Porgatory

[necrotic freak]

---

ah okay sige Magisterium of the Church hehe...ang mga early Christians ang gacompile

sa Bible kadtong united pa ang Church kaniadto,

Mao bitaw nga naghimo ug standards ug nagcompile ang Apostolic Catholic church kay DILI united kaniadto daghan gitawag ug heretics nga mga scriptures.

usa pa di sad pwede nga usa ra ang magbuot sa interpretations like sa Magesterium sa Pope kay mura ug sila ra ang naay authority

Mao nang pwerting daghana ninyo karon mga Christian denominations kay magiyahay man lang mo ug interpret sa Bible, magbout man diay mo sa inyong gustong interpretation.

[rics zalved]

Mao bitaw nga naghimo ug standards ug nagcompile ang Apostolic Catholic church kay DILI united kaniadto daghan gitawag ug heretics nga mga scriptures.




Mao nang pwerting daghana ninyo karon mga Christian denominations kay magiyahay man lang mo ug interpret sa Bible, magbout man diay mo sa inyong gustong interpretation.

do you think pud nga inffable ang magisterium sa paginterpret? daghan kaayo nanggawas sa doctrines diha nga contradiction sa Bible

ug usa pa walay gimention pud sa Bible nga sila ra ang gihatagan ug authority

[necrotic freak]

do you think pud nga inffable ang magisterium sa paginterpret? daghan kaayo nanggawas sa doctrines diha nga contradiction sa Bible

ug usa pa walay gimention pud sa Bible nga sila ra ang gihatagan ug authority

Kamo ray nag ingon nga daghan doctrines nga ni contradict sa Bible kay tungod lagi lahi inyong (ija-ija) nga interpretation.

Kinsa man diay gibinlan ni Kristo dinhi sa kalibutan sa pagdumala sa iyang simbahan? I'm sure kaila ka ananong tawhana kay suhito gud ka sa KJV nga Bible.

[rics zalved]

Kamo ray nag ingon nga daghan doctrines nga ni contradict sa Bible kay tungod lagi lahi inyong (ija-ija) nga interpretation.

Kinsa man diay gibinlan ni Kristo dinhi sa kalibutan sa pagdumala sa iyang simbahan? I'm sure kaila ka ananong tawhana kay suhito gud ka sa KJV nga Bible.

mao ni imo gimean?

Matthew 16:18-19
King James Version (KJV)

18 And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

19 And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.

ang gisultian ani si Peter, pero dili siya ang bato diri kay ang sakto nga translation ani petros ug petra respectively sa Greek ang pasabot sa rock, so dili kang Peter gibinlan sa church

other uses sa petra nga word

Matt. 16:18, "And I also say to you that you are Peter (petros), and upon this rock (petra) I will build My church; and the gates of Hades shall not overpower it."

Matt. 27:60, "and laid it in his own new tomb, which he had hewn out in the rock (petra); and he rolled a large stone against the entrance of the tomb and went away."

1 Cor. 10:4, "and all drank the same spiritual drink, for they were drinking from a spiritual rock (petras) which followed them; and the rock (petra) was Christ."

1 Pet. 2:8, speaking of Jesus says that he is "A stone of stumbling and a rock (petra) of offense"; for they stumble because they are disobedient to the word, and to this doom they were also appointed."

so si Jesus ang rock, ang forever head sa church....

