01 Aug, 05:37AM in sunny Singapore!

Recent Posts by Tcmc

Subscribe to Recent Posts by Tcmc

  • Tcmc's Avatar
    1,412 posts since Nov '11
    • Originally posted by zocoss:

       

      Dann suffers ruptured testicle

       

      Scott Dann
      SIDELINED ... Scott Dann

       

       

       

      BLACKBURN defender Scott Dann has been ruled out for six weeks with a ruptured testicle.

      The former Birmingham centre-back scored as Rovers crashed to a 2-1 defeat against West Brom at Ewood Park on Saturday.

      He played the full 90 minutes but under-fire boss Steve Kean has confirmed Dann faces a lengthy spell on the sidelines.

      Kean said: Kean said: "Our physio cannot believe it.

      "He has two players out with problems that he has never come across before in all of his years experience.

      "Scott Dann has come in and played so well to replace Phil Jones, but in our last match he was hurt and it now transpires he will be out for six weeks with a ruptured testicle."

      <!-- end story body -->

       

      Sure become gay because of reduced male hormones!

  • Tcmc's Avatar
    1,412 posts since Nov '11
    • Originally posted by sgdiehard:

      If your limited knowledge, of course.

      Same to you regarding buddhism and its concepts.

      Limited knowledge of yours, of course.

  • Tcmc's Avatar
    1,412 posts since Nov '11
    • Originally posted by sgdiehard:

      hehehe...definitely difficult to prove....icon_lol.gif

      as difficult as proving that jonah lived in a fish stomach 4000 years ago :))

  • Tcmc's Avatar
    1,412 posts since Nov '11
    • Originally posted by sgdiehard:

      I said " if you are in Saudi...." where you are now doesn't really matter to me.

      sgdiehard

       

      But you want biblical laws to be appiled in singapore or not? just curious

  • Tcmc's Avatar
    1,412 posts since Nov '11
    • Originally posted by BroInChrist:

      On a high level note, different religions at least recognise some things in common.

      1. There is a supernatural realm with supernatural beings.

      2. There is sin. Humans are morally screwed up.

      3. There is a need to make atonement for sin. Someone needs to be appeased.

      4. There is judgement for sin.

      5. There is a heaven to go and a hell to avoid.

      6. People seek salvation. Salvation is provided.

      Now the above are merely the broad themes I can think of that are common to all religions. One question is, how come all have the same themes? Let's set aside the differing details for the moment.

       

      All points I can agree except for 5 and 6.

      Clearly shows your lack of understanding of other religions.

       

      5. In Judaism and many sects of Buddhism, there are no heavens and hells.

      6. Salvation is very subjective. It is not always in terms of heaven or hell.

  • Tcmc's Avatar
    1,412 posts since Nov '11
    • Originally posted by BroInChrist:

      Tcmc,

      1. For the record, I am NOT against speaking in tongues. Why should I set myself against the Holy Spirit? All I am telling you is that 1 Cor 12-14 tells us how tongues should be exercised and I am of the view that churches in general or charismatic churches in particular do not abide by that.

      2. And here you are demonising me for refusing to acknowledge Mormons as Christians, when you have little clue as to what Mormons believe? Who is more hypocritical? Anyone claiming to be a Christian means he is? Jesus says that in the last days people will claim to be Christ, so you just believe also out of respect?

       

      BIC

       

      1. Hmm clearly you have failed to look at the charasmatic christian's perspective! You always fail in looking at other's perspectives. According to the charasmatic, their tongues is Holy Spirit inspired! And that 1 Cor 12 is to be applicable for the Corinth church only! So according to them, you are actually setting up yourself against the HS.

      I mean, according to them. What do you say? Cos this is what my charasmatic friend told me.

       

      2. SOrry I know about Mormons maybe more than you and that is why I do not demonise them or border on demonising them.

      People only demonise others when they are ignorant!

