You think I did not consider those
things ? seriously ?
Thus what do you claim to bring me ?
Do you really think you know better than me what is "pure and hard
logic" and which things are so ?
See texts I wrote about Christian logic [not translated yet] and
Thanks for no more bothering me with ridiculous claims to teach me
how to think with such childish lessons.
Pure and hard logic is
simply what we manage to understand, and when we can't anymore,
then it becomes mystery
I am intelligent, surely
less than you in some fields but I had mark 19 in math on my
scientific Bachelor degree
Is the universe definite or
indefinite ? we know that the big bang theory is no more a
theory it is the explanation of the creation of the universe, we
know with present technology that the universe is expanding so
it is getting bigger so it is definite.
Is the time that passes
definite or indefinite ? with big bang theory we know there was
a beginning at t=0 and the end of this time scale is our present
so yes the time scale is definite it started at the creation and
ends at the present time.
I invite you to reply one
Is existence an accident ?
(the existence of our world in 4 dimensions, space with 3
dimensions and time with 1 dimension)
Answer me by yes or no with
only about 10 lines
But I don't take you for
stupid, but I did not like what you tell about religion, you are
Religion is a hope for
some, and for others a lie, I have my convictions, this is why I
ask you to answer whether existence is an accident yes or no
As for me I cannot prove
you this, I lost my mother and at that very time I made a dream
while I did not expect her death. For me there is indeed
something that cannot be explained, but I'm sure, there does
exist something beyond, thus science has limits, and can never
explain everything. I'd be happy to confront my ideas with you,
so is existence an accident ?
Truth cannot be chosen, it
forces itself, and when one refuses to believe it one becomes
unbeliever even if one is intelligent.
I am not the one mocking religion. It is religion that is somehow
ridiculous. Why should I be guilty to have found the truth on the
troubles of something (should I recall you) I previously joined ?
If religion is ridiculous, is it my fault ?
If I mock religion (or Christians), then I mock myself, as I was
Christian before. Thus things are more subtle.
What is your goal ? To force your truth to me ? Can you revise
your positions ? I am not mocking. I just care for the truth. Thus
I must develop explanations that religions are false. Do you call
this mocking ? Can you consider that you may be wrong and that
religions may indeed be wrong ? or is it an impossibility of the
I can't consider to be wrong either. But it is a matter of truth,
not of moral value of mocking or not mocking.
Sorry but if we start with this question just for finally reaching
the truth of Catholicism, we can't get through in less than 10,000
messages, and I have no time. Anyway the question "is existence an
accident" is very fuzzy and undefined. We can't seriously specify
the question in less than a few pages, not to mention the try to
answer. But it does not matter, such a "question" and similar ones
are but a game of sophisms by which, from confusion to confusion,
you manage to convince yourself of the truth of your religion, and
to not understand how it is possible to think otherwise. It's not
serious. You should first learn to really think, but I cannot help
you. I have enough troubles
If you insist to talk and you think you know the subject of
religion better than I, then I accept to talk.
But, let's be logical : I'll be the one asking questions, and
you'll have to answer. Are you ready ?
I only defend the catholic
religion, which is a religion of love hope and peace even if in
the past this religion was ill represented by its leaders.
so of course I'm ready to
answer your questions but I can't promise to answer at once. If
you are not in hurry you can ask questions and I'll be happy to
answer them as accurately as possible.
So here are some questions.
As I understand you, you believe in the existence of hell:
Is the existence of hell the fruit of an accident, or of a
If hell is the fruit of a creation, who is its creator ? for which
Are there people who will be in hell eternally ? for which sins ?
Or if it is by choice, is it a true choice ? Can one really choose
hell ? If hell is eternal (or if hell or purgatory is very long),
would not this question of the origin of hell, be worth
consideration independently of our life, which is comparably
If God exists, which religion should trisomics believe ?
Which religion did God want humans 10,000 ago to believe ? If the
answer "none" was then acceptable for the will of God, why is it
no more so now ? Is it by chance ? Logically, if all men are
similar, the fact that I am myself and you are yourself, that
prehistorical humans were prehistorical, that Muslims are Muslims
and atheists are atheists, is that all a fruit of chance ?
If the abortion of trisomics is a murder, why are they still so
much different from other men that God does not require them to
have a Catholic faith ?
What about animals (apes, dolphins...), does God require them to
have faith ? Why should one make a fundamental difference for this
between humans and animals ? As you accept the big bang, do you
accept evolution, where humans progressively evolve from the same
ancestors as animals ? Don't animals also have a soul and a life
after death ? then why would not they also need to have faith ?
Imagine someone born in a Muslim country, nobody preached him the
gospel, but only the Koran. He thinks: it is not by chance that I
am taught the Kuran. And modern science was written in the Koran
(yes, I heard some Muslims claim this with no doubt that Kuran is
proved by science). This should not be an accident either.
