The Roman Catholic Church~ Questions

[Jhared]

---

Mga brad ug sis mangutana unta ko

A lot of theologians as well as "learned" lay people insists that the bible need not be taken literally most particularly the events narrated in the book of genesis...kay most of it are "symbolic" man daw.

so ang akong pangutana, asa man diay dapat sa bible ang dapat tuhoan nga mao gyud ang tinuod nga nahitabo..or should i say the the actual event or scenario that should be taken literally?

salamat daan sa mutubag

There's really no way for you to tell which is literally true and which is symbolic.. because the only ones who have a say about it are the ones authoring the magisterium of the Catholic Church, or whosoever is appointed by your religion.. so before clinging on to some self-authored interpreted idea regarding the stories in the bible it's best to first consult the magisterium (or your pastor) to verify it.. or better yet suspend judgement and believe neither until a magisterial proposition is released by your church..

- - - Updated - - -

kanang hula hula bitaw or fengshui wat if bro sa bata paka maayo naka ana? either sa duha. naa gani uban bro nga makakita sa imong future, hulaan ka. pero dili sila ingon nga mangingilad.. naay uban gani motoo sila sa fengshui pero motoo sila gehapon sa ginoo. kanang mga hula hula giton-an na nila or talent na sya? god given na sya or dili...

there's not a "what if" possibility in your proposed scenario... because in the first place binuang nang hula2, ug kanang baligya sa sidewalk sa sto.nino bahin anang unsaon pag basa sa palad sa taw, ug paghubad sa mga damgo, it's ludicrous for a person to believe such nonesense...

no pun intended..

[noy]

kanang hula hula bitaw or fengshui wat if bro sa bata paka maayo naka ana? either sa duha. naa gani uban bro nga makakita sa imong future, hulaan ka. pero dili sila ingon nga mangingilad.. naay uban gani motoo sila sa fengshui pero motoo sila gehapon sa ginoo. kanang mga hula hula giton-an na nila or talent na sya? god given na sya or dili...

kasagarang hula2x bro kay atik2x, possible pud ang mga natinuod kay chamba or taghap lang..
but i'd like to believe that some if not a few are coming from God especially the ones who do it in the service of others and for a good cause..
naa koy kaila nga pari sa una,patay na run.. dili ingun nga managnaay to..Lol pero grabe kaayo to ug hunch or gut feeling..
often times, maka tabang jud sa amoa iyang mga kutob2x or however you'd like to call it.

i think the correct theological term ana is discernment..

[Archfear]

atik2x ranang hula2x bro.. i think feng shui is okay as long as you don't place God's symbols next to feng shui relics on the same altar..

[Batmanthe26th]

"God is both Alpha and Omega, no beginning and no end." Lisod imaginon ang concept sa?

[Jhared]

atik2x ranang hula2x bro.. i think feng shui is okay as long as you don't place God's symbols next to feng shui relics on the same altar..

igsuon rnang feng shui sa hula-hula.. everybody can get good fortune if they live an honest life and persevere, but of course neatness and the application of 5S also have its own sets of contribution which i think what feng shui really is all about.. it's really not at all that mysterious..

[Jhared]

"God is both Alpha and Omega, no beginning and no end." Lisod imaginon ang concept sa?

Yes indeed.. Christian thinkers such as Aquinas introduced (or rather popularized) the concept of efficient cause where he argued that every thing that exist must have had a prior causative that enabled for it to exist, like you for example, you wouldnt exist if your parents hadn't made you, and your parents wouldnt have existed if not for your lolo and lola, and so on and so forth.. the same can also be said regarding everything that exists from air molecules to the boogers in our noses,..

now Aquinas argued that since it's written in the bible that God is both alpha and omega therefore he must have been the ultimate cause, the only true causative of all causes, god must have had no beginning and therefore no end.. otherwise the argument would result into an infinite regress, as every atheist would put it, where we can say that god had a creator and his creator also had a creator and so on, branding the argument as logically false..

so in our modern time where time is treated as a variable concept rather than a constant value, one way to reconcile this is to say that god is beyond time., is existing parallel to the passage of time., is so powerful that he can bend time and go in and out of it.. or that he's in a different dimension entirely.. etc etc.. as some Christians say he is.. but do feel free to fill in the blanks, your guess is as good as mine..

