is the world as you see it really the only way things are?

Tiburon

Member
My "telling atheists what they think" are the observations I make of their statements.
So..... if you don't want to be told what you're thinking from someone else's perspective, you should simply stop talking.
I realize that doesn't make sense to you, but this is part of conversation.

Some people will preface their comments along these lines with----

Well, as I'm understanding what you're saying, I see your comments stating----- .................................................................

After 20 years, I've simply dropped that preface. Partly because I grew weary of people complaining my posts were too tedious to read.

So..... when I state---
you're just saying......

see that preface above included.

I do have to say.... I'm surprised you didn't understand that.
I understand perfectly. You often come back with "I see your comments stating' followed by a position that is a mile wide of their original statement. Usually more in line with what you want them to be saying. You then seem to be unable to accept a reframing of the original statement.
 

Komodo

Active member
I'm still not the one chasing others around the forum and playing whack-a-mole, trolling, and desperate to be right.
Steve, what are the signs by which one can tell that somebody is "desperate to be right"?

Follow-up: assume for the moment that somebody has clearly, objectively shown himself to be "desperate to be right," but that the claim he is desperately insisting he's right about, is in fact true, and your rejection of that claim is therefore wrong. What should you do?
 
Last edited:

SteveB

Well-known member
Steve, what are the signs by which one can tell that somebody is "desperate to be right"?

Pretty much the conversations had by atheists here who keep saying we who follow Jesus are wrong.

Follow-up: assume for the moment that somebody has clearly, objectively shown himself to be "desperate to be right," but that the claim he is desperately insisting he's right about, is in fact true, and your rejection of that claim is therefore wrong. What should you do?
When I'm found to be wrong, about something which YHVH says he himself is right, then I turn to God, from my wrong, and place my trust in Jesus regarding that matter.
 

Komodo

Active member
Pretty much the conversations had by atheists here who keep saying we who follow Jesus are wrong.
That can't be the answer to the question, "how do you know someone is desperate to be right," since you make that accusation when people challenge you about other matters also.

When I'm found to be wrong, about something which YHVH says he himself is right [. . .]
That wasn't my question. What if someone is "desperate to be right" (on some subject on which God has not spoken), but he happens to be right on that subject and you are wrong? Are you saying this is impossible? If not, what do you think you should do if it happened?
 

SteveB

Well-known member
That can't be the answer to the question, "how do you know someone is desperate to be right," since you make that accusation when people challenge you about other matters also.
Why can't it be the answer?
You asked me how I know.
I explained that I have observed it in the discussions and conversations with atheists.

It's not a complicated thing. Are you telling me that you are right and I'm not allowed to observe the world as I do?

Sounds like you need to be right.

That wasn't my question. What if someone is "desperate to be right" (on some subject on which God has not spoken), but he happens to be right on that subject and you are wrong? Are you saying this is impossible? If not, what do you think you should do if it happened?
If they weren't desperate to be right, they'd come follow Jesus.

Their refusal to be right with God is demonstration that they are desperate to be right about their own beliefs.



Jesus said,

Joh 3:16-21 WEB 16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only born Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish, but have eternal life. 17 For God didn’t send his Son into the world to judge the world, but that the world should be saved through him. 18 He who believes in him is not judged. He who doesn’t believe has been judged already, because he has not believed in the name of the only born Son of God. 19 This is the judgment, that the light has come into the world, and men loved the darkness rather than the light; for their works were evil. 20 For everyone who does evil hates the light, and doesn’t come to the light, lest his works would be exposed. 21 But he who does the truth comes to the light, that his works may be revealed, that they have been done in God.”​
 

Komodo

Active member
Why can't it be the answer?
Because if you are arguing about the definition of a word, or about whether something did or did not happen in a past exchange, or about what some author or article did or did not claim -- that is, if you are not arguing about atheism or Jesus -- then it's a non sequitur to say "I know he is desperate to be right here, because of the way he defends atheism and rejects Jesus elsewhere."

You asked me how I know.
I explained that I have observed it in the discussions and conversations with atheists.
Even if you have accurately observed something happening in some discussions with atheists (which is not at all obvious), that does not imply it is happening in all discussions with atheists. I have observed communists to be generally dogmatic and unpersuadable about matters of economics; it does not follow that I can assume they will be dogmatic and unpersuadable about (say) baseball. So if I'm asked why I said that a communist was being dogmatic and unpersuadable in a discussion about baseball, it wouldn't be reasonable for me to say "I have observed it in discussions with communists."


It's not a complicated thing. Are you telling me that you are right and I'm not allowed to observe the world as I do?
Everybody who makes any claim about anything to anybody in any context is implicitly claiming to be right. If we didn't think we were right, we wouldn't have made the claim. So "are you telling me that you are right?" is an utterly pointless question; of course I think I'm right. And of course you think you're right. It has nothing to do with "forbidding" anybody else from thinking otherwise. You are equally telling me that you are right about having a good reason for telling people they are "desperate to be right"; are you therefore saying I'm "not allowed to observe the world as I do," i.e. I'm not allowed to say "you haven't provided a good reason for what you're claiming"?

Sounds like you need to be right.

If they weren't desperate to be right, they'd come follow Jesus.

Their refusal to be right with God is demonstration that they are desperate to be right about their own beliefs.


So, if any of atheist tells you "according to these authorities, you have this definition wrong" or "I didn't say what you claim I said" or "I did say what you claim I never said" or "your calculation here is wrong," you can dismiss it as merely another case of atheists being "desperate to be right," because atheists are always desperate to be right about everything? And therefore you need never acknowledge, let alone apologize for, an error of yours which an atheist points out?

If this is what you are implying, then "you are desperate to be right" or "sounds like you need to be right" sounds like something you say just in order to excuse yourself from making the effort to read and consider anything that anybody says to you about anything, and to excuse yourself from ever having to acknowledge an error which an atheist points out.

If that's not what you're implying, then you still have said nothing which would clarify what grounds you have for saying that in any particular discussion, an atheist is showing himself "desperate to be right."

And the part I've quoted here is supposedly a response to my questions, "What if someone is "desperate to be right" (on some subject on which God has not spoken), but he happens to be right on that subject and you are wrong? Are you saying this is impossible? If not, what do you think you should do if it happened?" You are very blatantly refusing to answer those questions. Shall we try again? Slower, this time:

Steve, is it possible for an atheist to be right, and for you to be wrong, about any topic at all? For example, is it possible for an atheist to be right, and for you to be wrong, about whether that atheist said (or didn't say) what you claimed he said (or didn't say)?
 
Last edited:
Top