The Roman Catholic Church~ Questions

[slabdans]

---

unsay stone tablets?

ang uban papyrus

[newbie.86]

Why Pontius Pilate was mentioned in the Nicene Creed?

First, he was the only authority who granted authority to the Roman soldiers to flog and crucify Jesus despite his hypocrisy of not claiming responsibility by washing his hands in front of the people. Therefore, Jesus could be seen "suffering" under him directly. He was the only authority who arranged for the torture and crucifixion, despite the Jewish authorities planning it.

Second, he serves a deeper meaning in the Creed and in Christianity itself. Pilate represents the hypocrisy of other "Christians", the fake trials, the manipulations (Pilate allowed himself to be manipulated) for personal interest, the betrayal of truth (he found no fault in Jesus but he subjected him to unjust punishment), the apostasy he committed by disavowing God to go along with the crowd. In short, Pontius Pilate himself almost represents the sins and weakness of humanity in the face of God.

Despite these, I see him somewhat of a philosopher who asked the ultimate question: What is Truth?

[Jhared]

ang uban papyrus

hahaha who are you fooling? that is not the bible.. it's a tablet that talks about a certain Athenian law... now you're quick to point out about papyrus.. haha..

[slabdans]

hahaha who are you fooling? that is not the bible.. it's a tablet that talks about a certain Athenian law... now you're quick to point out about papyrus.. haha..

dili lagi na bible, pero sa stone tablet diha nasuwat ang part sa bible, dili baya bible ng daan ang bible, compilation nalang baya na

[Jhared]

Why Pontius Pilate was mentioned in the Nicene Creed?

First, he was the only authority who granted authority to the Roman soldiers to flog and crucify Jesus despite his hypocrisy of not claiming responsibility by washing his hands in front of the people. Therefore, Jesus could be seen "suffering" under him directly. He was the only authority who arranged for the torture and crucifixion, despite the Jewish authorities planning it.

Second, he serves a deeper meaning in the Creed and in Christianity itself. Pilate represents the hypocrisy of other "Christians", the fake trials, the manipulations (Pilate allowed himself to be manipulated) for personal interest, the betrayal of truth (he found no fault in Jesus but he subjected him to unjust punishment), the apostasy he committed by disavowing God to go along with the crowd. In short, Pontius Pilate himself almost represents the sins and weakness of humanity in the face of God.

Despite these, I see him somewhat of a philosopher who asked the ultimate question: What is Truth?

yes but the issue raised by my late argument with slabdans was that Pontius Pilate merely ordered it,because his approval was required, but the will itself was with the people, and he merely acted on that will of the people who dont want to make their hands dirty., it was the people that wanted it,. hence Pontius not wanting to have anything to do with it washed his hands, he even called Jesus just..

it was his duty to keep the peace amongst his constituents,. ]

[newbie.86]

yes but the issue raised by my late argument with slabdans was that Pontius Pilate merely ordered it,because his approval was required, but the will itself was with the people, and he merely acted on that will of the people who dont want to make their hands dirty., it was the people that wanted it,. hence Pontius not wanting to have anything to do with it washed his hands, he even called Jesus just..

it was his duty to keep the peace amongst his constituents,. ]

sorry but Christianity dont see it your way. too bad your opinion was 2000 years late.



Rome has spoken, the matter is settled.

[R.Forster]

NONSENSE.

Mga ROMANO ra diay ang makasuwat niadtong panahuna? hahahaha.
Nalibang tingali ka katong ni-discuss inyong mga maestra nga ang mga Judio makasuwat pud diay.

Jesus Christ as a name did not exist in his time, he was known as Jesus of Nazareth to the Romans. Tan-awa kuno ang inscription nga INRI sa krus He was treated as an ordinary criminal and the roman emperor did not pay attention to his case. If he could have met Tiberius, maybe naa cya free publicity. His Jewish contemporaries wrote about him.

Take note, FACTS are not only transmitted through writing, they can be transmitted via ORAL TESTIMONIES. The existence and resurrection of Christ was witnessed by at least 500 people.

Take another analogy.

Socrates did not write anything. His students, not the Athenian government wrote about him and his teachings.
Jesus did not write anything. His apostles and followers, not the Roman government wrote about him and his teachings.

