Matthew Le God Posted 3 August, 2020 Share Posted 3 August, 2020 Just now, badgerx16 said: Which schisms have been due to disagreements about the nature of a potential afterlife ? Religions and some of their followers claim their scriptures are 100% accurate. They have conflicting views on the afterlife that cannot all be correct. So if one religion was shown to be correct on the afterlife it would show the others are not 100% accurate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
badgerx16 Posted 3 August, 2020 Share Posted 3 August, 2020 1 minute ago, Matthew Le God said: Religions and some of their followers claim their scriptures are 100% accurate. They have conflicting views on the afterlife that cannot all be correct. So if one religion was shown to be correct on the afterlife it would show the others are not 100% accurate. I refer you back to my coin analogy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew Le God Posted 3 August, 2020 Share Posted 3 August, 2020 (edited) 8 minutes ago, badgerx16 said: You are aware the Christianity, Judaism, and Islam are all fundamentally the same religion, and that their differences are nothing to do with what happens after you die ? This is simply not true. For example Protestants and Catholics have different views on purgatory. Edited 3 August, 2020 by Matthew Le God Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
badgerx16 Posted 3 August, 2020 Share Posted 3 August, 2020 If Jean Paul Sartre is correct, does this mean that MLG is proof that there IS an afterlife ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
badgerx16 Posted 3 August, 2020 Share Posted 3 August, 2020 2 minutes ago, Matthew Le God said: This is simply not true. For example Protestants and Catholics have different views on purgatory. "Purgatory : After years of neglect, some Protestants now believe it exists; many Catholics don’t. For others, it’s not a place--it’s a state of mind." https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1995-10-20-ls-59038-story.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew Le God Posted 3 August, 2020 Share Posted 3 August, 2020 Just now, badgerx16 said: "Purgatory : After years of neglect, some Protestants now believe it exists; many Catholics don’t. For others, it’s not a place--it’s a state of mind." https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1995-10-20-ls-59038-story.html All that does is back up my point. That they have different views on it! How does that help your case? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew Le God Posted 3 August, 2020 Share Posted 3 August, 2020 9 minutes ago, badgerx16 said: I refer you back to my coin analogy. You mean the analogy that is fundamentally flawed? "If I could find 2 people who had never seen money and sat them facing each other, then held a pound coin up between them and asked them if they could see a face, one of them would say no, but that wouldn't mean the face didn't exist. Both interpretations of the coin would be correct." The question was 'can you see a face?' The question was not 'is there a face on this coin?'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
badgerx16 Posted 3 August, 2020 Share Posted 3 August, 2020 (edited) 8 minutes ago, Matthew Le God said: All that does is back up my point. That they have different views on it! How does that help your case? It shows that the individuals' beliefs are their own and not fixated on religious doctrine. Protestant reformers rejected the concept because Martin Luther did so, which was driven by his personal opinions of Catholicism - which supports my position that schisms are driven by human personal prejudice and desire for self aggrandisement. Edited 3 August, 2020 by badgerx16 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
badgerx16 Posted 3 August, 2020 Share Posted 3 August, 2020 (edited) 3 minutes ago, Matthew Le God said: You mean the analogy that is fundamentally flawed? "If I could find 2 people who had never seen money and sat them facing each other, then held a pound coin up between them and asked them if they could see a face, one of them would say no, but that wouldn't mean the face didn't exist. Both interpretations of the coin would be correct." The question was 'can you see a face?' The question was not 'is there a face on this coin?'. "Sire, the Pedants are revolting !". That question would get the same answer. Edited 3 August, 2020 by badgerx16 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew Le God Posted 3 August, 2020 Share Posted 3 August, 2020 3 minutes ago, badgerx16 said: It shows that the individuals' beliefs are their own and not fixated on religious doictrine. Protestant reformers rejected the concept because Martin Luther did so, which was driven by his personal opinions of Catholicism - which supports my position that schisms are driven by human personal prejudice and desire for self aggrandisement. It shows a schism about the afterlife that you said did not exist. Then you went and found evidence it does exist! Doing my job for me! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew Le God Posted 3 August, 2020 Share Posted 3 August, 2020 3 minutes ago, badgerx16 said: That question would get the same answer. No it wouldn't. It really does not work as an analogy. It is flawed and irrelevant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