  • Tcmc's Avatar
    1,412 posts since Nov '11
    • Originally posted by BroInChrist:

      Tcmc,

      1. Why do you insist that I take on the prerogative of God? Define a good Christian now. So you want me to say he is bound for heaven. But 10 days later he did something wrong, then you want me to say he is bound for hell? But then 20 days later he repented and you want me to say he is bound for heaven? Is that what you want me to do? I already stated my stand clearly. You clearly have problems understanding a clear statement of my beliefs!

      2. Regarding my Paradise statement, Jesus said that the thief would be WITH JESUS. Regardless of what people may think, wouldn't you agree with me that to be with Jesus is what eternal life is all about? It just shows that now you are raising up objections even when it have no substance. Admit it, you have no refutation at all.

      3. Are you 100% sure that no Christian can be 100% sure about what God said? Are you 100% sure that the Bible can never be 100% clear in what it communicates? You are confused about being infallible and being 100% of certain things. The Bible says that the Gospels were written so that one may believe and know he has eternal life. But you are saying that even that clear statement cannot be sure.

      BIC

      1. End of day, you would have to agree with me that christians are bound by faith and works. :) It says so in the bible that faith without deeds is dead! Same - faith and deeds

      2. Already showed you verses but you close your eyes and say lalalala

      3. My point regarding interpretation has always been - Christians interpret verses differently and no christian should be 100% sure that they are correct with their interpretation

       

  • Tcmc's Avatar
    1,412 posts since Nov '11
    • Originally posted by sgdiehard:


      If you are in Saudi Arabia, they will tell you to be answerable to whatever law they have.

      Ya but we are in Singapore mah..

      SO we dont have to answer to sharia law or biblical laws.

      Only if you in Vatican city you might have to answer to SOME biblical laws!

  • Tcmc's Avatar
    1,412 posts since Nov '11
    • Originally posted by sgdiehard:

      It is for you to decide, that is my last sentence! who is asking you to answer to sharia law or christian law?

      You did say or imply that we have to answer to biblical/christian laws!

      "Of course there is a higher moral yardstick for man going into eternity, that is set by God. .."

       

      Dont you believe that we have to answer to God's law one day?

      So I am just reminding you that not everyone has to answer or want to answer to biblical/christian laws! :)

      Cos not everyone is a christian mah!

       

      Edited by Tcmc 20 Dec `11, 11:45AM
  • Tcmc's Avatar
    1,412 posts since Nov '11
    • Originally posted by sgdiehard:

      not trying to get in between your discussion with BIC on this subject. We are answerable to the local laws where we are. You can't bring fruits or honey from melbourne to perth but nobody will check you for taking some drugs around. In Singapore, you are free to bring in any fruits but if you carry more than 15 gm of drugs, you will be hanged. The countries set the law, and that is the yardstick on how far you can go, here is nothing fair or not fair.

      You will also be answerable to your own conscience. Do you feel at ease if you steal from somebody? that is your moral yardstick.

      There is also a higher legal yardstick set by government, an american company set up a plan in Vietnam, they will have to follow the pollution control yardstick in america AND in Vietnam.

      Of course there is a higher moral yardstick for man going into eternity, that is set by God. In your case whoever in your Buddhist religion. The moral yardstick for religion and local government may be different, e.g. abortion is legal in Singapore, but it is against the moral yardstick set by God.

      Ultimately, which yardstick will prevail, to whom you will have to be answerable? that is for man to decide.

      sgdiehard

       

      1. Yes we have to answer to legal courts and civil laws

      2. But we dont have to answer to sharia law (islam religious law) OR biblical law (christian religious law), UNLESS you want us to be a theocratic society.

      You know whats theocratics? Like Saudi Arabia?, but christian version?

  • Tcmc's Avatar
    1,412 posts since Nov '11
    • Originally posted by BroInChrist:

      Better still, why don't you take the next one hour and read up a couple of online commentaries and then we talk? Like I said, I am not your answering machine and neither do I owe you answers on demand.

      No need lah.

      Simply put , like what depondent said (hes christian)

      Easy verses - literal

      Difficult verses - metaphorical

       

      Thats the essence.

      yea there are LOTS of "explanations" but in essence thats it!

