What probable month is the birth of JESUS?

[slabdans]

---

ahahaha...kay naa daw ka kompetensya diri sa istorya.net bay. hala ka.....kinsa di ay imo gipanguyaban diri bay? . na topic ka kad**** sa chatbox ganina. hehehehe

nye mao ba unsa ng kad**** wa man koy kalibutan dah m agi daw ko sa chat box bi

[noy]

@defender
kung unsa man ganiy REASON sa mga early Church leaders whether for BUSINESS or gunuine COMPASSION..
sila nay manubag sa GInoo ana...
WHAT MATTERS most is that pagan actually DID one way or the other somehow accepted Christ Jesus as their savior..
if Christianity is the TRUE religion then at least they got to know it nad had the chance and option to know Christ Jesus.

prehas gud na sa usa ka TAO...magpatukod ug foundation for kids...
foundation helped a lot of children...pero iyang intention was pasikat lang plus business or personal ra tanan...in short paka arun ingnun...
as a whole di na mu matter ang intention 'cause we can never deny the fact nga NAKATABANG JUD..
could be God worked through His foundation to HELP the KIDS
BUT idividually, naa SIYAY tulobagon sa iyang selfish intentions...

in teh same way sa mga nangnegosyo nga mga church leaders sa una
ingun pa ni JESUS, they have been paid in FULL...
but they are NOT our concern...and besides, HISTORY na tong mga tawhana...
in fact through HISTORY, nagpinatyanay pa ang mga catholics ug protestants sa una...
TO THINK they are UNDER Christ's LAW of LOVE...

KITA bai ang present ug FUTURE nga Christiano...DI na ta magdwell sa kagahapun!!

ug labaw sa tanan bai, WALA ni ISA sa ato ang NAKAHIBAW sa kinatibuk.an sa ISTORYA
labaw na sa SULOD sa mga kasing2x sa sinaunang Kristohanon...
uu tuod man, naay mga abusado, korakot...pero kahibaw pud ta nga
naay daghan nga tinud.anay....proven to have given there lives in tribal ministries...
martyrd by PAGANS in the name of the GOSPEL.

what matters most is that the PAGAN worshippers before
have come to know Christ and His salvation.

[defender_1611]

nye mao ba unsa ng kad**** wa man koy kalibutan dah m agi daw ko sa chat box bi

suwayi ug agi sa chatbox bay. heheheh....kad**** kani siya ang akong gi mean ani is kadjot. hehehe.

[noy]

agi pud kos CB beh...hahaha..

[defender_1611]

@noy

dili pod siguro nato kalimtan or ibalewala ang mga sinaunang kristohanon bay. kay dapat ta makahibaw sa ilang kaagi. Murag wala man siguro nag pinatyanay ang mga catholics ug christians atong time ma bay. The catholics kill those christians man bay. The Roman Empire has gone through several incarnations. There was the political Rome of Jesus' day. As it declined, the spiritual Roman Empire of the Popes replaced it. They virtually ruled over the kings of Europe for the next 1000 years. The era was befittingly called "the Dark Ages." During the Dark Ages, a European king could not hope to retain his kingdom unless he had the blessing of Rome.

Anyone who claimed to be a Christian during those days also had to acknowledge the supremacy of the Pope, or face the Inquisition. The Roman Church burned tens of thousands of true Christians at the stake for refusing to accept that doctrine.

Following the Protestant Reformation, the authority of the Papacy waned in some parts of Europe, but not all. Both Charlemagne and Napoleon claimed their intent to restore the Holy Roman Empire as justification for their military conquests. After Napoleon's defeat, the power of the Papacy declined. The Popes of Rome no longer dictate to kings, they retain their influence over populations. To this day, the "Kings" of the earth still kneel in audience with the Pope.