badgerx16 Posted 3 August, 2020 Share Posted 3 August, 2020 3 minutes ago, Matthew Le God said: It shows a schism about the afterlife that you said did not exist. Then you went and found evidence it does exist! Doing my job for me! The schism that Luther brought about was not about the afterlife, it was based on a much deeper distrust of Catholicism - the view on purgatory derived from this, but was not the cause of the schism. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
badgerx16 Posted 3 August, 2020 Share Posted 3 August, 2020 (edited) 6 minutes ago, Matthew Le God said: No it wouldn't. It really does not work as an analogy. It is flawed and irrelevant. I was sorely tempted to make a personal comparison at this point. You said that conflicting views on a question cannot both be correct, when in fact they can. Edited 3 August, 2020 by badgerx16 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew Le God Posted 3 August, 2020 Share Posted 3 August, 2020 Just now, badgerx16 said: The schism that Luther brought about was not about the afterlife, it was based on a much deeper distrust of Catholicism - the view on purgatory derived from this, but was not the cause of the schism. A schism is a difference in opinion or belief. The differing views on purgatory isn't the cause of a schism, it is the schism. Another afterlife difference between the Abrahamic religions is the Houri. No mention of Christians being accompanied by numerous virgins in heaven, only in Islam. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew Le God Posted 3 August, 2020 Share Posted 3 August, 2020 4 minutes ago, badgerx16 said: You said that conflicting views on a question cannot both be correct, when in fact they can. Your coin analogy does not work. Please give another. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raging Bull Posted 3 August, 2020 Share Posted 3 August, 2020 (edited) 3 minutes ago, Matthew Le God said: Your coin analogy does not work. Please give another. God loves you bro he just thinks you’re a tit Edited 3 August, 2020 by Raging Bull Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew Le God Posted 3 August, 2020 Share Posted 3 August, 2020 Just now, Raging Bull said: God love you bro he just thinks you’re a tit God been talking to you again? How do you know you weren't hallucinating? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
badgerx16 Posted 3 August, 2020 Share Posted 3 August, 2020 1 minute ago, Matthew Le God said: A schism is a difference in opinion or belief. The differing views on purgatory isn't the cause of a schism, it is the schism. Another afterlife difference between the Abrahamic religions is the Houri. No mention of Christians being accompanied by numerous virgins in heaven, only in Islam. 1) How many schisms do you think Martin Luther caused to form his new set of beliefs ? Is it one per thesis ? 2) Humans create the definitions of the afterlife to try to justify their position and attract followers. This is all window dressing, but does not underrmine the fundamental underpinning. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
badgerx16 Posted 3 August, 2020 Share Posted 3 August, 2020 6 minutes ago, Matthew Le God said: Your coin analogy does not work. Please give another. The analogy works, your brain simply doesn't register the fact. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
badgerx16 Posted 3 August, 2020 Share Posted 3 August, 2020 4 minutes ago, Raging Bull said: God loves you bro he just thinks you’re a tit Did God make him a tit, or just grant him the free will to develop in that way of his own volition ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew Le God Posted 3 August, 2020 Share Posted 3 August, 2020 Just now, badgerx16 said: 1) How many schisms do you think Martin Luther caused to form his new set of beliefs ? Is it one per thesis ? 2) Humans create the definitions of the afterlife to try to justify their position and attract followers. This is all window dressing, but does not underrmine the fundamental underpinning. 