[noy]

Yes indeed.. Christian thinkers such as Aquinas introduced (or rather popularized) the concept of efficient cause where he argued that every thing that exist must have had a prior causative that enabled for it to exist, like you for example, you wouldnt exist if your parents hadn't made you, and your parents wouldnt have existed if not for your lolo and lola, and so on and so forth.. the same can also be said regarding everything that exists from air molecules to the boogers in our noses,..

now Aquinas argued that since it's written in the bible that God is both alpha and omega therefore he must have been the ultimate cause, the only true causative of all causes, god must have had no beginning and therefore no end.. otherwise the argument would result into an infinite regress, as every atheist would put it, where we can say that god had a creator and his creator also had a creator and so on, branding the argument as logically false..

so in our modern time where time is treated as a variable concept rather than a constant value, one way to reconcile this is to say that god is beyond time., is existing parallel to the passage of time., is so powerful that he can bend time and go in and out of it.. or that he's in a different dimension entirely.. etc etc.. as some Christians say he is.. but do feel free to fill in the blanks, your guess is as good as mine..

walay cause ang Ginoo bai jhared 'cause God is "the" cause.

Only things that have beginnings and things that don't have to exist requires a cause.
basically all things within space and time or technically the entire creation per se.
But God is beyond creation and its nature, not bound by space and time.
Therefore Infinite, no beginning and end, uncaused and uncreated.

for further info about the Catholic Church's stand about your premise, you may wanna read this link below:
Who Created God? | Catholic Answers

[pakinimo]

walay cause ang Ginoo bai jhared 'cause God is "the" cause.

Only things that have beginnings and things that don't have to exist requires a cause.
basically all things within space and time or technically the entire creation per se.
But God is beyond creation and its nature, not bound by space and time.
Therefore Infinite, no beginning and end, uncaused and uncreated.

for further info about the Catholic Church's stand about your premise, you may wanna read this link below:
Who Created God? | Catholic Answers

'god has no cause' is basically an assertion.. not any kind of argument. And has no irrefutable arguments that support it... heehehe OT na ngare noy sah tan aw lng kooow

[noy]

'god has no cause' is basically an assertion.. not any kind of argument. And has no irrefutable arguments that support it... heehehe OT na ngare noy sah tan aw lng kooow

kmusta diha bai?
yes an assertion as well as an argument based from the nature of creation as we know it..

we all know that the very first effect of whatever ignited some 14billion years ago triggered time and space..
time and space would have to be created by something that existed preceeding them.
therefore one has to be outside time and space and to have existed infinitely in order to create them..
apparently, only God fits with the description..

nothing is ever irrefutable by the way kay kini tanan natong assertion maski pa ug unsay gibasehan ana..duna gihapuy missing pieces..hehehe.. anyways, di man jud kaayo ni siya OT kay apil man gihapun ni sa Catholic Teachings, God being the creator of all things..etc pero broad lang kaayo ni subject, mas fit unta ni sa Atheism/Theism nga discussion ug labaw sa tanan wala niy kahumanan nga istorya so maypa ug magfocus nalang atong questions regarding practices and teachings of the Catholic Church.

[Jhared]

kmusta diha bai?
yes an assertion as well as an argument based from the nature of creation as we know it..

we all know that the very first effect of whatever ignited some 14billion years ago triggered time and space..
time and space would have to be created by something that existed preceeding them.
therefore one has to be outside time and space and to have existed infinitely in order to create them..
apparently, only God fits with the description..

nothing is ever irrefutable by the way kay kini tanan natong assertion maski pa ug unsay gibasehan ana..duna gihapuy missing pieces..hehehe.. anyways, di man jud kaayo ni siya OT kay apil man gihapun ni sa Catholic Teachings, God being the creator of all things..etc pero broad lang kaayo ni subject, mas fit unta ni sa Atheism/Theism nga discussion ug labaw sa tanan wala niy kahumanan nga istorya so maypa ug magfocus nalang atong questions regarding practices and teachings of the Catholic Church.

hats off to what pakinimo said., considering god as "the" cause is basically an assertion., a philosophical idea that stemmed-out simply from a subjective standpoint,..