"For no man can lay a foundation other than the one which is laid, which is Jesus Christ." (1 Cor. 3:11).

kanang whatever you bind and loose sa earth gisulti man pud na niya sa uban, dili lang kay Peter

Matthew 18:15-20
15“If your brother sins against you, go and tell him his fault, between you and him alone. If he listens to you, you have gained your brother. *16But if he does not listen, take one or two others along with you, that every charge may be established by the evidence of two or three witnesses. *17If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church. And if he refuses to listen even to the church, let him be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector. *18Truly, I say to you, whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven. *19Again I say to you, if two of you agree on earth about anything they ask, it will be done for them by my Father in heaven. *20For where two or three are gathered in my name, there am I among them.”

kanang keys pud gihatag ni Jesus kang Peter pareha ra pud na pagkaistoryaha ani

Luke 11:52
King James Version (KJV)

Woe unto you, lawyers! for ye have taken away the key of knowledge: ye entered not in yourselves, and them that were entering in ye hindered.

nagpasabot na nga gitagaan niya ug authority nga mangsangyaw kabahin sa kingdom of heaven unya dili ra si Peter naay authority ana kun dili tanang magministeryo, bale giablihan na ang langit para sa ilang sangyawan pinaagi nila ug sa mga nagshare sa gospel karon panahona

mao nang daghan sad kaayo ang mga interpretations sa uban kay lack of understanding na ilaha, or either naay personal motives para makakwarta pinaagi sa tithes, or ila iinterpret in another way kay dili mofit sa ilang lifestyle, and so many more

[necrotic freak]

mao ni imo gimean?



ang gisultian ani si Peter, pero dili siya ang bato diri kay ang sakto nga translation ani petros ug petra respectively sa Greek ang pasabot sa rock, so dili kang Peter gibinlan sa church

other uses sa petra nga word



so si Jesus ang rock, ang forever head sa church....



kanang whatever you bind and loose sa earth gisulti man pud na niya sa uban, dili lang kay Peter



kanang keys pud gihatag ni Jesus kang Peter pareha ra pud na pagkaistoryaha ani



nagpasabot na nga gitagaan niya ug authority nga mangsangyaw kabahin sa kingdom of heaven unya dili ra si Peter naay authority ana kun dili tanang magministeryo, bale giablihan na ang langit para sa ilang sangyawan pinaagi nila ug sa mga nagshare sa gospel karon panahona

mao nang daghan sad kaayo ang mga interpretations sa uban kay lack of understanding na ilaha, or either naay personal motives para makakwarta pinaagi sa tithes, or ila iinterpret in another way kay dili mofit sa ilang lifestyle, and so many more

Kung kamo lagi pasultihon. Mao bitaw pwerte na ninyong daghana....

[MasterK]

inyoha sad ning nahibaw-an, pero not necessarily maoy tinuod hehehe. Greek gyud diay?

mao ni imo gimean?



ang gisultian ani si Peter, pero dili siya ang bato diri kay ang sakto nga translation ani petros ug petra respectively sa Greek ang pasabot sa rock, so dili kang Peter gibinlan sa church

other uses sa petra nga word



so si Jesus ang rock, ang forever head sa church....



kanang whatever you bind and loose sa earth gisulti man pud na niya sa uban, dili lang kay Peter



kanang keys pud gihatag ni Jesus kang Peter pareha ra pud na pagkaistoryaha ani



nagpasabot na nga gitagaan niya ug authority nga mangsangyaw kabahin sa kingdom of heaven unya dili ra si Peter naay authority ana kun dili tanang magministeryo, bale giablihan na ang langit para sa ilang sangyawan pinaagi nila ug sa mga nagshare sa gospel karon panahona

mao nang daghan sad kaayo ang mga interpretations sa uban kay lack of understanding na ilaha, or either naay personal motives para makakwarta pinaagi sa tithes, or ila iinterpret in another way kay dili mofit sa ilang lifestyle, and so many more

Matt. 16:18, "And I also say to you that you are Peter (petros), and upon this rock (petra) I will build My church; and the gates of Hades shall not overpower it."

kani brad nakahibaw sad ka ani stoyaha? asa kahay mas tinoud ani?

"Is that so?"...

