The Roman Catholic Church~ Questions

[noy]

---

bai @NapoleonBlownapart, ayaw nalang ug sayang2x ug istorya ana ni boy-banned kay wala na siya nangita ug discussion..
nangita ra na ug ma among sa iyang umaabot nga infraction. Lol

next question please.

[NapoleonBlownapart]

Yes he is confused. The Trinity never teaches that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are persons yet they are one person. That's absurd. That's insane. What the doctrine teaches however, is that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are persons of the Trinity yet there is only one being in the triune Godhead. He obviously assumes that the terms person and being can be interchanged that's why he is confused.

[noy]

you still don't know what he meant?? are you that stupid??

rofl....omg you are the worst catholic here

seriously, improve your comprehension skills man..

kini maoy classic example sa ad hominem.
as defined,

Ad Hominem
- marked by or being an attack on an opponent's character rather than by an answer to the contentions made.
Ad hominem - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary

speaking of comprehension.

asa may lisud sabton ani nga part from this certain forum rule?

"Posts should be composed in such a manner that respects persons of all races, religions, cultures, and sexualities. No post may contain personal attacks, as they have no proper place in discussions. The purpose of this forum is to facilitate growth, not to belittle others. This also applies to Private Messages and the Shoutbox entries. Attack the Opinion not the Person."
iSTORYA.NET - Forum Rules

ayaw ug hisgut2x ug comprehension kung ikaw mismo wala ka kasabut ug unsa na..

[Arteezy]

What the doctrine teaches however, is that the Father are persons of the Trinity yet there is only one being in the triune Godhead..

in short, 1+1+1= 1

what a fail

- - - Updated - - -

kini maoy classic example sa ad hominem.
as defined,

Ad Hominem
- marked by or being an attack on an opponent's character rather than by an answer to the contentions made.
Ad hominem - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary

speaking of comprehension.

asa may lisud sabton ani nga part from this certain forum rule?

"Posts should be composed in such a manner that respects persons of all races, religions, cultures, and sexualities. No post may contain personal attacks, as they have no proper place in discussions. The purpose of this forum is to facilitate growth, not to belittle others. This also applies to Private Messages and the Shoutbox entries. Attack the Opinion not the Person."
iSTORYA.NET - Forum Rules

ayaw ug hisgut2x ug comprehension kung ikaw mismo wala ka kasabut ug unsa na..

ad hominem - you are an idiot therefore i'm right

insult - you are an idiot


i didn't commit an ad hominem..i just insulted him...


another christian trying to be smartass but failed miserably

ROFL christians always fail

[noy]

Yes he is confused. The Trinity never teaches that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are persons yet they are one person. That's absurd. That's insane. What the doctrine teaches however, is that the Father are persons of the Trinity yet there is only one being in the triune Godhead. He obviously assumes that the terms person and being can be interchanged that's why he is confused.

dili na confused imung kaistorya bai.. patagad na siya..and you're giving him the satisfaction kay imung gipalit iyang mga istorya..hehehe...
hinuon pwede ra pikhan once in a while..pero it would be pointless to go toe to toe...

sakto imung giingun nga being and person are two different things.

being - The state or quality of having existence.
person - A living human.

1 human = 1 being, 1 person
1 animal = 1 being, 0 person
1 God = 1 being, 3 persons

[Arteezy]

1 God = 1 being, 3 persons

you mean 1+1+1=1 ROFL

[noy]

ad hominem - you are an idiot therefore i'm right

insult - you are an idiot


i didn't commit an ad hominem..i just insulted him...


another christian trying to be smartass but failed miserably

ROFL christians always fail

LOL you wouldn't call Nap stupid unless you thought you're right..
therefore you insulted him by using ad hominem argument..

instead of pointing out the part where you think he failed to understand, you instead called him stupid for not being able to understand.
in which case, an insult and an ad hominem.

which both violates forum rule number 2(the one that is stated above).

again, before mag hisgut2x ug comprehension or mga sinweto nga istorya..
sugod sa gagmayng butang ha? forum rules usay unaha ug sabut.. unya na nang trinity2x...
ambisyoso ra kaayo ka..LOL

ok. next question.

[Arteezy]

LOL you wouldn't call Nap stupid unless you thought you're right..
therefore you insulted him by using ad hominem argument..

instead of pointing out the part where you think he failed to understand, you instead called him stupid for not being able to understand.
in which case, an insult and an ad hominem.

which both violates forum rule number 2(the one that is stated above).

again, before mag hisgut2x ug comprehension or mga sinweto nga istorya..
sugod sa gagmayng butang ha? forum rules usay unaha ug sabut.. unya na nang trinity2x...
ambisyoso ra kaayo ka..LOL

ok. next question.

i never said i'm right...first and foremost, i wasn't arguing with him because i'm an agnostic atheist...

i never agreed neither of the two parties...

i was just insulting your laughable theism debates...

you called it ad hominem and it made me laugh even more

[noy]

you mean 1+1+1=1 ROFL

LOL ingun diay ko ana... ?

if by one you mean person then of course basic math the answer would be three..
1 person + 1 person + person = 3 persons, but this does not necessarily mean 3 gods..LOL

because 1 being does not necessarily mean 1 person as well..
pareha sa iro, being man na kay nag exist ug buhi man..pero dili na siya person..

so kanang 1+1+1=1 argumento na sa mga prehas nimu nga wala kasabut..
kung wa man diay gani kasabut..pangutana ug tarong di kay mudritso ug yawit kay kataw-anan kaayo ka tan-awon..
(for sure , wa ka karealize ana..)...hahahaha..


next?

[noy]

i never said i'm right...first and foremost, i wasn't arguing with him because i'm an agnostic atheist...

i never agreed neither of the two parties...

i was just insulting your laughable theism debates...

you called it ad hominem and it made me laugh even more

you do not claim you're right but you have the nerve to call someone stupid? hahahaha..
then it all boils down to attitude. this only shows how sick of a person you are.

ganahan kaayo ka sah kay gitagad ka..LOL well..not for long...