RESOLVED: Christianity is Beneficial to the Individual Man

The opponent is trying to change the definitions of this debate, and this concept of Christianity and what a Christian is. When someone is Christian, especially by choice, they practice Christianity. Christianity has been defined by the opponent as having a personal relationship with the savior and God as well as having a desire to save knowledge of Jesus, as provided in R1. However, the opponent in R2 redefines this as living within the accords of Christian morality. I have accepted the first R1 debate definitions; ergo his new definition will be ignored throughout my case. Postulate #1: The Afterlife The opponent makes two fundamental mistakes; he says that neurons are here to present you, and he says that the “in some parallel universe, the soul exists” On Neurology Neurologically speaking, consciousness, i. e the qualities of being to touch, feel, smell, sensory experiences etc. originate from the brain, and is sustained by the brain. Neurons are small orgasms in our body that creates the sensations of touching; henceforth, when I touch my computer, or my television, my neurons are sending a certain degree of electronic information (charge) for me to be able to interact, feel and think. Neurons originate from a tube in the nervous system called the neural plate; they, like every other cell, have a nucleus. However, taking insights from physiology, the neuron is made out of many other parts that are not present in other cells. The myeline sheath protects the loss of electrolyte, the originators of NT. The axon contains the NT, and the dendrite detects stimuli. Enough neurology for now; we must understand that the brain and the cells in your brain were created to sustain consciousness, to sustain one’s mind. Henceforth, one cannot simply state that the “brain is the ship of the soul’s crew” because the “soul and its crew is created by the brain” The abilities of humans to touch, feel and sense creates an identity of perception, because whilst we live in an objective reality, we live in a subjective fantasy; we humans perceive many things differently. If the soul truly existed, then we would be living in an objective fantasy. The opponent also makes the fundamental error; when something goes wrong in the brain, human consciousness and your “soul” is also affected. A person suffering from mental disorders, such as schizophrenia and schizoid, experience an interesting change in their identity, for a person with schizoid is most likely to have many social relationships. In fact, a case study of a man who accidentally had an iron rod through his prefrontal cortex showed that he was more grumpy and moody at times; the loss of motor skills in this case study was also present. On Parallel Universes “In some parallel universe, I’m a liberal” “In some parallel universe, I’m not ugly” “In some parallel universe, I believe in God” The analogical fallacies set out here is enormous; the opponent states that since not all things that exist can be proven, and when something that exists “in name” cannot be proven to not exist, ergo it exists. However, this is purely and inductively negative proof fallacy; if we were to look into logic, we can see that: Prop. 1 All things that exist are purely physical or if this doesn’t exist physically, then its existence is clear to us Defense: For example, gravity’s existence is clear to us. So is oxygen; these things do not exist physically, but it existence is of no doubt to us as it is supported by empirical evidence. Other than that, all other substances either exist in physical shape. Prop 2. The supernatural does not exist physically, and its existence is unclear to us Defense: The supernatural’s existence is in question Conclusion: The supernatural does not exist. The opponent also commits another correlation-causation mistake; because of 1/20xis true does not necessarily means x is a true proposition. Unless the opponent’s quasi metaphysical-based convictions are to be supported by a posteriori propositions, then his argument is wholly based upon more false prepositions. Apart from this, the truth-factor proves nothing in this debate on the benefits of Christianity to the common man. REPLYING TO THE OPPONENT’S QUESTION ON FALSE BIBLICAL PROPHECIES: Virgin Birth (here) Israelite Will Be Unbeatable (here)The Nile Draining Up (here)Eziekel’s Destruction of Egypt: Postulate #2: Truth Factor and Benefits Please consider this following image, a criticism of Pascal’s Wager: This visualized game theory matrix proves one thing; “it is more logical to abstain from the worship of God” Why? The first assumption is based upon the Christian view of God; he is vengeful and wrathful. Henceforth, he damns you to hell for worshipping “fake” Gods. The second assumption is based on the atheist view; God does not exist. Then the notion of religious worship is a total waste of time. But the last assumption states that if a God exists and benevolent, then