... As Greek scholars—even non-Catholic ones—admit, the words petros and petra were synonyms in first century Greek. They meant "small stone" and "large rock" in some ancient Greek poetry, centuries before the time of Christ, but that distinction had disappeared from the language by the time Matthew’s Gospel was rendered in Greek. The difference in meaning can only be found in Attic Greek, but the New Testament was written in Koine Greek—an entirely different dialect. In Koine Greek, both petros andpetra simply meant "rock." If Jesus had wanted to call Simon a small stone, the Greek lithos would have been used. The missionary’s argument didn’t work and showed a faulty knowledge of Greek. (For an Evangelical Protestant Greek scholar’s admission of this, see D. A. Carson, The Expositor’s Bible Commentary [Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1984], Frank E. Gaebelein, ed., 8:36.

source: Peter the Rock | Catholic Answers

[MasterK]

...
mao nang daghan sad kaayo ang mga interpretations sa uban kay lack of understanding na ilaha, or either naay personal motives para makakwarta pinaagi sa tithes, or ila iinterpret in another way kay dili mofit sa ilang lifestyle, and so many more

grabeha gud ani imo giingon. tuk-an man sad uban christian sect ani, hehehe

sa more than 35k christian denomination. lainlain ug interpretasyon pero "lack of understanding..." diay ang uban? pero kung sila sad pasultihun kamo sad tingali ang gitawag nimo ug "lack of understanding... or either naay personal motives... " Lol. kinsa kaha ninyo angayan mosulti ani no?

[yhokz101]

"Despite these differences, there are a few central tenets that bind all Christians together (unless you don't consider Catholics as a Christian, some really don't consider), regardless of their particular church, denomination, culture, or geographical location. Christians believe in God (the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit), that all humans are sinful and in need of grace, and that only Jesus Christ makes it possible for us to have a relationship with God through his death and resurrection.

I also believe that the Bible most clearly reveals who God is, how we can have a relationship with him, and how we can extend God’s love to other people.

While other beliefs and practices are important, and often the cause of disagreements, they are secondary. God’s story is bigger than our differences, and if we continue to seek him according to the longing and desires that he has given us, we can all begin to find our places in his grand story."

[noy]

hehe mao pud lagi, may gani wala giblock nang istorya sa inyo hehe

haha..mao jud bro..

actually it is not about the salvation ang gihisgutan sa John 1:9, but about the
fellowship, balik ta atong Father-Son relationship, even nakasala ang child, wala
nawala ang love(salvation) niya gikan sa Father, pero ang fellowship ang nagsuffer, para marestore, he need to admit nga nakasala siya dayon kung maforgive na, balik na pud ang fellowship

hmm...fellowship is synonymous with salvation in the context of forgiveness bro.
kay kung walay fellowship, walay forgiveness..of course kung walay forgiveness, naa kahay salvation? wala pud siguro..
anyway, God's love cannot be equated with Salvation. God's love is unconditional 'cause He died for everyone. pero ang Salvation is conditional, 'cause dili tanan ang maluwas because there are certain things that needs to be done to be saved.
now, you said, once saved..always saved. kung makasala after na saved, we have to confess our sins to God so that we will be forgiven..
nangutana ko nganu mu confess pa man for forgiveness nga once saved always saved naman kaha? imung tubag ang confession para ra marestore ang fellowship but it has nothing to do with salvation kay saved gihapun..
which leads me to another question, so if salvation cannot be lost, what happens if you have unconfessed sins to God given the necessity of confession?

you were given an account kung you truly accepted Jesus, kanang dili jud hypocrite
jud ba, nagbunga jud siya, kay daghan man gud moclaim nga giaccept daw nila pero
walay ebidensya ug resulta

so tanang tao nga mu claim or even mga ning believe nga saved na sila..di pa diay gihapun na absolute 'cause pwede pa man diay mausab nig sumada tanan sa Ginoo due to the fact that everyone is to give account. in other words, kanang "once saved, always saved" nga notion, inaccurate diay na.
anyway, tanan muhatag ug account sa tanang buhat, huna-huna ug istorya atubangan sa Ginoo diba? butang ta lang ug ang tao, namatay jud nga hugot ug pagtuo sa Ginoo naninguha sa tanang butang kutob sa iyang nahibaw-an nga mahimuot jud ang Diyos pero sa iyang pagka tao, kahibaw ta duna jud siyay sipyat gihapun. dugangan pa nato gamay, wa pa jud siya kahibaw nga sipyat siya..so meaning wala siya mangayo ug pasaylo sa Ginoo. ang pangutana, Langit ni siya diretso?

naay freewill ang taw mao nga makapili siya unsa iya buhaton, pero as a Christian,
imong freewill gamiton nimo according sa word of God, so a Christian's goodness
gikan sa iyang freewill nga based sa Bible.
everything is good man jud in the first place since Creation, pero nagbutang ug
situation ang Ginoo nga we can choose to be obedient or to be disobedient so mao nang naay possibility nga we can choose sin
well kanang sin, nigawas ra na tungod pud na sa freewill nato, nagsugod na sa
pagrebelde ni Satan kang God kay siya man pud naay freewill, si Adam pud naay
freewill so diha gasugod nila,

hmmm..vague man imung tubag bro, hehehe.. so ang demonyo ang author sa Sala? or the fact nga duna tay freewill mao nay naka ingun nganu naa tay sala?

makahatag ba nako sad bro nga pwede morepent after mamatay?

well nothing that explicitly says so, verses that would somehow imply the idea hinuon..like in Matthew 12:32, Jesus refers to a sinner who will not be forgiven, either in this age or in the age to come.

kay we are judged man jud according to what we have done

.
Exactly, so maski pa ug namatay ka nga hugot ang pagtuo sa Diyos ug ningdawat naka sa kaluwasan ni Jesus sa cross..mu matter jud tong pinaka tago2x ug pinaka gamay nimu nga sala if they are unconfessed, especially the ones you committed after giving your life to Christ.

actually bro kung giingon man gani diha nga profitable for teaching, rebuking, etc..
so basis na jud na sa faith
gipasuwat ni Luke gani tanan para matudlo ug tarong

yep, the bible is definitely a great source or basis of Faith..it's even considered as the word of the Lord but it is not necessarily the sole rule of faith. there's a huge difference between the two bro.

unya kung magpuno ka sa pulong sa Ginoo, liar ang tawag nimo ana
dako pud gani kaayong warning

kinsa may nag add bro? how about ang kuhaan? Lol

even si Jesus puros na siya based sa scriptures tanan sulti niya
as early as the first century, nagcirculate naman na daan ang mga letters ni Paul,
Peter, John, etc. so mao na ang gibasehan nila sa mga Christians
well, ang goal man gud anang Sola Scriptura nga irecognize nga tanang lihok sa
Simbahan is based sa unsay nasuwat sa mga scriptures, daghan naman gud nanggawas nga
traditions nga nakaviolate sa Bible, murag mawala ang unity Bible kung iinsist ang
other traditions, there is nothing with traditions, pero angay unta dili makaguba sa unity sa teachings sa Bible.

Yes the coming of the messiah is prophesied.
anyway, by "Jesus, puros na siya based sa scriptures tanan sulti niya" you mean ma confirm pud nato sa Old Testament?
in Matthew 23:2-3, we read "The teachers of the law and the Pharisees sit in Moses’ seat. So you must be careful to do everything they tell you. But do not do what they do, for they do not practice what they preach"
Jesus teaches that the scribes and pharisees' teaching authority is legit based on moses' seat but this phrase or even the idea is nowhere to be found in the Old Testament. however, it can be found in Mishnah (an authoritative collection of exegetical material embodying the oral tradition of Jewish law and forming the first part of the Talmud). meaning si Jesus, dili to mutuo ug sola scriptura. hehehe
naa kay verse nga mabasa nato bro nga nag circulate ang mga writings nilang peter, paul ug john within first century Christians?
anyway, the gospel of John was written between 90-100AD, wa koy sure sa Pauline espistles as well as sa kang Peter pero sigurado nga established na ang Christian Faith before pa sila nagsulat because himutang na kaayo ang theological instruction.
point ani bro, The New testament is basically based on Tradition. word of mouth by witnesses of Jesus himself and His teachings and those who have been taught by His disciples. mao nay Fact.
in 2 Thessalonians 2:15, Paul wrote "So then, brethren, stand firm and hold to the traditions which you were taught, whether by word of mouth or by letter from us." --see? written teaching is not the sole rule of Faith.
so if you're saying that purgatory is not inline with scripture, daghan kaayo tag verses nga nag imply its existence pero ang problema dili mu mudawat nga mao nay pasabut hehehe. so apart from personal interpretation, what can you present that will prove our claim wrong? kay ang doctrine of purgatory namo, makita nato nga dunay Jewish roots..duna pud tay early Christian writings that would confirm with the the supporting verses we present that suppose to imply the existence of purgatory. mao nangayo ko ug early Christian manuscript that would confirm with your point of view.

nagtudlo man gud ug prayers of the dead using money ang Apocyrpha

mao nay gitawag sa Judaism bro nga "kesef kippurim" money offering that makes atonement for the soul.
Exodus 30:16 "And thou shalt take the atonement money of the children of Israel, and shalt appoint it for the service of the tabernacle of the congregation; that it may be a memorial unto the children of Israel before the Lord, to make an atonement for your souls."
Numbers 31:50 "We have therefore brought an oblation for the Lord, what every man hath gotten, of jewels of gold, chains, and bracelets, rings, earrings, and tablets, to make an atonement for our souls before the Lord."

nagtudlo sad ug magic

LOL wa nalay kwenta ang passover? The Israelites were instructed to mark the doorposts of their homes with the blood of a slaughtered spring lamb and, upon seeing this, the spirit of the Lord knew to pass over the first-born in these homes.
or when Jesus healed a blind man, he spat on the ground, naghimo ug clay(lapok) using his saliva and sand dayun gitaplak sa mata sa buta.. seems an awful lot like magic..hehehehe well it is magical per se.
however, kanang magic nga gicondemn sa bible bro kay witchcraft and the likes.
the verse in Tobit is basically divine instruction..no different than the passover.

salvation by works

bro, if you read the old testament, an Israelite is declared righteous by following the mosaic Law. of course, they are saved by works. we are talking about pre-messianic salvation.

historical errors sad
Judith 1:5, "Now in the twelfth year of his reign, Nabuchodonosor, king of the
Assyrians, who reigned in Ninive the great city, fought against Arphaxad and
overcame him."
The book of Judith incorrectly says that Nebuchadnezzar was the king of the
Assyrians when he was the king of the Babylonians.

not necessarily incorrect bro, when Nebuchadnezzar's Father, Nabopolassar and his allies defeated the Assyrian empire and freed Babylon from Assyrian rule leaving Assyria loosing almost all of its major cities without a King although some resistance still existed. Technically speaking the counquered Assyrian cities were to take vassalage to either Nabopolassar and his allies. so when Nebuchadnezzar assumed the crown, he also assumes the conquered Assyrian cities thus making Nebuchadnezzar technically an Assyrian king in some sense.
murag sa UK and Ireland bro ba, the Queen of England is also considered as the queen of Ireland although northern Ireland ra ang part sa UK.

Baruch 6:2, "And when you are come into Babylon, you shall be there many years, and for a long time, even to seven generations: and after that I will bring you away from thence with peace."
Baruch 6:2 says the Jews would serve in Babylon for seven generations where Jer.
25:11 says it was for 70 years. "And this whole land shall be a desolation and a
horror, and these nations shall serve the king of Babylon seventy years."

well, 7 generations can be a figurative description of 70 years..LOL

actually daghan pa ko ani ipuno pero motaas samot ako post hehe

sakto bro, igo na kay perting taasa na jud..however, as though some details were indicated in the Bible.. we really can't consider the bible to be absolutely historical in the same way that it isn't scientific. However, this does not mean that the things written on it are wrong.

pero di ba ang Orthodox Church naa man pud sila extra biblical writings pud kauban ang ubang writings sa Deutocanons? wala pud ninyo girecognize ang uban ato?

hmmm..wala but we don't necessarily deem them erroneous. just not inspired like the epistle of Clement, book enoch the didache etc.

ah okay sige Magisterium of the Church hehe...ang mga early Christians ang gacompile sa Bible kadtong united pa ang Church kaniadto,

Yes early Christians who were Catholics.

first of all, wala man pud nagingon sa Bible nga kinahanglan usa ra jud ang giclaim

well, Christ founded One Church and not churches. though the churches might be scattered around the globe, they should be united and in full communion with one another. apparently this isn't the case.

nga true church kay all local churches nga nagtudlo lang ug sakto members na na sila sa body of christ, so it should be non denominational pero murag girecord gihapon nang uban ana sa denominational, though not sure kabalo man jud na ta nga si Satan maayo kaayo mangdeceive mao nga nadeceive ang uban
founders ana, next reasons nganong daghan ug denomination is para makakwarta ang founders ana.

True, which leads us back to my question, how do we draw the line bro?

ang Hades/Sheol kay lugar nga dili para purification as what the Parable of Rich Man and Lazarus described.it seems nga motoo jud bitaw sila anang realm where souls are purified ang mga Jews, pero still wala nay blessing gikan sa Ginoo nga niexist jud na kay wala gani na sa ilang Old Testament asta ang Deuterocanon wala pud na sa ila, so mahulog ra ni nga dogma ra jud ni nila
unya kung isagol ta na nga doctrine sa Christianity, makaguba siya sa unity
ug usa pa ang mga Jews dili motoo ni Jesus nga siya na ang nakapurify sa atoa
ug usa pa si Paul nga Jew niingon siya nga

because the Jews do not believe in sola scriptura. they also believe in Sacred Tradition along with Scriptures. just like Catholics and this doesn't mean nga gisagol ni sila..remember, Christianity came from Judaism, Jesus was a Jew.
way blessing gikan sa Ginoo? are you in the position to declare such thing bro?

ang fire ani di man jud ni literal nga temporary punishment, gidescribe diri ang
rigid testing sa usa ka Christian

how sure are you bro? hehehe
anyway, Yes the fire in that passage bro is used as metaphor for something that consumes and purifies. i never said they were literal fires.. Lol
the passage clearly talks about salvation. a builder whose works endure the testing fires(fire that consumes) will be granted with rewards while the builder whose work has been consumed by the testing fire will suffer loss but will still be saved but only throuh fire(fire that purifies).
the scripture shows fire being used as a metaphor for something that consumes(Matt. 3:12; 2 Thess. 1:7- and as a purifying agent(Mal. 3:2-3; Matt. 3:11; Mark 9:49).

well, i just checked man pud sa ubang views sa mga ubang mga apologist, ug i pray man pud nga maayo unta sakto ako view pud wala bitaw na gicondemn kay ang mga saved man na nga gipasaka niya..

i was talking about the context of 1 Peter 3 bro paralleled with Ephesians 4:8-10. Both passages didn't talk about damnation even just a tiny bit.. while ikaw miingun nga ang usa ka compartment kay gi luwas while the other kay gi condemn. in other words, murag wala masulod imung gisulti sa context bro. no offense bro ha.. hehehehe nice chat pero perting taasa jud.. Lol

[necrotic freak]

TS, nganong nag himo naman pod ka ug thread aning porgatory? wala pajud mahimutang imong kalag sukad 2007? Pagsulti lang kay tabangan nalang ka namo ug ampo.

Throwback sa imong porgatoryo nga thread ay. naa koy 234 ka posts diha.
https://www.istorya.net/forums/spirit...rgartoryo.html