1) I've now refuted your point that there are no Abrahamic differences regarding the afterlife. That is clearly not true and you've even provided evidence to show that is the case. 2) 'Fundamental underpinning' - What is that then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew Le God Posted 3 August, 2020 Share Posted 3 August, 2020 (edited) 3 minutes ago, badgerx16 said: Did God make him a tit, or just grant him the free will to develop in that way of his own volition ? Free will is logically impossible if a creator God is all knowing and all powerful. We've been through that already! 😉 Edited 3 August, 2020 by Matthew Le God Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew Le God Posted 3 August, 2020 Share Posted 3 August, 2020 (edited) 7 minutes ago, badgerx16 said: The analogy works, your brain simply doesn't register the fact. It does not work. It is flawed! Quote "If I could find 2 people who had never seen money and sat them facing each other, then held a pound coin up between them and asked them if they could see a face, one of them would say no, but that wouldn't mean the face didn't exist. Both interpretations of the coin would be correct." They are not being asked about the same piece of evidence. They are provided with different bits of evidence and then asked about their own bit of evidence. So it is a nonsense analogy to the situation and point you were failing to make. Edited 3 August, 2020 by Matthew Le God Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
badgerx16 Posted 3 August, 2020 Share Posted 3 August, 2020 (edited) 1 hour ago, Matthew Le God said: It does not work. It is flawed! They are not being asked about the same piece of evidence. They are provided with different bits of evidence and then asked about their own bit of evidence. So it is a nonsense analogy to the situation and point you were failing to make. You have completely missed the point, ( again ), which was to show that because you do not posess any evidence that something exists, does not mean that it doesn't. If I ask you 'is there an afterlife ?" you will say no, if I ask a beleiver they will say yes. Edited 3 August, 2020 by badgerx16 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
badgerx16 Posted 3 August, 2020 Share Posted 3 August, 2020 2 hours ago, Matthew Le God said: 1) I've now refuted your point that there are no Abrahamic differences regarding the afterlife. That is clearly not true and you've even provided evidence to show that is the case. 2) 'Fundamental underpinning' - What is that then? 1) And you accuse other people of deliberately misunderstanding and misquoting. You said that Protestants and Catholics have differing views on Purgatory, when in fact people of both faiths hold both views - it exists or it does not. 2) That whatever way they paint it, an afterlife exists. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew Le God Posted 3 August, 2020 Share Posted 3 August, 2020 10 minutes ago, badgerx16 said: You have completely missed the point, ( again ), which was to show that because you do not posess any evidence that something exists, does not mean that it doesn't. If I ask you 'is there an afterlife ?" you will say no, if I ask a beleiver they will say yes. I don't know how many more times I need to say this to you..!. I have not said there is no afterlife! 🙄 What I have said is that there is no credible evidence available to me that shows there is an afterlife. There is a significant difference between those two positions and you keep claiming I've said the former... when I haven't! 🙄 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew Le God Posted 3 August, 2020 Share Posted 3 August, 2020 5 minutes ago, badgerx16 said: 1) And you accuse other people of deliberately misunderstanding and misquoting. You said that Protestants and Catholics have differing views on Purgatory, when in fact people of both faiths hold both views - it exists or it does not. 2) That whatever way they paint it, an afterlife exists. 1) As I just showed above. You misunderstand and misquote me. Catholics and Protestants make up their own view of purgatory, but that is them cherry picking and creating a religious schism of their own. 2) Are you claiming for definite an after life exists? Is it outside space and time? Because existence by definition is temporal and physical and so cannot exist outside time and space. That would be an oxymoron. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 4 August, 2020 Share Posted 4 August, 2020 Genuine question to MLG: "why do you persist in giving everyone else on this thread the reaction and attention they crave?" Genuine question to everyone else on this thread: "why do you persist in giving MLG the reaction and attention that he craves?" Given the universe is a computer simulation, I can't work out if this thread is an example of a bug in the code or the programmer getting some kind of kick out of futility. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raging Bull Posted 4 August, 2020 Share Posted 4 August, 2020 (edited) 49 minutes ago, trousers said: Genuine question to MLG: "why do you persist in giving everyone else on this thread the reaction and attention they crave?" Genuine question to everyone else on this thread: "why do you persist in giving MLG the reaction and attention that he craves?" Given the universe is a computer simulation, I can't work out if this thread is an example of a bug in the code or the programmer getting some kind of kick out of futility. I can’t speak for anyone else but to begin with I was just answering his deeply flawed reasoning and miss placed aggression towards God. I pretty much gave up after I pointed out that Russia is in the bible (I quoted a passage for example) and he still disagreed that it was, like a child sticking his fingers in his ears shouting ‘I can’t hear you’. I can’t work out whether he’s not very bright, he simply can’t accept he’s wrong or he’s autistic. if it’s the latter then I’ll shut up. Edited 4 August, 2020 by Raging Bull Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hypochondriac Posted 4 August, 2020 Share Posted 4 August, 2020 8 minutes ago, Raging Bull said: I can’t speak for anyone else but to begin with I was just answering his deeply flawed reasoning and miss placed aggression towards God. I pretty much gave up after I pointed out that Russia is in the bible (I quoted a passage for example) and he still disagreed that it was, like a child sticking his fingers in his ears shouting ‘I can’t hear you’. I can’t work out whether he’s not very bright, he simply can’t accept he’s wrong or he’s autistic. if it’s the latter then I’ll shut up. He's definitely autistic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew Le God Posted 4 August, 2020 Share Posted 4 August, 2020 (edited) 45 minutes ago, Raging Bull said: I can’t speak for anyone else but to begin with I was just answering his deeply flawed reasoning and miss placed aggression towards God. I pretty much gave up after I pointed out that Russia is in the bible (I quoted a passage for example) and he still disagreed that it was, like a child sticking his fingers in his ears shouting ‘I can’t hear you’. I can’t work out whether he’s not very bright, he simply can’t accept he’s wrong 1) Your statement appears to presume God exists. You can't have aggression towards something that you think has not been proved to exist. 2) If he did exist then he deserves aggression towards him and not worship. He endorses slavery, rape, genocide etc. That is not an entity deserving of unbridled worship. You keep making excuses for him... but he is a horrific character in that old book. 3) Your point about Russia is bizarre. Russia is a human construct that evolved from early states. That whole topic came up when you were trying to give examples of prophecy. It is fundamentally flawed to use the Bible to support the Bible in prophecy. I outlined why it is a circular argument which you appear to have ignored. It is deeply flawed and you have the cheek to call me 'not very bright'! It is you that hasn't grasped how an old book cannot be evidence of prophecy that is later fulfilled in the same book. 4) You call me 'not very bright', yet you appear to take the Bible very literally. You are a man who appears to think talking snakes, burning bushes, global genocidal floods, walking on water, water into wine etc etc literally happened! 🙄 Edited 4 August, 2020 by Matthew Le God Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew Le God Posted 4 August, 2020 Share Posted 4 August, 2020 (edited) 1 hour ago, trousers said: Genuine question to MLG: "why do you persist in giving everyone else on this thread the reaction and attention they crave?" Edited 4 August, 2020 by Matthew Le God Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joey-deacons-left-nut Posted 4 August, 2020 Share Posted 4 August, 2020 The burden of proof tends to lie with whoever makes a claim. What MLG is getting at is that the claim that there is an Afterlife (or god or super sky wizard) has yet to have had any proof that can stand up to any kind scientific scrutiny presented. He's not saying there is no afterlife. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew Le God Posted 4 August, 2020 Share Posted 4 August, 2020 (edited) 26 minutes ago, Joey-deacons-left-nut said: The burden of proof tends to lie with whoever makes a claim. What MLG is getting at is that the claim that there is an Afterlife (or god or super sky wizard) has yet to have had any proof that can stand up to any kind scientific scrutiny presented. He's not saying there is no afterlife. You are correct! Some people in this thread keep stating I've said things I haven't. At no point did I say there is no afterlife... I said there is no good evidence to believe there to be an afterlife. Those two things are not the same. Same applies to God, I haven't said there is no God in this thread... I said there is no good evidence to believe in a God. I will say certain descriptions of God are bullshit because they are contradictory and can't be true. For example a 100% kind and loving God is not compatible with a God who endorses rape, genocide and slavery like the one of the Bible does. Edited 4 August, 2020 by Matthew Le God Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 4 August, 2020 Share Posted 4 August, 2020 1 hour ago, Raging Bull said: I can’t speak for anyone else but to begin with I was just answering his deeply flawed reasoning and miss placed aggression towards God. I pretty much gave up after I pointed out that Russia is in the bible (I quoted a passage for example) and he still disagreed that it was, like a child sticking his fingers in his ears shouting ‘I can’t hear you’. I can’t work out whether he’s not very bright, he simply can’t accept he’s wrong or he’s autistic. if it’s the latter then I’ll shut up. My questions stem from the the curiosity I have around the psychology and philosophy around debates and arguments. I tend to duck out of debates/arguments when it's blatently obvious that both sides are entrenched in their point of view and that whatever anyone says is going to have zero effect on the outcome of the discussion. In other words, why continue with a debate when to do so is futile? My observation is that some (most?) people seem to crave circular / pointless debates and deliberately post stuff that they know exactly what the reaction from the other side will be. There's every chance my outlook on life is abnormal of course Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew Le God Posted 4 August, 2020 Share Posted 4 August, 2020 12 minutes ago, trousers said: My questions stem from the the curiosity I have around the psychology and philosophy around debates and arguments. I tend to duck out of debates/arguments when it's blatently obvious that both sides are entrenched in their point of view and that whatever anyone says is going to have zero effect on the outcome of the discussion. In other words, why continue with a debate when to do so is futile? My observation is that some (most?) people seem to crave circular / pointless debates and deliberately post stuff that they know exactly what the reaction from the other side will be. There's every chance my outlook on life is abnormal of course No they aren't. If someone like @Raging Bull is able to provide good proof of the God he believes in then I would change my view. He hasn't come remotely close to doing so however and he seems oblivious to previous rebuttals to his claims and he uses circular arguments of using an old book to prove the claims of the same old book. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 4 August, 2020 Share Posted 4 August, 2020 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 4 August, 2020 Share Posted 4 August, 2020 https://www.menshealth.com/trending-news/a19548571/why-some-people-need-to-be-right/#:~:text=“People who always need to,deal with insecurity%2C she explains. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew Le God Posted 4 August, 2020 Share Posted 4 August, 2020 12 minutes ago, trousers said: Is that @Raging Bull and @whelk using the Bible to justify the Bible? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 4 August, 2020 Share Posted 4 August, 2020 3 minutes ago, Matthew Le God said: Is that @Raging Bull and @whelk using the Bible to justify the Bible? You won't get a reaction from me (other than telling you that you won't get a reaction ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raging Bull Posted 4 August, 2020 Share Posted 4 August, 2020 1 hour ago, Matthew Le God said: Is that @Raging Bull and @whelk using the Bible to justify the Bible? This has clearly alluded your attention but I’ve not bothered engaging too much when this thread gets dragged up by you time after time. This is for 2 reasons. 1. You disagree, and that’s fine. I’m happy with my beliefs as I’m sure you are with yours. it’s also clear that you simply cannot, in your self righteous pride, let me go on with my beliefs. You even brought God up in the things that annoy you thread because you couldn’t accept my beliefs. 2. At all costs, you need to be right, always. You’re easily 1 of the most self righteous twerps I’ve ever encountered. And as a side note, the fact that you keep referring to the bible as simply ‘an old book’, doesn’t mean it’s irrelevant to today just because you can’t accept/understand it. Anyway, this is my 3rd post so I’m off because I have a life. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew Le God Posted 4 August, 2020 Share Posted 4 August, 2020 (edited) @Raging Bull Forget the Bible for a minute. Can you see why it is a problem to use a book that is not the Bible to justify the contents of the same book? For justification you need external confirmation. Now let's apply that to the Bible... you keep using the Bible to justify the contents of the Bible! You've never been able to provide external confirmation of the claims of the Bible. You always use a circular argument and that is deeply flawed. Edited 4 August, 2020 by Matthew Le God Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 4 August, 2020 Share Posted 4 August, 2020 (edited) 25 minutes ago, Raging Bull said: This has clearly alluded your attention but I’ve not bothered engaging too much when this thread gets dragged up by you time after time. This is for 2 reasons. 1. You disagree, and that’s fine. I’m happy with my beliefs as I’m sure you are with yours. it’s also clear that you simply cannot, in your self righteous pride, let me go on with my beliefs. You even brought God up in the things that annoy you thread because you couldn’t accept my beliefs. 2. At all costs, you need to be right, always. You’re easily 1 of the most self righteous twerps I’ve ever encountered. And as a side note, the fact that you keep referring to the bible as simply ‘an old book’, doesn’t mean it’s irrelevant to today just because you can’t accept/understand it. Anyway, this is my 3rd post so I’m off because I have a life. He wants you to react in the way that you react. Try telling him he's right (even if you don't believe he is) and then sit back and delight in how that flummoxes people that crave to be right whilst lusting for people to disagree with them... https://ninaamir.com/5-ways-stop-needing-right/ Quote It’s human nature to want to be right. After all, if you aren’t right, it follows that you are wrong. Right? Who wants to be wrong? No one. Yet, the need to be right can get you into a lot of tight spots. And it’s an approach that won’t help you change anything. Instead, it keeps you stuck. Being Right is Human Don’t beat yourself up if you know you tend to want to prove yourself right…often. It’s human nature to want to be right. We don’t like being wrong and consider it a reflection on who we are. If we are wrong, we think we look bad. And we will do just about anything not to look bad. However, our need to be right can become an addiction. Like a bad habit, it’s something we do automatically or unconsciously, and we can’t live without it. It helps us maintain our sense of equilibrium. If we are right, we know we are okay. I get it. I don’t want to be wrong either, and I like to look good. But the need to be right does me no good at all. It doesn’t help my relationships. It doesn’t change anything in my life for the better, and it doesn’t provide solutions to problems. And it definitely doesn’t make me happy. Give up the Need to be Right So, I suggest we give up the need to be right. One of my clients did it for Lent, but I recommend you and I do it now. Right now. To give up your need to be right, first, you must become conscious of when you feel that desire to make someone or something wrong. Notice when your attitude turns toward, “They’re wrong,” “That’s wrong,” or “I know better.” When you notice that happening, make a shift. Do something different. Specifically, drop that need to be right! You can only do that when you are aware it’s happening, though. Like any addiction, you’ll break it by creating a new and more-positive habit. You do that by consistently doing something else. 5 Ways to Stop Needing to be Right I know of five ways to give up the need to be right. Give them a try. Ask the age-old question: Would you rather be right or happy? Most of us would rather be happy, but we often equate being right with being happy. In fact, when you make someone else wrong, deep down inside, you don’t feel good (or right) about your actions…or yourself. That’s why you’ll never be happy as long as you insist others are wrong. Consider that you want to be right to justify yourself or your actions in some way. Maybe you want to prove you are smarter, not wrong, better, or that it wasn’t your fault. Drop the justifications; the need to be right diminishes—or disappears. Your reasons tend to end up as blame and excuses, neither of which improve a situation, relationship, or how you feel about yourself. Stop telling yourself you aren’t proving the other person wrong but just proving that you are right. In fact, you possess the need to make the