  • Tcmc's Avatar
    1,412 posts since Nov '11
    • Originally posted by BroInChrist:

      Tcmc,

      1. Putting words in my mouth again? Again I see no need to respond to troll questions.

      2. Yes, many would disagree. But no reason to agree with you that therefore no one is right or can be right.

      3. It's one thing to interpret a text differently, it's another to DENY what the text clearly says. Mormons do not just have problems with Christ deity, they have a host of doctrines that put themselves clearly outside of Christian orthodoxy. But then again, how much do you know about Mormonism? My guess? Nuts. Sorry I am not being gentleman. It should be, zip zero nada.

      BIC

       

      1. No. But clearly you are against modern day tongues, right? Or what? Clarify?

      2. Oh no, you just said dont demonise other christians, now you are doing it, or BORDERING on demonising Mormon christians...

      Hypocrite. 

      PLEASE RESPECT MORMON CHRISTIANS. They recently released a news article in straits times educating people that they are christians too!

      Edited by Tcmc 20 Dec `11, 11:41AM
  • Tcmc's Avatar
    1,412 posts since Nov '11
    • Originally posted by BroInChrist:

      But the problem is that YOU are not being logical or coherent!

      Did Dawkins claim divine inspiration for his books? LOL!

      OH so you only look out for DIVINE inspiration?

      Then i guess you only see hindu scriptures, quran, sikh scriptures and bibles as inspiration!

  • Tcmc's Avatar
    1,412 posts since Nov '11
    • Originally posted by BroInChrist:

      Tcmc,

      You will ALWAYS have a problem with Christianity because all you are doing is trying to find justification to confirm your own rejection of the faith. You never had a good reason for leaving the faith, so now you trying to find anything that sticks.

      Oh so you are a she? My bad. I should be nicer to you then. Again truths don't change. If it does, then the statement "truths change" can change to "truths don't change" any time soon?

      Inspiration is not a baseless statement. Please, and I am being gentle on you now, go read up on Christian doctrine.

      1. LOL. No if you could explain your points logically and coherently i will believe ! But so far you have not!

      2. Too broad and general! Quran and Hindu Scriptures are all inspiration too! Richard Dawkins' books are too! OR You choose which are inspiration again?

      Edited by Tcmc 20 Dec `11, 11:25AM
  • Tcmc's Avatar
    1,412 posts since Nov '11
    • Originally posted by sgdiehard:


      God exists way before man knows how to write, and man believe in God way before there was any science. at least you come to your senses that science cannot prove everything. Now get your timing and logic right, that is scientific.

      Please prove that 

      1. god exist way before man

      2. your god is the one that exist before man, and not the other hundreds of gods

       

      Well if you cant prove, you can explain sensibly, and with logic.

  • Tcmc's Avatar
    1,412 posts since Nov '11
    • Originally posted by BroInChrist:

      Tcmc,

      1. I already answered you, tongues are a gift from the Holy Spirit. The issue with charismatic churches today stems from the practice of it. Read 1 Cor 12-14 and you will see how tongues should be exercised. But then again, you will have an interpretation issue ya? LOL!

      2. Strawman argument again. No Christian I know says that God is telling them audibly or through a trance or vision concerning what a passage means. There is no short cut to be an approved student of the Word of God.

      3. Yes, we do interpret differently, that's why there is always room for healthy debate, but not demonising those who disagree with us over matters that are peripheral and not essential. Of course people like you who lack maturity cannot handle debate over differing Bible interpretation.

      BIC

       

      1. So are you saying the modern day charismatic churches are not doing the "real tongues"? 1 Cor 12? Read IN CONTEXT FRIEND! Paul was only speaking to the church then!!! What happen to your in context???? Or you choose again???? Buffet ah?

      2. Ya many trained pastors and "approved students of the word of god" would disagree wiith you too about 1 Cor 12!

      3. Yea I agree you shouldnt demonise or say the other camp is wrong just because your interpretation is different! For e.g Mormons interpret jesus to be not God. So you should not say they are wrong! Just live and let live!

       

  • Tcmc's Avatar
    1,412 posts since Nov '11
    • Originally posted by BroInChrist:

      Tcmc,

      1. Is "winged creature" an inconvenient word? Inconvenient to who? To Bible bashers only when they know that they don't have a case.

