to bridge this gap and understand even basics on this side of it.

God Himself will not allow us in His presence until the appointed time.
We have not yet reached the appointed time.
Therefore, if someone presents themselves as God at this time, I would dismiss/disregard anything that is said.
Why?
Because He has given us the only revelation we need to get us through this time until that time.
So if someone is attempting to offer something other than what is in that revelation, it is to be rejected.

On top of all of this, your hypothetical is repulsive.

Originally posted by SwissGambit
You said you are not informed by morality; I hold that you are.

I know.
I got that from the first time you offered it.
It was rejected then, on the basis that morals are the sum total of the currently-acceptable societal behaviors.
Homey don't play that.
I get my cues from the spiritual life planned and prepared for believers who reside in the Church Age.
These standards of integrity are timeless.

Originally posted by Proper Knob
I don't doubt that. Then that is all is needed to be said next time you get caught out. 🙂

The fact is no one else cares about 'retrospective trolling' except you. A man notorious for making it up as he goes along.

notorious? please sir you are as given to free form jazz as the next man!

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
I know this must be so hard for you to comprehend, and I can appreciate how foreign it must be to you... but it doesn't change the fact that you and this reality are so far removed from one another that it's impossible for you to bridge this gap and understand even basics on this side of it.

God Himself will not allow us in His presence until the appoin ...[text shortened]... that revelation, it is to be rejected.

On top of all of this, your hypothetical is repulsive.

when is the appointed time? how will you know it is the appointed time?

Originally posted by stellspalfie
when is the appointed time? how will you know it is the appointed time?

So many questions.
So little time...