With respect to sincere Roman Catholics who have personally received Christ as their Savior and Lord and to those who are evaluating the claims of Christ on their lives, I must point out that the Church of Rome today does not teach "for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints." (Jude 1:3). Instead they have added the baggage of 1500 years of tradition to the original doctrines of Christianity. Most or all of that added teaching originated in pagan or "mystery Babylon." Today the Church of Rome is doctrinally a mixture of Babylonian paganism and Christianity. That is why it is a far cry from "for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints."

[defender_1611]

agi pud kos CB beh...hahaha..

suwayi ug agi bay noy....didto ko tig tambay sauna...but karon usahay nalang kay puol. hehehe

[defender_1611]

@noy: bay regarding this statement karon pa nako na bantayan "and are you really 100% sure if PAGAN worship and nagpaluyo sa Catholic Chrurch?"


Answer: YES! But ugma nako mu explain bay noy kay mu out nako sa office karon. Tiwas lang ta discuss ugma.

[tan2x74`]

sa na andan na lang nato DECEMBER!

[Breakeven]

@defender, @noy

Bro, i really appreciate sa inyong discussion heheeh....mao ni nindot nga klase kay this will lead both sa insakto.

sa akoa lang sad, both of you have a good point....importante mo lead lang diha sa kamatuoran. Pero usahay depende sa need, naa jud ang compromise to win the people to Christ.....labi na sa atong panahon karon

Dunay mga christians nga babe in Christ nga ilang matake is milk of the word.
Duna sad mga mature christians who need meat and not milk anymore...

Ang ka brod defender kay effective para pang mature christians, while ka brod noy effective sad for the new believers in christ. Parehas nindot ug igo basta importante lang it will lead the believers to the truth.

unsa kaha brods? pero nice discussion....padayon ta.....

[newbie.86]

Again, Christmas is a Christian celebration no matter what date it is celebrated. Passover is an important celebration among early Christians, who were still attached to their Jewish tradition. Mao na nga ang Christmas gitawag nga Pascua, from Pesach or Passover.

Studyhan pud nato ang etymology sa salitang ugat mga higala:

Jewish = Pesach
Spanish - Pascua
French = Paques
Old English = Cristes Maesse "Mass of Christ"
Latin = Dies Natalis

Now, the Bible is not really helpful in providing the accurate EXACT date, and even "bible believing" Christians ASSUME a date nga wala makita sa bible. In short, nagbuot buot pud ni cla ug date, the way they accuse Catholics. Asa diay makita sa bible nga exacto September 29 jud natawo si Kristo? Asa makita sa biblia nga October pud diay? In short, EXTRA BIBLICAL pud ni ilang assumptions.

Christmas is undoubtedly a Christian tradition, and even from the earliest days of Christianity it has been celebrated in different dates up to now.

Latin Christianity makes up 92% of Catholicism, and 24 sui iuris (self - governing) churches in communion with the Pope celebrate Christmas in different dates, and the Pope does not have a problem with that.

And the question is, would it matter if we celebrate it on December 25th or any other date, as long as we have the right intent of honoring our Savior?

and an analogous situation:

If the pagans sang and used lyre to honor their deity, would it be unacceptable to God if Christians sang and used lyre in honoring Him?

Would protestant worship be invalid and paganized with their use of rock bands and noisy instruments in honoring Jesus during their worship service?

---> Take note that rock and loud music is the debauched pagan custom in honoring Dionysus in the Mystery Religions of Ancient Phrygia and Eleusis, which Protestants have used to honor Jesus.


The Pope himself in his latest book has clarified, wala'y tawo nga naka hibaw kanus a natawo si Jesus because of the absence of concrete data. In fact, he admitted that the date calculated by the scholars is debatable. But he admits that tradition will be here to stay for the meantime. Lisud usbon kay mao naandan sa tawo. He adds futher that Christmas is a celebration intent of honoring Christ. Wala ni-teach ang simbahan ug ang Santo Papa nga ang Pascua maoy pagdayaw ni Mithra or kinsa pang diyoses sa mga pagano.

It just baffles my why Protestants are telling Catholics what they believe, which is not.