[clifford6ngr]

Originally Posted by unleash97

eh pano ka nabinyagan kung wala kang religion, at pano ka maliligtas kung hindi ka nabinyagan?
kung hindi ka nabinyagan hindi ka bunga ng puno na si Jesus, at kahit ka pa mabuti kung hindi ka bunga ng punong yan, all of your goodness is nothing. you are just a branch detached to the tree who thinks himself great that he needs not the church, the religion founded by Christ, the mystical body whose head is Jesus.
you rely on your own goodness, fine. good luck to your decision. you think you can go to heaven without the church, without the aid of the religion that Christ instituted, again good luck, but since Jesus is in the church, and His doctrines and means of salvation is only available in this religion, where are you going? for "without Me you can do nothing".

That's hold-up.. Goodness is nothing without religion?
How about our ancestors long before christianity??
In that case, they should be all in hell and that's pathetic..

[unleash97]

Originally Posted by clifford6ngr

That's hold-up.. Goodness is nothing without religion?
How about our ancestors long before christianity??
In that case, they should be all in hell and that's pathetic..

thats according to logic, mind you.
divine revelation tells us that human persons before Christ and those who have never heard the gospel will be saved if they have done good and wished to follow the truth that God had planted in the hearts of men. but those who have known the christian catholic and apostolic truth, and yet refused to enter to the church's communion, this denial of truth will merit them hell kahit na me mga good works pa sila.
you think perhaps na "ok lang maging agnostic o kasapi sa ibang non-catholic religion, basta lang deistic ako at mabuting tao" -wrong! when God revealed Himself and you still refused this knowledge to guide you it becomes a sin against the Holy Spirit which even in the after life has no pardon. in moral terms, one is accountable based on the knowledge that he has and the availability of that knowledge to him. thus kung nireveal na ng Dyos ang isang paraan and yet you still refused to abide by it, it becomes a moral sin. the light shines yet you prefer to be in the dark. thats pathetic.

[unleash97]

Originally Posted by loloytisoy

Kaya sinabi Nyang Why have you forsaken me because He was in His human nature at that time. If all of you forced to separate the Father, Son and Holy Spirit then you HAVE THREE GODS. The Bible said THERE IS IN ONLY ONE GOD. If you put distinction between the Offices of God and make them three persons then you are all disbelieving the truth.

hmmn, so para sayo, dalawa ang person ke Jesus -isa divine, yung isa naman human, kaya nung nakapako Sya He was (the human person of Jesus) speaking to the divine person. if this is the case si Jesus pala ay me "split personality".
sa catholic teaching, Jesus has two natures united in His one divine person. though He has a human and divine intellect (hence two intellects), these faculties are governed by the one person of the Logos incarnate.
Jesus Himself say baptize them in the NAME (singular) of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit -meaning there are three Persons who shares in the one divine nature, in the one divine Godhead. the english term "God" denotes the divine essence or nature only. hence there is only one God, one undivided nature, but this nature is shared by three Persons who exists as one God.
sa tao, we may have the same human nature but exists as distinct and unique as each human person are different by reason of our materiality. this is not so with God who is the purest of spirit. God, therefore, has no material composition that can multiply His nature.
pero bakit there are three Persons in the one divine nature? because God is love, His nature is charity itself -hence if God is alone all by Himself with no one like Himself to love and to receive love from then He is not love itself. but because God is charity the Father begets the Son out of love and the Son loves the Father and Their mutual love for each others is so strong and divine na hindi ito feelings lang kundi it is a Person, too -the Holy Spirit.