other person wrong. If you accomplish that goal, on some level, you believe you will feel better about yourself. (As mentioned, on another level you will feel worse.Instead, try allowing the other person to be right. Doing so is as easy as saying, “You know, you are right.” And those words do not mean you are wrong. Two people can be right. Start small. Taking small steps is good advice when you want to change any unsupportive habit. You could go cold turkey—break your addiction fast! Or look for little opportunities to practice dropping your need to be right.For example, don’t tell the waiter he took your order incorrectly. You said, “dressing on the side,” but the dressing came on the salad. You can eat it the way this one time or say, “I would prefer the dressing on the side. Is there a way we can correct this situation?” Or order another salad and ask, “Did you get that? I’d like the dressing on the side.” Let’s say your driving on the highway, and a car pulls sharply in front of your vehicle. Fight your urge to shout, “You’re a jerk! You cut me off! You don’t know how to drive!” Also, don’t give in to your desire to speed up and tailgate him or to pull around him and wave your fist at him through the window as you pass. Instead, consider that maybe you weren’t paying attention to his need to change lanes or merge and, therefore, didn’t slow down to let him in. Or admit, “Wow…that was a bit scary and dangerous. I’m glad we are both okay. I’ll give him some more space.”Get used to allowing for the possibility that you aren’t right and the other person is not wrong. Focus on what’s right with everything! The need to be right makes you focus on what is wrong. To counteract this tendency, stop looking for what’s wrong. Instead, look for what’s right. When you change your focus in this way, you’ll discover fewer opportunities to point your finger and say, “That’s wrong,” “You’re wrong,” or “I am right.” #peace Edited 4 August, 2020 by trousers 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew Le God Posted 4 August, 2020 Share Posted 4 August, 2020 8 minutes ago, trousers said: He wants you to react in the way that you react. Try telling him he's right (even if you don't believe he is) and then sit back and delight in how that flummoxes people that crave to be right whilst lusting for people to disagree with them... https://ninaamir.com/5-ways-stop-needing-right/ #peace I've already told you that I'm happy to be shown to be wrong on this when I said... "If someone like @Raging Bull is able to provide good proof of the God he believes in then I would change my view. He hasn't come remotely close to doing so however and he seems oblivious to previous rebuttals to his claims and he uses circular arguments of using an old book to prove the claims of the same old book." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 4 August, 2020 Share Posted 4 August, 2020 I agree with MLG (see, not that difficult, is it...?) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew Le God Posted 4 August, 2020 Share Posted 4 August, 2020 (edited) 18 minutes ago, trousers said: I agree with MLG I'm getting that framed regardless of context! Edited 4 August, 2020 by Matthew Le God Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whelk Posted 4 August, 2020 Share Posted 4 August, 2020 I genuinely think you are ill. I pray you recover soon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew Le God Posted 4 August, 2020 Share Posted 4 August, 2020 8 minutes ago, whelk said: I genuinely think you are ill. I pray you recover soon You are going to pray(talk) to an invisible deity who you have a personal relationship with!? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
badgerx16 Posted 5 August, 2020 Share Posted 5 August, 2020 On 04/08/2020 at 12:49, Matthew Le God said: I've already told you that I'm happy to be shown to be wrong on this when I said... "If someone like @Raging Bull is able to provide good proof of the God he believes in then I would change my view. He hasn't come remotely close to doing so however and he seems oblivious to previous rebuttals to his claims and he uses circular arguments of using an old book to prove the claims of the same old book." The problem with this is that his proof of God is Creation, and you won't accept that this is proof. The argument then tends towards becoming a perpetual motion engine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
badgerx16 Posted 5 August, 2020 Share Posted 5 August, 2020 On 04/08/2020 at 17:58, Matthew Le God said: You are going to pray(talk) to an invisible deity who you have a personal relationship with!? Why do you have to be so dismissive of other people's belief systems ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now