Where are the mistakes here ? As there are miracles in many
religions (link above), why consider this as a proof for
Catholicism and not of other religions or divisions of
Christianity (such as Evangelicals and Pentecostals that witness
so many miracles) ?
If there was the Galileo trial and the death penalty for Giordano
Bruno by the Church, is it a fruit of chance ?
If the strongest opposition to the scientific discoveries on the
origins of the world are the Christian churches, including the
Catholic Church before 1961, and the main motivation to the
opponents of evolution (or: to the big bang theory, and the
resulting age of the universe) still nowadays (quite powerful in
the USA), is Christian faith and the Bible, by people who
sincerely claim to know Jesus personally, is it a matter of
Is it an accident if Muslims are Muslims, if Buddhists are
Buddhists and if atheists are atheists, or is it the fruit of a
higher will, and which one ?
If it is the fruit of everyone's human will : can men have the
deliberate will to lead themselves to mistake, even while they are
deeply sincerely and devoutly searching for God ? Is God unable to
reveal the truth to anyone seeks it sincerely ? or do people who
follow other religions, not sincerely seek the truth ?
How can one religion be more true than another ? Is God
describable by stories, icons or rituals, so that some may be more
similar to God than others ?
If faith is a means for the service of the end that is to have a
miracle, then would miracles be an end in themselves ? For a
handicapped person, I understand a miracle of healing be an aim
(among other possibilities), but for healthy people, why should
they be bothered to oblige themselves to give themselves a means
(faith) to seek an end (a miracle) that not only anyway (according
to catholic statistics themselves) hardly bring anything (except,
some very bloody stigmata all life long, is that your dream ?) but
is as likely to happen as a gain at lotto ?
Otherwise, why did you write "we just need to have a great faith
to have a miracle" ? Did this remark occur to your mind by
You wrote about the big bang, that the end of time is now. Science
does definitely not say this, but rather that the universe will
keep existing without limits (progressively degrading along
billions of years). Where do you get that from ? from the bible
just like young-earth creationists who deny the big bang ?
If the purpose of miracles is to generate faith, and if the
purpose of faith is to generate miracles, then what is the purpose
of both ?
Was the existence of Neanderthals or Erectus a fruit of chance ?
Did their life (that had no descent) have a sense ? Did it have as
much or less sense than ours, and why ? Is it by chance ?
What religion did God want them to believe ?
Is the existence of mosquitoes an accident, or did God create
them, for what purpose ?
Good evening, I hope you
are doing well. I read your messages, let me time for thinking
please, no problem I'll answer
Were Neanderthals sinners ? Did the Son of God sacrifice for them
Was the Original Sin a historical event ? Is it a new specificity
of humans as compared with the animals they descend from ? In
other words, are humans worse in this sense than animals, or
similar, or better ?
Is there life and civilizations elsewhere in the universe ? Are
they without sin, or did the Son of God also die for them ? Did He
sacrifice only once on only one planet, or on several ? If on only
one, was it chosen by chance ?
If the Son of God was sacrificed on only one planet but not ours
(and that here the Gospel story was a mere fruit of a human error
and accident), would the foundations of theology be affected (less
true) and our relation with God (notice of any difference) ?
To complete the previous question on miracles:
Stigmata and the crying Lady, that is funny but what is it for ?
"science could not prove" miracles: I don't get the sense of this
remark, what was the point ?
And if prophets could not announce scientific and technological
About the Fatima miracle, I just read Wikipedia, that mentions the
UFO hypothesis, that seems an interesting clue for it, what do you
How can a religion that brings its followers to stigmatize
homosexuals, by putting homosexuality in the same list of the
worst evils of mankind as (I quote your first message) "abortion
war prostitution", while:
- sexual orientation is not chosen (but fixed by nature), and
- homosexuality is one of the very few non-tragical limits to the
main plague that destroys the Earth (overpopulation),
come without shame or hesitation, to describe itself as "a
religion of love hope and peace" (not mentioning its "humility")
and then be surprised (find it wrong) that people go away from its
After what criteria shall we be judged :
1) Our faith in God (religious orientation, prayers...)
2) The purity of our intentions (heart...)
3) The effective consequences of our actions on others
4) Still something else, or a combination of the above to be
Is your answer to this question fully satisfying, worthy of being
called divine justice, deserving worship ?
If you had to decide yourself the principles of judgement, what
would be your option ? Are we allowed to ask ourself the question
Is a prayer for someone a good action ?
Is the goal of this good action, to have the wished events
If this accomplishment is a goal in itself, and if it is just up
to God to make it happen, then why does God not make it without
prayer ? Does He not know what is good to make, or can He not make
Did you already know about the circumstances of the deaths of Hypatia
and Alan Turing
? Once you know, how do you analyze the responsibilities ?
Is it by chance that the earthquake of 2007 in Pisco, Peru,
happened during Assumption so that about 200 people died under the
collapse of the cathedral ?
Of the following 2 events, which one is the most important :