joseph1013:


All these people sef. They cannot answer questions simply. smh

HellVictorinho:

Your question can't be answered simply to effect logic.

joseph1013:


So you don't know if morality is objective or subjective?

LordReed:


You are agnostic and believe there is a "god". What I'd like to know is why you seem to like the Catholic faith, something in it resonate with you?

HellVictorinho:

Forget about the church.
I have explained the big bang event in my reply to
your statement on the unknown.

CAPSLOCKED:


WHEN IS THIS GRACE COMING UPON US THE BILLIONS OF NON-CHRISTIANS WORLD WIDE?

DON'T TELL US TO READ THE BIBLE OR LISTEN TO THE THINGS YOU PREACH. IF THERE'S AN OMNI-THIS AND OMNI-THAT (S)HE SHOULD BE CAPABLE OF GETTING TO EVERY ONE OF US. THERE WON'T BE CONFLICTING CHRISTIAN BELIEFS AND RELIGIONS. THERE WON'T BE NEED FOR YOU TO TRY TO SWEET-TALK US INTO "BELIEVING" IN THIS OMNI-SOMEBODY. THERE WON'T BE NEED FOR SOME OF YOUR PASTORS TO GO EXTRA MILES TO TRY "TRICK" US INTO "BELIEVING", FOR IF THIS OMNI-THING WAS REAL AND EXISTING, WE ALL WILL "KNOW".

9inches:
The Big Bang Church, I wanna attend.

joseph1013:


1. Where are the results? Please show us your results.

2. In other words, you have tested the Abrahamic religions and found them to the true, and therefore conclude that the others are false (without looking into them). Is that correct?

9inches:
2. Yes, I can say that I have knowledge of the other world religions. Belief systems can be grouped and understood in a nutshell. For example, if the Abrahamic religion is false, Judaism, christianity and Islam will fall in one fell swoop and your search for the truth focuses on the other religions. But if the Abrahamic religion is true, then your search narrows down to only the Abrahamic religions.

HellVictorinho:

I've found you,Mr Inches.
And,guess what?
I've created a topic titled ' Timing of Existence' to burst your bubbles.
The Big Bang was just one of the events afterall.
And this event was possible because the events that caused the cosmic systems to be suspended upon the plane of Existence,which is undimensional, were also capable of causing their states to change dramatically.

HellVictorinho:

It can be objective.
It can be subjective.
So it is not fixed.

9inches:

1. In what form do you want the results? The result is the readily available (a.k.a already-made) answers to just about every one of the ever burgeoning questions man could have. If that's what you're asking, then I can point you to where and how to search for information/answers.

2. I thought I've answered that.

joseph1013:


Let's make this discussion as direct and obfuscation-free as possible. Many words when a few words would do can render points hidden and trying to untangle them could provide a waste of time.

It's a simple question. Murder, is it objectively evil? This question demands only a Yes or No.

Your response seem to be that it is objectively evil. Correct?

HellVictorinho:

Murder is a crime-fact.
"Good"/"Evil" are just words.

joseph1013:

Do you understand that your answer means morality is subjective?

9inches:
Why is murder a crime?

9inches:
Describe the first ever "event" and what constituted it.

joseph1013:

In terms of answers to question is fine.

I'm actually just interested in the verifiable proof you have to belief that Christianity is the one and only true religion.

HellVictorinho:

Ask the lawmakers in your country's government.

9inches:
Nothing in the law says where the idea of criminalizing murder came from. Is it safe to assume you don't know the answer.

HellVictorinho:

Are you a lawyer/legal practitioner?
And,if murder was not a crime,do you think you would be alive today?

9inches:

No, I'm not a lawyer. Which of the lawmakers you referred me to are lawyers? See, you don't need law degree to know the law. You would need it to deal with the technicalities of arguing the law in a court setting.

That being said, there's no secular law that explains its foundation entirely world over. Only the US Constitution as far as I know comes close to dabbling into that.