      2. Yes, truths don't change. Of that I am sure. Otherwise, when you are dead in a 100 years and someone says you are a girl will you say it is true? Truth changes mah! Duh!

      3. I already answered you. Inspiration is only extended to the Autographs, not to the copies. But if you failed to marvel at what textual criticism has accomplished for us, then it only shows you are ignorant of it.

      BIC

      Again failed to read.

       

      1. I have problems with why an allpowerful entity has to use such an inconvenient word and then allow the scribes to translate wrongly to "bird" and when he knew all this would mess up. :) You still didnt read ah? Why he already know it will mess up then he still use the winged word?

      2. I am a girl, so please be gentleman ok! Anyway, some truths change and some truths dont change! So you were wrong, partially! Dont be simpleminded!

      3. Lol. Baseless statements. "inspiration". What a broad and general term.

  • Tcmc's Avatar
    1,412 posts since Nov '11
    • Originally posted by BroInChrist:

      That's because I have learned to discern by reading up, looking at contexts, etc etc, the very essential things that you FAILED to do.

      Explain to me how then you choose to read matt 5 in context, but matt 28 to be applicable through time?

      Explain to me why when both commandments are direct instructions from jesus, that you choose one to be a hyberbole and the other not?

      And do you agree with despondent who said that generally christians obey the "easy commandments" only?

  • Tcmc's Avatar
    1,412 posts since Nov '11
    • 1. Yes I have no problem with the hebrew word of winged creature but I have problems with why an allpowerful entity has to use such an inconvenient word and then allow the scribes to translate wrongly to "bird" and when he knew all this would mess up. :) You still didnt read ah?

       

      2. Truths dont change? Are you sure? What was true 100 years ago, still true today?

      Like I said, I gave you 2 options of explanation for translation/statistical errors in the bible, pls choose one ---

       

      1. "God" was incapable or unwilling or not powerful enough to preserve the meaning through translation, therefore there is no "God" in the picture, merely a religious book written by men

      2. There are errors in the current bible but the original supposedly inspired by God is perfect. (Unproven)

  • Tcmc's Avatar
    1,412 posts since Nov '11
    • Originally posted by BroInChrist:

      As usual you FAILED to read. I already said that the Bible is God's Word to us. As such we have to read it and interpret it using accepted rules of hermeneutics (which you obviously have no clue about!) and understanding of genres (which again you know next to nothing about). Anyway, the words of the Bible is God inspired. The interpretation is mine. And I believe my interpretation is correct because it takes the most natural and plain sense meaning, and because it does not conflict with other passages, and it can explain apparent conflicts with other passages, and it is consistent with and does not contradict the accepted creeds of the faith.

      Sigh

      You initially said - 100% sure - from bible - bible from god - 100% sure - from bible - bible from god

       

      Sorry I admit I am not skilful enough to argue you out of your circular logic.

       

      We can end this interpretation discussion

      At the end of the day you choose

      1. To acknowledge that there are different interpretations by different christians about all christian doctrines, and yours is not necessary correct because all of of us are not 100% sure.

      OR

      2. Just say your interpretation is the correct one, although you did not provide a method to prove that your methods are different from the rest of the christians.

       

      :) 

      Edited by Tcmc 20 Dec `11, 10:57AM
  • Tcmc's Avatar
    1,412 posts since Nov '11
    • Originally posted by BroInChrist:

      Demon Bane,

      The point I was trying to bring across, and I think you do see the point, is the need for an absolute moral standard, an objective moral standard, one that is the ultimate and supreme standard that is the judge of all but is not subject to being judged by another, for then it would not be supreme or ultimate. Laws are not brute facts that just exist fr no reason. They are established by a moral lawgiver who is NOT a force or a thing, but really a Mind. The idea of truth resides in a Person who is the Truth. Jesus said, "I am the Truth...."

      Absolute moral standard?

      But even among christians, morals are not standard and are subjective rght? So why do you expect nonchristians to have absolute standards for morals?