Can we dispute that Socrates did not exist at all and regard him as another fairy tale creature by the Greeks?

Nag effort pa kag type, Puros mali tanang gi type nimo.

Wala ko ni ingun na ang mga romans ray kabalo mu sulat, Gi basa nimo akong post? Kabalo ka mu basa?

Ayaw sad ug pataka anang inri inri nimo, Asa naman ang krus sa inyung imaginary jesus na naay inri? Apil na sa fictional story sa inyung imaginary jesus na naay "inri" na nakabutang daw kuno sa iyahang krus.

According to the biblical fairytale ilado man daw na kunohay nang imaginary jesus ninyo sa teritoryo ni Pontius Pilate, in fact the romans called him the "King of the Jews", he was the so called "Messiah" and a threat to the empire (according to the fictional story) so it's logical for Pontius Pilates' camp to document a crucifixion of a high profile criminal, kaso wala man jud makit.an na document, So the crucifixion of jesus still remains a fairy tale up to this day. It doesn't need an audience with the emperor for a criminal to be documented and the fictional jesus was not treated as an ordinary criminal by the way he was judged and cruficied according to the fictional story.

Bringing the fact that the jews can write during that time is pointless, why? Because there is not a single writing that mentioned a certain "Jesus" that came from the jews, you're looking like a clueless ignorant ***** here.

Also bringing up the so called "Oral Testimonies" is a sign of desperation, Any oral testimony that talks about extraordinary events that took place 2000 years ago that has been passed down to generations does not hold water, It's like saying that the chinese today has evidence of the existence of flying dragons 2000 years ago because they have oral testimonies that dates back 2000 years from their ancestors witnessing a flying dragon.

Comparing the situation of Socrates to Jesus is like comparing apples to oranges, Socrates' life was well recorded by not only by his educated students but other greek sources as well that doesn't have an agenda like Christianity, and there were even documents found that dates back to the ancient athens that has mentioned and acknowledge Socrates.

[noy]

Do you guys tithe? Or do you just donate what you can? What's the official Catholic teaching on tithing?

Hi Dors,

while the church teaches that offering is obligatory for all Catholic adults who are able to do so, the church doesn't have any specific percentage or amount for offerings.
bisag pila ra ang ihatag..ok ra

however, in some cases like mga church groups prehas sa kanang mga charismatic communities especially kadtong wala naka tie up with a certain church or parish. they might come into an agreement of giving tithes to support the financial needs of the community, as far as i know it could be 10% for those who aren't capable..
in other words it's totally up to the member according to the dictates of his/her conscience.

[noy]

Guys,

OT lagi nang ipamugos ninyo inyong panahom diri nga thread. because in the first place, this thread is not for arguments and the likes.. klaro kaayo ug unsay punto sa thread. Q and A for RCC.

if you have follow up questions from the answer you were provided with, that's fine but imposing your beliefs or whatever you think is true or right just becuase you do not agree with the answer coming from the Catholic perspective is an entirely different matter..


if di jud mo kapugong sa inyong gibati ug ganahan jud ninyo i challenge ang Doctrine sa Catholic Church
then ask a question..follow up questions...basta as long as ma maintain nato ang Q and A nga scenario..
kung di mu ganahan ana aw..paghimu mo ug lain nga thread
again, Answers should come from the Catholic Perspective as the thread suggest...

ang nahitabo diri kay ingun ani man gud..

example, naay mangutana unsay purpose nganu namatay si Jesus...
naay motubag nga.. wa namatay si Jesus kay wala siya ning exist historically..LOL

tan.aw ninyo haom pa kaha ta sa purpose ani nga Thread?

[Jhared]

dili lagi na bible, pero sa stone tablet diha nasuwat ang part sa bible, dili baya bible ng daan ang bible, compilation nalang baya na

Haha that tablet that you posted, well guess what, that's from 5 centuries Before Christ.. no part of the bible was written yet during that time Old and New.. so please..

- - - Updated - - -

sorry but Christianity dont see it your way. too bad your opinion was 2000 years late.



Rome has spoken, the matter is settled.

then be it as it may..