-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
How does one side have all the truth?
- Thread starter Eric B
- Start date
:laugh:
Read your own writings. When you described the "default" tactic, you considered it dishonest. Now that you're using it, you don't.
That's just another form of dishonesty.
Last edited by a moderator:
Confirming that "truth" is relative to you.
To me it's not. If you believe today's truths are relative, then it is highly likely that the truth in scripture is relative to you as well, like it is to all politically liberal Christians
To me, it's not.
FR7 Baptist
Active Member
You lie. I'm a political liberal and I believe that the Holy Scriptures contain truth, without any mixture of error, for their matter.
carpro said:
So Paul3144, do you believe that today's truths are relative?
That is the condition that carpro established at the beginning of the sentence that caused you accuse him of lying.
The only thing I called dishonest was trying to force a person into a label so that you can make him guilty of everything the labeled group advocates. I have not done that with you. You embraced conservativism. I have not gone around calling you a conservative, and then tagging you with something wrong some other conservative has said or done. I have only criticized you for stuff you have said.
I have since edited it to say "But in many of these other issues, "truth" is not always that clear...
But I know that isn't enough for you.
I gave the example of gravity and scripture as being clear truths from God. you have yet to prove any of your "truths" likewise.
You only generalize it to me holding "all truth" (or now "today's" truths) being relative. Again, if you can't tell the difference between God's word and political ideologies, then you're making up your own source of infallible truth.
Then why don't you ever reference it then, to prove your views? Or show how it is as universal and self-evident as gravity? This is what's being asked; but yet again, it is made to be about our views.
Last edited by a moderator:
FR7 Baptist
Active Member
I'm not sure exactly what you're trying to get at, but I'll take a shot at answering. Truths can not be self-contridactory. If something is true, then it is true for all people. For example, if it's true that the sky is blue and I say that it is green, then I am objectively wrong.
Did you vote for Obama , or any other pro abortion candidate, when there was another alternative?
Last edited by a moderator:
What I am geting at is - Carpro said "If you believe today's truths are relative, then it is highly likely that the truth in scripture is relative to you as well..."
If you do not yourself believe that today's truths are relative - then you should not have taken offense at his statement as it would not apply to you.
Do you agree that if someone believes that "truth is relative" then it is also likely that "truth in Scripture" is also relative to that person?
I do.
You have a lot of reading to do. "ever" is a huge word. Get back to me when you're done.
That being said, referencing scripture to liberals is largely a waste of time. Their moral relativism belies their Christianity, and justification and rationalization is their order of the day.
But now, you have to catch up on your reading before you season your crow.:thumbs:
You claim to be netural and unbiased but there nothing in your writing condemning the "left wing" veiwpoints as you have done for the "right wing" viewpoints and that says everything about where you stand.
I don't think I ever claimed to be "neutral" or even "unbiased". (Another straw man?)
And there are criticisms of the left in there. (I wouldn't even bother with this if I was at all happy with their handling of the issues).
But it is primarily a criticism of the Right, especially as the wing has made such claims on God amd truth, but show themselves to be just as humanly fallible and self-interest motivated as anyone else.
Again, still all about what I believe.
That's a total cop-out.
(So now you're encourqging me to follow you from post to post?)
I have already seen enough of your posts over the years, and all I have ever seen is the above, and worse. It's all about the other person, and the liberals, and you don't need to prove yourself because it's a waste of time anyway. So your words are just true and that is that.
Here is your entire tactic:
•I say my views are truth
•You disagree with it
•One is liberal if they disagree with these views
•Liberals have ungodly policies
•You therefore side with the liberals
•If you don't identify with [this definition of] the liberals, then you are dishonest too.
•So you're just a stupid, blind, lying liberal, and whatever you say is automatically wrong, and everything we say is automatically proven to be truth
On truth:
•Truth is not relative
•God's word is truth
•Conservatives take biblical positions on issues like abortion and gay rights
•Therefore, we are "grounded in truth, and everything else we say is likely to be truth
•If you question this, you're a relativist.