9inches:
Well, just like truth and morality, I don't have to like it. Who loves too much rules and responsibilities?
By the way, I'm a catholic. I only said became agnostic at some point. I grew up catholic though. But at some point, it wasn't making "reasonable sense" to me, especially while I was in college studying science and engineering. I reverted back to catholicism after serious consideration of a lot of other beliefs/faith. I now realized it was out of naivety that I left in the first place; I didn't put effort to learn about faith as I did learning sciences. I'm glad though, that I finally did. Better late than never.
The same thing that happened to me is currently happening to millions of Christians worldwide, especially this cuddly postmodernist-freedom-loving generation that loathes the idea of individual responsibility and absolute truths.

Why am I catholic?
I believe that Jesus Christ really lived, died and resurrected, and that we must obey everything that he taught. As a result of that, we have to believe the church that he established to continue his message to the world.
So today we believe and we obey the catholic church because the church is Christ extended into this world.

If you're already a christian and your question is why I'm catholic and not a protestant... you know, like the "Jesus and nothing else" or "Jesus is against religion" type of christians, then I'd answer a little deeper because if I'm allowed to rephrase such question, it would be "are you saying Jesus isn't enough".

The answer to that would be that it's Jesus himself that tells you that you also need the church because he established the church. Matthew 18:15-18 where Jesus says he gives the perennial command, anytime until he comes again, that if your brother offends you, you should go and tell him his fault and try to settle. If he won't listen to you, Jesus says, you should take one or two others with you. Notice that Jesus doesn't say anything like "hey, I'm enough. If someone disagrees with you, just ask me again and I'll tell you again...... He says you go to your brother.

You just don't say "oh Jesus settled everything. No, "you go, because Jesus tells you to go and teach. But then if they disagree what hapoens? You take one or two with you for witness sake and you try to settle. If they still don't agree, Jesus says you should tell it to the church! Now, according to Jesus (who has the final say in the matters of the church, which he also claimed is his own body), if they still refuse to listen even to the church, then treat him as you would a pagan or a tax collector, for "whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven."

This does not imply that Jesus isn't enough I'm not enough; we know Jesus is more than enough but it's Jesus who empowers the church to deal with these things (for reasons that could be argued later). But the idea of "Jesus only is enough means" (in context) which means "I don't need anybody else or the church" is unbiblical.

For biblical contexts:
a) The "church" as mentioned in this scenario refers not to the entire church of Jesus, as in Matthew 16:18, but to the local congregation.

b) "Treat him as you would a pagan (Gentile) or a tax collector": Just as the observant Jew avoided the company of Gentiles and tax collectors, so must the congregation of Christian disciples separate itself from the arrogantly sinful member who refuses to repent even when convicted of his sin by the whole church. Such a person is to be set outside the fellowship of the community. The harsh language about Gentile and tax collector probably reflects a stage of the Matthean church when it was principally composed of Jewish Christians. That time had long since passed, but the principle of exclusion for such a sinner remained. Paul makes a similar demand for excommunication in 1 Cor 5:1-13.

HellVictorinho:

Alright, I will explain.
Humans limit themselves in different ways.
'Making laws' is just one of those ways.
Without these limits,humans won't even be as organized as rats.

9inches:

1. In what way is making laws limiting to human?
2. Do rats have laws, why do humans need laws? Why not live the rat way - lawless?

HellVictorinho:

Have you heard of limitations to the freedom of human rights?
Rats don't have that intelligence which causes humans to question everything including themselves.

9inches:
No, tell me about that.

So why then do we need laws to live our lives?

HellVictorinho:

Google the first one.
You need laws to maintain your peace, at least for some minutes.

LordReed:


Thanks for the clarification.

9inches:
Why would a person need laws to maintain peace?

HellVictorinho:

Because other persons might want to take it away from you.

9inches:
And so what? What's wrong with that?