[clifford6ngr]

Originally Posted by unleash97

thats according to logic, mind you.
divine revelation tells us that human persons before Christ and those who have never heard the gospel will be saved if they have done good and wished to follow the truth that God had planted in the hearts of men. but those who have known the christian catholic and apostolic truth, and yet refused to enter to the church's communion, this denial of truth will merit them hell kahit na me mga good works pa sila.
you think perhaps na "ok lang maging agnostic o kasapi sa ibang non-catholic religion, basta lang deistic ako at mabuting tao" -wrong! when God revealed Himself and you still refused this knowledge to guide you it becomes a sin against the Holy Spirit which even in the after life has no pardon. in moral terms, one is accountable based on the knowledge that he has and the availability of that knowledge to him. thus kung nireveal na ng Dyos ang isang paraan and yet you still refused to abide by it, it becomes a moral sin. the light shines yet you prefer to be in the dark. thats pathetic.

being whatever religion in baptism especially catholicism is just a part of convenience inherited by parents. You refused other religion because you believe your religion is the true and divine institution.
But what about those who were born non-catholic who believe they are true and divine as well? Shall your omni-benevolent god like jesus who has no vivid existence condemn them to hell because of their refusal to your preachings!?
That's injustice my friend.. Making authority as the truth instead the truth as the authority.. We have the innate behavior to dissent but doing so will lead us to hell.?. Isn't that absurd..

[CallOfNet]

sa totoo lng madali lng naman ung ganyang mga usapan eh sabi nga nung iba "kita kita na lng sa finals"..

[unleash97]

Originally Posted by clifford6ngr

being whatever religion in baptism especially catholicism is just a part of convenience inherited by parents. You refused other religion because you believe your religion is the true and divine institution.
But what about those who were born non-catholic who believe they are true and divine as well? Shall your omni-benevolent god like jesus who has no vivid existence condemn them to hell because of their refusal to your preachings!?
That's injustice my friend.. Making authority as the truth instead the truth as the authority.. We have the innate behavior to dissent but doing so will lead us to hell.?. Isn't that absurd..

obviously because Christ instituted only one church, not two not three but one church only. that Christ founded only one church is not a matter of faith but a fact, tnt
ano ba isinagot ko sayo, sabi ko pagnalaman mo na ang catholic religion ang syang tunay na Christ-instituted church and yet you obstinately refused to enter in her communion, you will be damed to hell for you have rejected the truth. it is not just by good works that a man is saved but also based on true faith. hence, if a non-catholic was hindered from knowing the truth and yet in his heart he ardently desires to follow God with all of his strength, he shall be saved.
no vivid existence? no ancient document has ever disputed the existence of Jesus, such an agnostic idea was only invented during the 19th century, lol
an injustice? no, thats reality. we are not the ones who makes the rules. reality bites -mahirap makapasok sa langit, you cant deceive yourself that believing to a nebulous god would make you worthy of heaven. hindi yan ganyan kadali, thinking lazily that one can go to heaven and enjoy eternal bliss by simply believing in deism, in an obscure god who even doesnt care for humans.
and since you are an agnostic, you have to necessarily abandon this question of salvation, thats why i find it quite uncommon for a person like you enmeshed bout soterology. you are simply not consistent to the agnostic views, but perhaps you are an eclectic, but thats absurd, tnt

[clifford6ngr]

Who invented then? It should be the claim of his existence and being the founder that must have been documented and not the dispute. How could we expect somebody like us to dispute a highly politically developed religion during their time? No skeptics love to die for disputing something not worth dying for.
Why should we look for the documents of disputers instead of those who claim? I bet that's an excuse..

[unleash97]

Originally Posted by clifford6ngr

Who invented then? It should be the claim of his existence and being the founder that must have been documented and not the dispute. How could we expect somebody like us to dispute a highly politically developed religion during their time? No skeptics love to die for disputing something not worth dying for.
Why should we look for the documents of disputers instead of those who claim? I bet that's an excuse..

yeah, there are a lot of ancient documents attesting the existence of Jesus but no document of the same eras denying His existence -how can you explain that as an agnostic? lol

[winmail]

Well ganyan talga pag-atheist lahat ng religion para sa kanila invented lang..

[sam_wel]

is it true that vatican library has the most vast collection of pornography?

and why would a pope write a grimoire?