Bible prophecy coming true - A One World Religious/ Economic/ Government System

[sapphi_snake]

Kasz216 said:

A) No it isn't.  Man is inherently good is a basis of Christian belief and must be taken as true when consdiering whether or not said statement is cotnradictory in the belief system.

C1) It's not a tautology.  Or do you disagree that helping others is good moraly?

C2) Again, this is all your opinion and irrelevent to the topic at hand and an attempt to retreat off the topic at hand to a arguemenatitive highground where you try to insert your own Dogma over the existing one to force flaws.  

This was afterall an analysis over what he said, and whether or not it was contradictory when concerning Christian Dogma. Your own personal beliefs are irrelevent.  To study whether it's contraditory or not one must accept the viewpoints as true and see if a contradiction happens when thinking as they do.

If you lack the critical thinking skills to do so, and decide to only look at anything ever through your own point of view, you won't see ANYTHING as ever being valid outside of your own beliefs... which is much more the cause of the problems and dictatorships that you complain about.

To Judge this you need to use Immanent Crique.  To explain it via a Wikipedia quote...

According to David Harvey, Distinguished Professor of Anthropology at the City University of New York (CUNY), "Critical theory at its most abstract and general level ... begins as a formal 'negativity.' As a dissenting motif, it selects some tradition, ideological premise, or institutionalized orthodoxy for analysis. As immanent critique, it then 'enters its object,' so to speak, 'boring from within.' Provisionally accepting the methodological presuppositions, substantive premises, and truth-claims of orthodoxy as its own, immanent critique tests the postulates of orthodoxy by the latter's own standards of proof and accuracy. Upon 'entering' the theory, orthodoxy's premises and assertions are registered and certain strategic contradictions located. These contradictions are then developed according to their own logic, and at some point in this process of internal expansion, the one-sided proclamations of orthodoxy collapse as material instances and their contradictions are allowed to develop 'naturally.'"

Therefore whether or not an Omnipotent god exists or not, it is irrelevent to the topic at hand.  In general your opinions or mine on dogma or reality are irrelevent.  All that is irrelevent is the general beliefs attributed to the statement.

 

D) If that's the case, then why as an atheist decide to live?  You are taking a very nihlistic view of life in such a case.  Aside from which, you aren't learning or living or growing then.

A. It's irrelevant when the belief system itself is contradicted by reality. (then again, in culture reality doesn't matter, and appearently people confuse culture with reality often)

C1. You said "it's good, because it's good". That's a tautology. And I'd like you to show me how helping others is in itself good. I know you can't, but amuse me. And no refrences to Christian dogma please.

C2. This is what he said:

You also have free will to do what you want with your life aswell - although there are consequences for all your actions -, so there`s all the room for individuality and unity with God.

This is a contradiction. He sais that people have free will to do whatever they want with their lives, but also that god has deemed certain actions as being "right", and certain actions as being "wrong". In other words god isn't interested in people expressing their individuality, but rather in them caving in to conformity and "sameness". What room is there for individuality, when there already is a standard model that everyone has to adhere to in order for them to be "with god"?

Christianity is also a belief system that claims to explain reality, so I'd say that whether or not it actually has any connection to reality or whether it's pure fiction is quite important.

D. What's the relevance of what you wrote? It seems like you meant to write this regarding the above point. We were talking about what Christians "think", and I actually used Immanent Critique to illustrate this contradiction in their beleifs system. It's not what I think, it's the logical conclusion that you come to when using the very rules of the Chritian dogma: if life has meaning and purpose (the purpose being salvation, and proving to god that you deserve it), but god is all knowing and already knows what people will do before they do it (and essentially what people will be "good" and end up getting saved, and what people will be "bad" and end up in hell), then life is ultimately pointless, because the purpose Christians attribute to it is negated (they don't have to prove anything to god, as god already knows what they will do before they do it, so life can just be skipped altogether).

Also, why don't you answer the questions you asked me yourself. If I remember correctly you're not a Chritstian, or religious. Why do you, as a whatever you are, chose to live? I chose to live because I want to, and regardless of what others may think of this reason, I do not care. With my limited knowledge of the universe (no different than the knowledge that all humans have, whether they like to admit it or not), it's the best and most honest reason I can find to want to live, without resorting to fantasies and delusions to find justifications for life.