Who is an antichrist

Originally posted by FMF
I have made no such assertion. Where is this assertion? Copy paste it here. What kind of 'debating' is this you are resorting to?

I asked you where you got your standard for morals after you said the
following in a couple of posts. Now, if you are looking at people to draw
your morals from, then you have to look at people's deeds. I pointed out
a few of the things people do, maybe not all next door to you but quite
a bit is done around you, and much more I did not bring up. This is the
source you use for your moral standards. So yes, you made the assertion
that people give you the standards for morals.

1. "Why is that so many people are able to live morally sound lives even though they don't feel a "fear of God"?"
2. "If it's only Hebrew mythology and the literature that set its offshoot in motion that is stopping you from acting immorally then that is a bit arbitrary "too" if you ask me; but if that's the only way you can lead a morally sound life [assuming that you do] then I suppose ... ~ well, yes, you go for it ~ whatever it takes. So I acknowledge your need for and dependence on that literature, but I ask again, why is that so many people are able to live morally sound lives even though they don't feel the "fear of God" that you just so happen to feel?"
3. By the standards of the neighbourhoods, communities and societies in which people live and, in my case, my adherence (and the adherence of those I live among) to the three simple moral principles (which I believe humans are hard wired to value and observe) that I laid out earlier. These standards underpin many of the important laws of the land where I live too. I believe I live a morally sound life and do so without a "fear of God" factor. Do you, for instance, believe you only live a morally sound life because of your religious beliefs?

Originally posted by KellyJay
I asked you where you got your standard for morals after you said the
following in a couple of posts. Now, if you are looking at people to draw
your morals from, then you have to look at people's deeds. I pointed out
a few of the things people do, maybe not all next door to you but quite
a bit is done around you, and much more I did not bring up. This i ...[text shortened]... you, for instance, believe you only live a morally sound life because of your religious beliefs?

It is because FMF has no fear of God that he lacks wisdom and asks so many stupid questions.

Originally posted by KellyJay
I asked you where you got your standard for morals after you said the
following in a couple of posts. Now, if you are looking at people to draw
your morals from, then you have to look at people's deeds. I pointed out
a few of the things people do, maybe not all next door to you but quite
a bit is done around you, and much more I did not bring up. This i ...[text shortened]... you, for instance, believe you only live a morally sound life because of your religious beliefs?

Kelly you're talking gibberish as per usual. Here's what FMF said -

'Coerce no one. Deceive no one. Harm no one.'

How can you read those three principles and then come to this -

'I understand you think people without God are good, I mean all the rapes, murders, wars, beheadings, stealing, cheating, backstabbing, and so on are just okay!'

You've blown a fuse here. Start again.

Originally posted by KellyJay
I asked you where you got your standard for morals after you said the
following in a couple of posts. Now, if you are looking at people to draw
your morals from, then you have to look at people's deeds. I pointed out
a few of the things people do, maybe not all next door to you but quite
a bit is done around you, and much more I did not bring up. This i ...[text shortened]... you, for instance, believe you only live a morally sound life because of your religious beliefs?

See what Proper Knob said. Your 'debating tactics' have become a bit daft. If you have a cogent point to make that does not rely on misrepresenting what I have said, I will look at it.

Originally posted by Proper Knob
Kelly you're talking gibberish as per usual. Here's what FMF said -

'Coerce no one. Deceive no one. Harm no one.'

How can you read those three principles and then come to this -

'I understand you think people without God are good, I mean all the rapes, murders, wars, beheadings, stealing, cheating, backstabbing, and so on are just okay!'

You've blown a fuse here. Start again.

Not starting again, he is judging good by the thing he is judging. People
are good, so lets look at people! It is foolish to do such a thing.
Kelly

Originally posted by FMF
See what Proper Knob said. Your 'debating tactics' have become a bit daft. If you have a cogent point to make that does not rely on misrepresenting what I have said, I will look at it.

Please, he is in the same boat you are.
Kelly

Originally posted by KellyJay
Not starting again, he is judging good by the thing he is judging. People
are good, so lets look at people! It is foolish to do such a thing.
Kelly

This is a complete misrepresentation, in fact it's so brazen it's verging on being an outright lie. How can you seriously claim that someone who has - Harm no one - as being a moral principle is 'okay' with murderers and beheadings? Explain that one.

Originally posted by KellyJay
Please, he is in the same boat you are.
Kelly

Which boat is that?

Originally posted by Proper Knob
This is a complete misrepresentation, in fact it's so brazen it's verging on being an outright lie. How can you seriously claim that someone who has - Harm no one - as being a moral principle is 'okay' with murderers and beheadings? Explain that one.

You are defining what a good person is by people, good will be good without
respect. So if all the evil in the world was found in a group of people, there
would be someone who is better than the rest, so is that person than good
and now the standard of good?
Kelly

Originally posted by KellyJay
You are defining what a good person is by people, good will be good without
respect. So if all the evil in the world was found in a group of people, there
would be someone who is better than the rest, so is that person than good
and now the standard of good?
Kelly

What are you talking about? How can someone who has - 'harm no one' - as a moral principle be 'okay' with murder and beheadings?

Originally posted by KellyJay
You are defining what a good person is by people, good will be good without
respect. So if all the evil in the world was found in a group of people, there
would be someone who is better than the rest, so is that person than good
and now the standard of good?
Kelly

Harm no one. Coerce no one. Deceive no one.

Tell me what you find wrong with those three basic moral principles.

Originally posted by Proper Knob
Harm no one. Coerce no one. Deceive no one.

Tell me what you find wrong with those three basic moral principles.

Nothing, you know anyone who lived that faultlessly their whole lives?
Kelly

Originally posted by Proper Knob
What are you talking about? How can someone who has - 'harm no one' - as a moral principle be 'okay' with murder and beheadings?

If the standard is not even to dwell on it, if it is in your heart is as if you did
it, how many would be good?
Kelly

Originally posted by KellyJay
Nothing, you know anyone who lived that faultlessly their whole lives?
Kelly

I have no idea. But what relevance does that have to the discussion?

Originally posted by KellyJay
If the standard is not even to dwell on it, if it is in your heart is as if you did
it, how many would be good?
Kelly

Sorry, no idea what you are talking about.