no worship would be the best time to use your time, as benevolent Gods do give a ticket to heaven for anyone who prays or does not. The vertex will be looked upon first: Looking into this in a more empirical manner, there are over 4,000 religions in the world, and in all of these religions, if we were to take the correlation-causation path, have a truth factor in them. Henceforth, if the first assumption is correct, then one of the 4,000 religions has to have a truth-factor. Which one is it? No one knows, because every end-time prophecy of every religion is more or less correlating with the known facts of the world (the prophecies fulfilled, however, are vague and could be attributed to anything). In the second view, God does not exist, and when we die, it all ends there. We like to make myths to impose on what we do not know; this is inherently harmful. Nevertheless, God does not exist; worshipping him is therefore immoral and a waste of time. The Game Theory-alternative would be to choose no worship at all, or atheism. The third assumption is based upon the view that a benevolent God exists. Henceforth, if a benevolent God exists, then all our sins will be forgiven and we will surely be damned for a certain period of time only, accordingly not to belief but merit. Therefore, if a Christian prays to this God but does something horribly wrong, he will go to hell. Speaking from a game theoretical point of view, the worship of God is illogical as there is barely any chance that a God exists, and even if he exists, then he exists as either benevolent or authoritarian; if he existed as authoritarian, yet still we would not know the true God due to the many religions in this world in existence. 3R1NRC: Violent Christians The opponent here tries to redefine Christian. However, as I have already stated, the first definition is the only definition that I will be taking. Apart from this the opponent admits to the fact that the Crusaders, Carlist et all. are Christian. Via definition, a Christian practices Christianity, and henceforth all Christians practices Christianity. The opponent also seems to be ignoring the case where systematic racial genocide, where Jews upon the word of God exterminated desert tribes. Is filling the minds of a person with hatred a sign of Christianity’s beneficial substance? This I doubt. Christianity has killed 3,000,000 people in the first few Crusades alone; in the name of God, 1,000,000 people were further killed in the Spanish Civil War, which is also commonly attributed by even the then pope as a “crusade” against Communism. The Taiping Rebellion, however, has been the bloodiest war that Christianity has caused; 20 million human beings died in the process of the usurping of power of the Qing dynasty by a man who has contacted God and fits the description of “Christian” in this sense. Many more can be named, but so far, Christianity has caused 24 million deaths in just three incidents; is this beneficial for the individual man? 3R2NRC: Memory and Benefits The opponent brings up the question: are you saying that people do not remember a life changing moment? Yes, that is exactly what I am saying. The memory curve theory, an empirically true theory, suggests that within 15 hours, only ~20% of the information from that memory may be considered definite and undoubtedly accurate. Let us take an example; psychologist Hermann Ebbinghaus tested his memories from 20 minutes to 31 days. From one incident, he would only remember a few things of this incident, and these things were often subconscious. Ebbinghaus tried to memorize nonsensical syllables; within 3 days of no practice, the nonsensical syllable memory shortened highly; this goes for the same in all human memories. “A memory is often nothing more than a rumor” With this said, the continuation of this argument shall be emplaced. The complete support of a system of worship promotes ignorance, and this ignorance cannot be harmful. Taking insights into the concept of Nietzsche’s philosophy in the Antichrist, Christianity is a depressant. It promotes pity; pity promotes negative emotions that lead to the brain entering a state of outright depression. It disarms the man of his most vital virtues, and arms him with the least preferred. Keep in mind that the opponent has the burden of proving Christianity beneficial for all and every mortal being, yet has provided only four cases of Christianity being beneficial, and all of these cases are affected by many things, including memory. With this said, we must take into account one last factor of this debate; if Christianity is beneficial, then many people would adhere it’s principles for a sustained period of time. However, people are turning from Christianity to Atheism; atheism provides more benefits than Christianity in that it embraces reality, and does not impose a sense of intuitive moral values upon a completely rational mind. The resolution is therefore negated. Sources from last round used.