
Originally Posted by
NoRemorse
O kay gi hadlok pud sila na naay langit ug impyerno, mga bugo na uto uto pariha nimo. BULOK! UTO UTO! hahaha!
ay sus..ay nalang ta brader..ikaw ra mismo gaingun nga mutuo nalang ka ug Ginoo, impierno ug langit just in case naay Ginoo for practical reasons..LOL
tan.awa ra unsa ka hanggaw nang istoryaha? pa atheist2x ug pa anti-religion2x pa ka karun..nig himatyon naka puhon..tingaleg hastang adlaw imung tawgon ug Ginoo out of desperation..haha
klaro kaayo nga impractical imung choice sa dili pag tuo..pagpuyo oi..
asa man imung non-debatable proof nga mga bogo ang mga motuo ug Ginoo?Heaven ug Hell? asa na? puros ra yaw2x..
kung impractical man diay gani ang atheism, therefore it defies logic and rationalism. hahaha!!
wala kay proof nga bogo mi..puro ra ka sat2x..binata...
pero ako, naa koy proof nga imung choice kay impractical ug unreasonable..therefore illogical!

Originally Posted by
NoRemorse
There must be? so nag assume lang ka kay naay nag buhat ani tanan? BULOK! asa ang ebidensiya nimo? BUGOA KA!
Hala! diba ingun ka nga di ka refute sa amung ebidensya..therefore imung gi acknowledge nga naa miy ebidensya..unya karun...nangita na pud kag ebidensya? hahahaha!!! shalan ning istoryaha..
asa lagi imung ebidensya nga bogo mi?
wa jud diay gihapun ka kasabut sah? ang basehan anang teleological argument or the argument of design brader kay scientific accounts showing the nature, reality and actuality of things..biology, astronomy, physics..ug uban pa..
mao kung di ka mutuo anang conclusion nga naay purpose ug design ang creation..
present your counter arguments why creation has no design or purpose...
i refute usa na di kay magsige kag pagarpar ug ipaklaro imung pagka hanggaw!
kay the more ka magsige ug istorya ug way pulos..the more nimu gipaka ulawan
ang atheism community..

Originally Posted by
NoRemorse
Kanang concept of heaven and hell, good and evil, has its roots way back to Zoroastrianism which was established 6000 years before Christianity,
Nangopya lang nang Jesus Christ ninyo ug religious philosophy para maka manipulate siya ug tao during his time,
asa man ka kakita ug tao nga manipulative yet selfless at the same time?
kung pag manipular ra diay iyang tuyo...kung gusto ra diay siya maghari2x..
nganu nagpadakop ug nagpalansang pa man siya?
kopya? unya kay ang pagtuo bahin sa Judeo-Christian which the hebrews called Yahweh or simplt the God of Abraham,Isaac and Jacob nga Ginoo kay perti naman tawng dugaya ana?
6000 years before Christ? buot2x sad ka dah..as per history, zoroastrianism is dated to have existed 6th century BCE means 6 centuries before Christ.
a century is 100 years, therefore betwen 500 - 600 years before Christ nagsugod ang zoroastrianism.
possible pa gani nga si zoroaster maoy nangopya sa Judaism esp the messianic prophecies..esp that 6th century BCE is also the time that the Jews were held captive by Babylon which resulted to culture encounter between Jews and Iranians..
OR.. it is a confirmation of messianic prophecies outside Judaism which all the more Jewish and Christian Messianic prophecies..
although, walay records that would show exact dates when the prophet zoroaster lived. most scholars would point out to the bronze age..between 1700-500 BCE.
pero usa ray sure, kanang 6000 years..hinanggaw jud kaayo na..nyahahaha!

Originally Posted by
NoRemorse
and let's not forget, wala pay klarong ebidensiya kung nag exist ba gyud ning Jesus Christ ninyo, pwede sad na gi himo himo ra ni siya sa mga nag sulat aning Bible para naa daw kunuhay godly figure na sundon.
Pirated ra nang Christianity ninyo. Mga bulok!
Untwa? paila ra man tawn kas imung pagka ignoy bahin sa historicity of Jesus oi..
asa man diay na gibase atong time scaling bah?
BC(Before Christ), AD(anno domini, year of our lord) unya ang gibasehan wala ning exist? unsa gud nang istoryaha..
naa pa kay pina let's not forget nga nahibaw.an..hahaha
"Most contemporary scholars of antiquity agree that Jesus existed, and most biblical scholars and classical historians see the theories of his non-existence as effectively refuted."
source:
Historical Jesus - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
FYI brader, what's in debate is his divinity/nature. not his existence..
pagtuon sunod ha para di ka patakag yaw2x..paita..