•Anything you say is therefore wrong
•We don't even have to prove it, because you liberals don't believe in truth anyway
This is all a FALLACIOUS loop.
You could tell me you were the King of Siam and use the same line of reasoning.
What you fail to realize, and keep jumping the track on is that anyone can SAY anything is truth. It's not proven because of a political platform. For that then would in itself become the source of truth.
Truth is either God's word, universal principles of the created order, OR in person vs person debates like this, to back up what one says. All you're doing is to turn it back to what others believe.
That's a total cop-out. Going to the archives wouldn't be following anyone. I can see you would prefer to believe you are right, even if it's a lie about someone else, than find out that you are wrong.. Another liberal trait.
You're really a very dishonest individual. Not just about who you are and what you stand for, but your cloak of holier than thou Christianity is threadbare. It didn't take the readers here long to out you.
You might as well come clean. You're fooling no one here anymore.
"Primarily" is an understatement! You essentially want to poke holes in everything that you've determined is "right wing" from the foundations of our nation all the way to current issues. Read your own web site - the record is clear there despite the dancing around the issues you've been doing on the BaptistBoard. Your real position has been exposed and that's probably difficult for you to accept.
You sound like you're describing yourself perfectly. for you're the one who would rather believe you're right than back it up with anything. You made the claim that I denied that liberals play the blame game, but could never prove that. So who's dishonest? That's an prime example of how you deal with "truth". This is all you have done. Put words in people's mouth, and erect straw men.
Who's "holier-than-thou", when you're the one who claim people who disaagree with conservativism are just wrong, wrong, wrong, and need no proof, or no civil discourse when debate. (Also, "holier-than-thou" is often a liberal or at least secular attack against Christians! As are terms such as "today's truth"). At every turn, you point at yourself.
Nothing has been "exposed" that I have not already revealed to people. You accused me of everything in the book already.
I never called myself a conservative or even neutral. I always made it clear that I was strongly opposed to much of conservative rhetoric and put my site out for all to see. So what I try to poke holes in it? Isn't that what the debate is for? I never thought there would ever be any question on this. But I see it's just the sole recourse you've found to deflect the questions posed to you.
But I can see now, my main question has been answered, and that was what I posted in the last post.
Your two-pronged 14 point cyclical self-verifying system of "truth"-determining was NAILED, and now you're flipping and just lunging at me and my position again. You can tell when a nerve has been struck, because it seems things are getting a bit more civil, and then all of a sudden, here come the ad-hominems, the accusations of dishonesty, the diversion to what I believe, etc. again. I see that's all you can do.
So I think this topic is finished. There were other questions in there, such as what do you want done about all this stuff you complain about constantly, but it's probably a waste of time to ask anything else.
Thanks anyway.
Eric, your criticism of Carpro where it concerns his not providing evidence to back up his claims concerning Liberals is disingenuous.
Your entire OP is merely your opinion and is nothing more than criticism of conservatives with no factual evidence to back up your supposition.
IMO this discussion need not go any further until you provide evidence that conservatives believe that their side has all the truth as you contend.
Or is it that you believe that you have all the truth? :smilewinkgrin:
Your entire OP is merely your opinion and is nothing more than criticism of conservatives with no factual evidence to back up your supposition.
IMO this discussion need not go any further until you provide evidence that conservatives believe that their side has all the truth as you contend.
Or is it that you believe that you have all the truth? :smilewinkgrin:
Since when do leftists provide proof for their accusations? He started this thread with the sole purpose of being critical of conservative Christians, while hiding his own far left leanings. He's still hiding them, but he claims to be about the center in his p0olitical views. He has successfully managed to fool himself, but not the others here that he came here to browbeat and criticize.
EricB is a far left liberal who openly condemns Conservative Christians as racists, among other things.
Liberals always have to play that card, don't they?
Eric's deceitful purpose is now public.
It's not his claims concerning liberals in general I was talking about. It's his claims about people here, like me saying liberals do not play the blame game.
