No, I think you've just found yourself incapable of answering how your adopted dogma accommodates the salvation of an isolated tribal community (many of which exist, even today) - which was my goal all along - because your "universal prescription" fails the universality test. The tribals are either "saved" due to their innocence, or damned, due to their specific lack of faith. If the former, then it would be better to be a tribal member in ignorance, than to have to worry about placing faith in superstition (talking donkeys, snakes, living inside fish, etc.) against the force of reason (Pascal's Wager?), for the said "salvation". You are incapable of answering that, and that frustration seeps through, name calling and all.
So, what is it again, dearest Betty Boop, are those tribals saved in ignorance, or not?
Remember what you wrote: "You can't get any of these people to answer a straight question! Then, they just tend to slither away — but usually, not before a parting insult..."
Is that... is that you, dearest Betty Boop?!!
Aaaah, but it's only the mask, JCB.
So, what is it again, dearest Betty Boop, are those tribals saved in ignorance, or not?
I think a simple yes or no would have been sufficient, don't you think JCB?
Remember what you wrote: "You can't get any of these people to answer a straight question! Then, they just tend to slither away — but usually, not before a parting insult..." Is that... is that you, dearest Betty Boop?!!
At least she seems to practice what she preaches. That's consistent.