       

      SOme christians think christian rock music is moral, some think otherwise.

      Some christians think short skirts are ok for christian women, some think otherwise.

      Some christians think drinking is ok, some think otherwise.

       

      Morals are never standard! Dont live in a simple world!

       

      THERE'S BEAUTY IN DIVERSITY!

      Edited by Tcmc 20 Dec `11, 10:39AM
  • Tcmc's Avatar
    1,412 posts since Nov '11
    • Originally posted by BroInChrist:

      Tcmc,

      1. I did not change words. What I said is what the Bible teaches. Your ignorance is not my problem. Unless you claim to be morally sinless, your complaint is without merit or substance.

      2. Again trying to hide behind another religion and hope to see sparks eh? You defend the Koran if you like, I shall not fall for your ruse of being dragged into this debate between Islam and Christianity. I would discuss this with a Muslim if he is interested to hear me. But you? You are just patronising here and trying to stir things up.

      1. Tell me simply, what caused us to be in sin and be in an imperfect world? Was it the act of adam's disobedience? Well I know you wont want to answer me because of your pride. But well, your answer is a simple yes. You jsut want to shift goalposts and change words to divert attention. Christianity teaches that we are paying for adam's original sin. And that in the ten commandments, it says that we pay for the sins of our forefathers. Again another contradiction with verses that say we dont pay for our forefathers' sin?

      2. Nah, just telling you the Islamic perspective about jesus. It is widely known everywhere how Muslims view jesus. Muslims love jesus as a good human prophet.

      Edited by Tcmc 20 Dec `11, 10:33AM
  • Tcmc's Avatar
    1,412 posts since Nov '11
    • Originally posted by BroInChrist:

      Tcmc,

      It's from the Bible lah! But of course the Bible is God's Word to us. But what I am refuting is your silly strawman idea that Christians are hearing directly from God as to what the Bible means. There is no such thing as an inspired interpretation of God's Word, geddit? So you assume? Now what did Jacky say about ASSume? You just made an ass out of yourself by assume things and then whacking your own strawman.

       

      Oh. So YOU are saying --

      You are 100% SURE

      1) Jesus is God

      but this interpretation of yours is not from God, but it is from the bible but the bible is from God? 

       

       

       

      Serious? I realise you like to change words.

       

       

      Clarify please clearly -

       

      Is your interpretation that Jesus is God, from God or the Bible? And if its from the Bible, is the Bible from God Himself?

      !

      PLEASE CLARIFY!

      Edited by Tcmc 20 Dec `11, 10:39AM
  • Tcmc's Avatar
    1,412 posts since Nov '11
    • Originally posted by BroInChrist:

      Tsk tsk Tcmc, self-pwned again. I thought you were some Bible study expert? Didn't you know that the Bible does NOT teach that we are paying for Adam's sin? The Bible says that the soul that sins shall die. You do not pay for your father's sin, or your grandfather's sin, or your ancestor Adam's sin. Please get to know the Bible first before you bash it.

      Oh BTW, Christians did not make Jesus to be our scapegoat as though He was some unwilling victim. No, Jesus is God in the flesh who willingly emptied Himself of His divine majesty and glory to take on frail human flesh to die for us to make atonement for our sins. He laid down His life for us so that we may live in Him.

       

      1. Oh so who caused us to be sinful? WHy must we continue to be imperfect? What was the reason? You like to change your words , but the meaning is still the same. According to christianity, it was because of adam that we are in sin. If according to christianity adam hadnt taken the fruit, will we be in sin? Therefore chrsitianity essentially teaches that we are in a way paying for adam's mistake. You like to change the words huh?

      2.  Well, in the Quran, it says that christians are merely making jesus the scapegoat, but Allah quickly rescued jesus and jesus didnt die. I didnt say this. The Quran did.

      Edited by Tcmc 20 Dec `11, 10:21AM
  • Tcmc's Avatar
    1,412 posts since Nov '11
    • Originally posted by Demon Bane:

      Anybody wanna answer that ?

      :)

      Edited by Tcmc 20 Dec `11, 9:52AM