You don't see Carpro's remarks about liberals and truth, and Dragoon's talk of conservatives being more "grounded" in truth? They are using this as the basis to claim automatic validation of their beliefs. Why do you think they are so bent on proving me a "liberal" when the intended topic is on their beliefs, not mine? Because then that means I'm just wrong, because "liberals hate truth" or however C puts it. I'm so wrong just for criticizing conservatives (and I've never claimed to be one or "hide" my criticism of them).
Did I ever deny anything you have quoted? I may have possibly posted that very excerpt somewhere years ago, or something similar.
And I surely made this view known more recently in the Grasshopper thread, and while your side of the issue tried to deny, what eventually came out of that but statistical figures showing "a larger proportion of blanks [sic] and of Hispanics receive public welfare than do whites and 'others'" and that it was a significant percentage of "the money spent on entitlement programs".
http://www.baptistboard.com/showpost.php?p=1536585&postcount=59
This was disputed, as other numbers suggested other counts, but then numbers were only used when convenient.
It was originally denied that blacks were being blamed as the "grasshoppers", or at least a significant part of them (and me accused of playing "the race card" of course), but once these "facts" were produced, that was now gone back on, and the whole thing dropped.
If you didn't think the story was aimed at race, then why try to produce numbers supporting that notion?
Earlier, in a discussion on Crosswalks, I had people blatantly trying to scold the entire black race for their "immorality" of having "so many children out of wedlock". Same thing again, they try to deny, but then throw up statistic numbers as convenient to them.
Now, that was not here, of course, but you can't argue for all conservatives. That page is for whoever the shoe fits.
What I should change, is "the entire right"; but this was originally written years ago, and it did seem like nearly all of the right agreed with this at times.
So what I find is that the Right, or at least parts of it (hopefully diminishing), likes to play the race card when it is convenient to them. Then, when it's dealt back to them, they accuse the other side.
If we try to say the issue is class more than race; that's no good, far left rhetoric as well. Poncho suggests global forces, and it seems people brush that off too. So then who or what is the problem in the economic system? Where is the money all going? Who are the "grasshoppers" leaving the rest of the country destitute? You won't answer (at least directly)? What do you want done about it? Why are your tactics of tossing around numbers and such automatically right? You just go back to me and my views.
So you want to call me a far left liberal, then say what you want. There's no reasoning with you.
Last edited by a moderator:
Perhaps your nerve has been struck?
Wow! You see "... two-pronged 14 point cyclical self-verifying system of "truth"-determining ..." in what I've written! That's very impressive and perhaps something I can add to my resume!
You didn't start the thread to ask a question! You had your own answer before you started. You started the thread to attack conservative principles. You can be honest about that, EricB, because everyone can see it clearly anyway.
You haven't fooled very many people with your extensive writing on these issues. You've provided everyone with a book that confirms what you believe! In it, and on this board, you consistently attack the conservative position on every issue from the founding of our nation to the present time, try to present yourself as having some great insight into the scriptures that the rest of us can not come even close to understanding with a degree of arrogance that's especially annoying, and you've essentially claimed that all the truth we have learned is based on nothing but lies.
Now you're claiming that you have a balanced middle-on-the-road position and equally berate the liberal position. Not so, brother! Give us a break with that lie! By your attacks on conservative principles you have only revealed and firmly confirmed your underlying love of liberal principles.
The topic will live on in debate after debate because one side does have the truth and it's not the liberal side - it's the conservative side - and that difference will continue to the end of time. Your argument, in my opinion, is finished because I don't think there's much more you can write that you haven't already exposed.
FR7 Baptist
Active Member
It's okay Eric. The connies do this all the time. It's projection. They do something and then psychologically project it on the other side. It's a quite primitive defense mechanism. Carpro takes it to another level, however, with his dishonesty, hatred, and lack of love towards other board members. I wish he could be a nice person like Rbell or Ken, but he chooses to be the way he is. I actually pity him. It must be terrible to foster such animosity.
Last edited by a moderator: