The evil paradigm that conquered America
Looking at that title, it would seem like some religion was sweeping across America causing nearly everyone to lose their ideals and subscribe to a false religion. That is actually not far from the truth, although one could hardly call relativity a religion, and it already happened.
Relativity is not a theory of Einstein's, it is the paradigm (definition of paradigm below) that insists that each person can choose to believe whatever he wants, and that belief is "right" or "correct" for him. This idea stems from the Protestant Schism that occurred in the 16th century, where Luther and many others sparked the "interperet the Bible for yourself" method of Christianity, pushing the Church out of the picture. In essence, Relativity denies objective religious and moral truth (again, definition below).
This paradigm, and this paradigm alone, is the cause of the social evils of abortion, euthenasia, and contraception, as well as a basis for many twisted ideaologies. How can this be, you ask? If the largest single religious institution is Catholicism, which strictly forbids and denounces all three of the above, how could all those voting Catholics allow such evils to exist? It is individual Catholics, who have bought into the theory of relativity. Their think,ing is as follows: "I don't support abortion, and would never have one, but someone else might think it's right, and I can't force my beliefs on them." Let me repeat that phrase. "I can't force my beliefs on someone else." Isn't that familiar? How often do you hear that phrase? I hear it every time I debate, because I invariably look to the Chatechism as a source. No Catholic can win a debate about morals when that statement is said and is the basis for debate.
So what is the answer? To prove once and for all that the IS objective moral and religious truth. To prove that God IS God and He IS supreme, whether one believes in him or not. But how?
The most direct way is to ask if the person you are debating would think it wrong if you walked up to him and slit his throat. Odds are, he will say it is. Then you have him, because if ANY MORAL LINE IS DRAWN, THE ENTIRE RELATIVITY PARADIGM IS PROVED FALSE. Either all moral truth is subjective, or it is all objective. Your opponent can mutter al he likes about natural order or whatever, but you can merely point out that regardless of the source, he has admitted to objective moral truth. Morals are laws and laws require a lawmaker and enforcer, so God follows directly.
In summary, relativity is possibly one of the most dificult curves that the devil has thrown the Church in all of history. By confusing the members of the Church itself and by masking morals in the same move, he prepared Society for billions of evils that lead inevitably toward utter chaos and dictatorship. Then, with society in his grip, Satan can once again wield it as a weapon with which to attack the Church. Relativity is pure evil.
~Ambrose
Glossary:
Paradigm - an ideological window through which we view everything.
Objective truth - moral laws or religious philosophies that are always true, regardless of circumstance or if an individual believes or not.
Relativity is not a theory of Einstein's, it is the paradigm (definition of paradigm below) that insists that each person can choose to believe whatever he wants, and that belief is "right" or "correct" for him. This idea stems from the Protestant Schism that occurred in the 16th century, where Luther and many others sparked the "interperet the Bible for yourself" method of Christianity, pushing the Church out of the picture. In essence, Relativity denies objective religious and moral truth (again, definition below).
This paradigm, and this paradigm alone, is the cause of the social evils of abortion, euthenasia, and contraception, as well as a basis for many twisted ideaologies. How can this be, you ask? If the largest single religious institution is Catholicism, which strictly forbids and denounces all three of the above, how could all those voting Catholics allow such evils to exist? It is individual Catholics, who have bought into the theory of relativity. Their think,ing is as follows: "I don't support abortion, and would never have one, but someone else might think it's right, and I can't force my beliefs on them." Let me repeat that phrase. "I can't force my beliefs on someone else." Isn't that familiar? How often do you hear that phrase? I hear it every time I debate, because I invariably look to the Chatechism as a source. No Catholic can win a debate about morals when that statement is said and is the basis for debate.
So what is the answer? To prove once and for all that the IS objective moral and religious truth. To prove that God IS God and He IS supreme, whether one believes in him or not. But how?
The most direct way is to ask if the person you are debating would think it wrong if you walked up to him and slit his throat. Odds are, he will say it is. Then you have him, because if ANY MORAL LINE IS DRAWN, THE ENTIRE RELATIVITY PARADIGM IS PROVED FALSE. Either all moral truth is subjective, or it is all objective. Your opponent can mutter al he likes about natural order or whatever, but you can merely point out that regardless of the source, he has admitted to objective moral truth. Morals are laws and laws require a lawmaker and enforcer, so God follows directly.
In summary, relativity is possibly one of the most dificult curves that the devil has thrown the Church in all of history. By confusing the members of the Church itself and by masking morals in the same move, he prepared Society for billions of evils that lead inevitably toward utter chaos and dictatorship. Then, with society in his grip, Satan can once again wield it as a weapon with which to attack the Church. Relativity is pure evil.
~Ambrose
Glossary:
Paradigm - an ideological window through which we view everything.
Objective truth - moral laws or religious philosophies that are always true, regardless of circumstance or if an individual believes or not.
posted by Ambrose at 7/10/2007 11:38:00 AM
2 Comments:
"Your opponent can mutter all he likes about natural order or whatever, but you can merely point out that regardless of the source, he has admitted to objective moral truth."
I'd like to see anyone just try to come up with a "natural order" that doesn't consider contraception, abortion and euthanasia all wrong -- I'd like to see 'em try it with myself in the room to destroy on the spot any fallacious flaws in logic they must use to do so.
~Yes, it's Mr. Longsentence (alias Scott) again.
P.S. In case I haven't complimented you on your blog yet, allow me to say: Your blog rocks!
My one issue with this (and the reason that this curve-ball is in fact the trickyest thing ever) is the fact that men are imperfect. No one, not even the Pope, can just say something and have it actually be Truth. This is not to say that the Pope tells lies or anything, it merely acknowledges that the Truth is a seperate entity from humanity. Although humanity might reflect that Truth, he is not the author of truth.
This leads to the thorny question - who determines what we will use to gage truth? Anyone who sets the foundation for determining what is true and what is not true is a human defining Truth, which holds no water logically. Even just saying "the Catholic Church determines truth" is flawed because it is still a human (however divinely inspired) institution, and thus can only reflect Truth. Look at the Church during the Rennesance (awash in Sodomy and politics) or the recent abuse scandals by a small minority of preists. The Church is not immune to bad eggs popping up every once an awhile, and if one pops up at an important Council, how do we know and correct the error?
This leaves the problem, yet again, of finding this Truth and figureing out how we know something is true when we see it. Lutherian self-rightiousness drug the Bible through the mud and modern science/archeology aren't making things easier, although we (or at least I) must admit that the physical world must play some part in Truth, as if we call it untrue then we deny ourselves and our senses. Reality must be considered, but how much? Science is no Church, as it can only say what IS, and in somce cases predict what also lies uncovered, not what SHOULD BE, moraly speaking.
This question is usually left to religious persons or philosophers to decide, but now any fool can say "I don't think that sounds right... I'm gonna take my ball and go found another 'church' because you all are wrong." Sometimes we have to stand up for what we beleive, as the Truth is the Truth and is not bound to any person, institution, exc - anyone can be right, The problem is, without a proper, relyable system that reflects and finds Truth rather than defineing it, the notion that ANYONE can be right turns into EVERYONE is right, and thus 'right' becomes meaningless, for there is no 'wrong' to differentiate from. Furthermore, this must be a flexable system, because humans are finate creatures and are always learning more about God's creation. The means of finding Truth must be able to evaluate itself so that it does not change every time something new comes along, but is not just a paperweight that refuses to change even when faced with overwhelming evidence that it is in the wrong. Flexible, but not a doormat.
So yea... thats what we need and it probably won't visit america anytime soon, or if it does, we will probably say "I don't like it, let's kill it!" and lose our last hope.
- Louis
Post a Comment
<< Home