Genesis 1:26 At sinabi ng Dios, Lalangin natin ang tao sa ating larawan, ayon sa ating wangis: at magkaroon sila ng kapangyarihan sa mga isda sa dagat, at sa mga ibon sa himpapawid, at sa mga hayop, at sa buong lupa, at sa bawa't umuusad, na nagsisiusad sa ibabaw ng lupa.
The only rule:
1.Will tackle straight from Bible verses
2.No unnecessary comments
3.No bashing
4.No name calling.
"This will be a one on one - all other post will be deleted/transfered to another thread"
Re: Gen 1:26 "Kalabog vs addako" Si Jesus o ang mga Anghel ang kausap ng Dios
No score for this post
April 25 2006, 6:49 PM
Anonymous (Login addako)
Re: Dito lang po ang comments sa debate ni Bro. Tidus at Addako
No score for this post April 22 2006, 2:13 PM
to i3answer :
o para gumana namn ang utak mo dahil puro bulong-bulong ka na lang sa tabi-tabi
hinahamon narin kita ng debate..tutal lagi mong tinatanong ang gen1:26...
ako ang gagawa naman ng tema this time...
gen 1:26...lalangin natin ang tao ayonsa ating wangis, ayon sa ating larawan
take note; ang kinakausap diyan ng Dios ay kawangis niya at kapuwa manlalalang niya kaya nga ang sabi"lalangin natin"...take note the word "natin", hindi "lalalangin ko"
ito ang tema
patutunayan ko na si cristo ang kausap diyan ng Dios
ikaw, patunayan mo kung sino ang kausap diyan ng Dios
The erroneous interpetation of ADDAKO is very obviuos when he says 'ang kinakausap diyan ng Dios ay kawangis niya at kapuwa manlalalang niya'
ADDAKO does not have anything here to support his doctrine except his own wishful imagination and desire to have the text say something it simply does not. There is nothing to indicate the numerical value of the words "us" and "our" but ADDAKO's extraneous imagination.
Another erroneous assumption of ADDAKO was this ...take note the word "natin", hindi "lalalangin ko"
He should have continue reading Gen. 1:27
And Elohim created man in His own image, in the image of Elohim He created him, male and female He created them.
ADDAKO can never equate the singular pronoun "His" and "He" to his preconceived ideas into the text.
ADDAKO's opening statements are highly erroneous and I have doubt if he will continue on this topic.
I will continue with the discussion but will wait for ADDAKO's reply on the above post.
Thank you.
Kalabg
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.
si tidus ang hinahamon ko sa temang iyan at hindi ikaw
No score for this post
April 30 2006, 6:55 PM
to:kalabog
bakit ikaw ang sumagot sa temang iyan, si tidus ang hinahamon ko at hindi ikaw, ngayon para patulan kita..gusto ko mag=posting ka dito naka-address kay tidus na hinihilin mo sa kaniya na ikaw na ang lalaban sa temang ito..at siempre hihintayin ko ang response din ni tidus sa thread din ito ng pagpayag niya sa iyo na ikaw na ang lalaban sa akin...just a show of respect sa kapwa mo ink member....kasi sa ginagawa mo wala kang GMRC..bigla kang nang -aagaw ng eksena na hindi naman ikaw ang dapat nandun.Gusto ko lang matuto ka ng tamang asal
tandaan mo;
1.kailangan ko ng permiso mo kay tidus na ikaw na ang lalaban sa akin
2.kailangan ko nang pagsang-ayon ni tidus, sa pamamagitan ng pag-posting niya dito...ok?ang gusto ko lang makita sa oras na ito ay ang credibilidad mo kung kang pagtiwalaan ng kapwa mo ink na sumabak sa debate. ganun lang kasimple.kuha mo? so hintay muna tayo ha?
at kung ok na ang lahat..gusto ko bago tayo magsimula...tutal pareho naman tayong pilipino..sana tagalog na lang at huwag enlish ang usapan ok ba?
rules:
1.bibliya lang ang batayan..wala nang iba..at isang version lang ng bible ang allowed gamitin.
2.lahat ng statement dapat may suportang talata.
3.kung ano ang tanong yun ang sagot..straight to the point..wala nang paliguy-ligoy
4.wala sanang ibang makikisali dito..tayong 2 lamang
5.para sa commnets dun na lang sa ibang thread na binuksan para sa comments
and most of all
bago tayo magsimula..i declare mo muna kung sino ang kausap ng Dios sa Gen1:26
ano ok ba?
typiiu
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.
Re: Gen 1:26 "Kalabog vs addako" Si Jesus o ang mga Anghel ang kausap ng Dios
No score for this post
May 2 2006, 11:30 AM
ADDAKO,
I have made a very simple rule as stated from the main thread. If you hold the truth then answer my disagreement regarding your opening remarks in either english or tagalog.
I prefer to answer in english as your Church(Eli Soriano) is registered as "Members of Church of God International".
Now, your assumptions are refuted by the text written in Gen 1:27 that God the creator is in singular pronoun as "He" and "His", therefore "He" alone is the creator. The text in Gen1:27 does not say "They" or "Them" to prove the plurarity of "us" and "our" in Gen. 1:26.
Kalabg
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.
di mo ba naintindihan ang sinabi ko..bago tayo magsimula..i-declare mo muna kung sino kausap ng Dios sa gen1:26..si felix ba?si eranio ba?si bularan? o si ramil?..sige sagot
typiiu
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.
ddako
(Login addako)
re:di mo ba naintindihan ang sinabi ko?
No score for this post May 3 2006, 4:32 AM
to:kalabog
di mo ba naintindihan ang sinabi ko..bago tayo magsimula..i-declare mo muna kung sino kausap ng Dios sa gen1:26..si felix ba?si eranio ba?si bularan? o si ramil?..sige sagot
typiiu
It seems that you don't read what the main thread says
And BTW, please follow those simple rules stated above. NO NAME CALLING, NO BASHING.....TACKLE STRAIGHT FROM THE BIBLE VERSES.
STOP PERSONAL ATTACK AND UNNECESSARY COMMENTS.
FOR YOUR INFORMATION, I ALREADY STATED MY STAND IN THE THREAD YOU HAVE STARTED.
Kalabog
(Login Kalabog)
Re: SI CRISTO BA ANG KAUSAP NG DIOS SA GENESIS 1:26?
No score for this post April 24 2006, 4:56 PM
Anonymous (Login addako)
Re: Dito lang po ang comments sa debate ni Bro. Tidus at Addako
No score for this post April 22 2006, 2:13 PM
to i3answer :
o para gumana namn ang utak mo dahil puro bulong-bulong ka na lang sa tabi-tabi
hinahamon narin kita ng debate..tutal lagi mong tinatanong ang gen1:26...
ako ang gagawa naman ng tema this time..
gen 1:26...lalangin natin ang tao ayonsa ating wangis, ayon sa ating larawan
take note;
ang kinakausap diyan ng Dios ay kawangis niya at kapuwa manlalalang niya kaya nga ang sabi"lalangin natin"...take note the word "natin", hindi "lalalangin ko"
ito ang tema
patutunayan ko na si cristo ang kausap diyan ng Dios
ikaw, patunayan mo kung sino ang kausap diyan ng Dios
Sige patunayan mo na.
Ang stand ko ay mga Anghel ang kasama ng Diyos dyan sa talatang yan.
The only rule: ...Will tackle straight from Bible verses ....No unnecessary comments, no bashing, no name calling.
This will be a one on one - all other post will be deleted/transfered to another thread
And BTW, please start posting your answers now and stop circling around and I'm afraid that on your next post you'll ask for permission given by Bro. Tidus, common sense should lead you that he already gave it when he started this thread as a gesture of his approval.
Kalabg
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.
before anything else..warning ko lang sa iyo...bibliya lang ang batayan..lahat ng sagot may suportang talata..isang bible version lang ang allowed gamitin.mine is "Ang bibliya"..ano sa iyo? ibigay mo sa sunod na tindig mo. bawal ang mga LINKS pares ng ginawa mo sa una. NOT ALLLOWED ang mga bible commentaries,QUOTATIONS, dictionary, world history ect.ONLY BIBLE.ngayon kung malinaw na start.
Gen 1:26...At sinabi ng Dios, Lalangin natin ang tao sa ating larawan, ayon sa ating wangis: at magkaroon sila ng kapangyarihan sa mga isda sa dagat, at sa mga ibon sa himpapawid, at sa mga hayop, at sa buong lupa, at sa bawa't umuusad, na nagsisiusad sa ibabaw ng lupa.
take note ang kausap dito ng Dios ay kapwa manlalalang, "co-creator"
may talatang mababasa na si Cristo ay manlalalang ng buhay;
Gawa 3:15...At inyong pinatay ang Lumikha ng buhay: na binuhay ng Dios na maguli sa mga patay; mga saksi kami ng mga bagay na ito.
maliwanag na si Cristo ang tinutukoy diyan..ano sabi? sino raw ang pinatay?...sagot: ANG LUMIKHA NG BUHAY!!
si Cristo pala ang lumikha ng buhay kaya't may kaugnayan ang gawa 3:15 sa gen 1:26..na ang kausap ng Dios ay kapuwa niya manlalalang kaya't si Cristo ay may participation sa PAGLALANG..yan lang muna ..ika nga'y PATIKIM LANG..sa pagtindig mo ..dapat mong patunayan na ang mga anghel ay katu-katulong at kasama ng Dios sa kaniyang ginawang paglalang..dapat talata ha ok..
typiiu
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.
addako
(Login addako)
re:umpisa na tayo
No score for this post May 7 2006, 9:18 AM
before anything else..warning ko lang sa iyo...bibliya lang ang batayan..lahat ng sagot may suportang talata..isang bible version lang ang allowed gamitin.mine is "Ang bibliya"..ano sa iyo? ibigay mo sa sunod na tindig mo. bawal ang mga LINKS pares ng ginawa mo sa una. NOT ALLLOWED ang mga bible commentaries,QUOTATIONS, dictionary, world history ect.ONLY BIBLE.ngayon kung malinaw na start.
If you want to enforce the above rule to yourself, then you are free to do so.
ADDAKO said: "isang bible version lang ang allowed gamitin."
How can you descern the truth if you will not compare spiritual things with spiritual? The bible has taught us how to descern the truth and teaches us to "compare". How can you compare it you are using only one rendition/translation?
These things we also speak, not in words which man�s wisdom teaches but which the Holy Spirit teaches, comparing spiritual things with spiritual. (1 Cor. 2:13, NKJV)
Putting links to support a previous qoute made by a poster should not be disallowed, for this will support what a poster wanted to harden his claims.
Gen 1:26...At sinabi ng Dios, Lalangin natin ang tao sa ating larawan, ayon sa ating wangis: at magkaroon sila ng kapangyarihan sa mga isda sa dagat, at sa mga ibon sa himpapawid, at sa mga hayop, at sa buong lupa, at sa bawa't umuusad, na nagsisiusad sa ibabaw ng lupa.
take note ang kausap dito ng Dios ay kapwa manlalalang, "co-creator"
may talatang mababasa na si Cristo ay manlalalang ng buhay;
Gawa 3:15...At inyong pinatay ang Lumikha ng buhay: na binuhay ng Dios na maguli sa mga patay; mga saksi kami ng mga bagay na ito.
maliwanag na si Cristo ang tinutukoy diyan..ano sabi? sino raw ang pinatay?...sagot: ANG LUMIKHA NG BUHAY!!
si Cristo pala ang lumikha ng buhay kaya't may kaugnayan ang gawa 3:15 sa gen 1:26..na ang kausap ng Dios ay kapuwa niya manlalalang kaya't si Cristo ay may participation sa PAGLALANG..yan lang muna ..ika nga'y PATIKIM LANG..sa pagtindig mo ..dapat mong patunayan na ang mga anghel ay katu-katulong at kasama ng Dios sa kaniyang ginawang paglalang..dapat talata ha ok..
typiiu
Readers of this thread can now conclude why ADDAKO wanted to use only one Bible Rendition, he was aiming for a cheat. Trying to use an alduterated rendition just to satisfy his wrong direction and neglecting to compare it with other translation only proves his poor biblical background.
Other biblical translations render Acts 3:15 in this manner
a. King James Version:
"And killed the Prince of life, whom God hath raised from the dead; whereof we are witnesses.:
b. The kingdom Interlinear Translation of the Greek Scriptures:
"Whereas you killed the Chief Agent of life. But God raised him up from the dead, of which fact we are witnesses."
c. Moffatt Translation:
"The boon you ask was a murderer, and you killed the pioneer of Life. But God raised him from the dead, as we can bear witness.
d. Contemporary English Version
"And you killed the one who leads people to life. But God raised him from the death, and all of us can tell you what he has done."
In the above-cited renditions of Acts 3:15, Christ was referred to as Prince of life, Chie Agent of life, Pioneer of life, and the One who lead people to life. However this name s ascribed to Christ do not prove His alleged divinity. The Lord Christ Himself taught us that He is man (Jn. 8:40)
Apostle John answers: "And this is the testimony: that God has given us eternal life, and this life was in His Son. He who has the Son has life; he who dos not have the Son of God does not have life." ( I Jn. 5:11-12, NKJV)
Apostle Paul teaches that the true God is immortal (I Tim. 1:17, NKJV). On the other hand the Author of life mentioned in Acts 3:15 was killed and was raised by God from the dead. But God is not the One who was rasied from the dead. Thus, to conclude from Acts 3:15 that Christ is God is erroneous.
How can we say the ADDAKO is using a wrong Bible tanslation?
ADDAKO said: maliwanag na si Cristo ang tinutukoy diyan..ano sabi? sino raw ang pinatay?...sagot: ANG LUMIKHA NG BUHAY!!
This is a bold error, just imagine the "ANG LUMIKHA NG BUHAY" ay pinatay ng kanyang nilikha at siya rin daw ang Dios....a comedy of error
But then again, ADDAKO has not establish his claims the God was speaking to Christ in Gen 1:26, simply becasue there no verse that will support his erroneous claims.
Kalabg
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.
post no.1 5/9/06 7:30 am
How can you descern the truth if you will not compare spiritual things with spiritual? The bible has taught us how to descern the truth and teaches us to "compare". How can you compare it you are using only one rendition/translation?
These things we also speak, not in words which man�s wisdom teaches but which the Holy Spirit teaches, comparing spiritual things with spiritual. (1 Cor. 2:13, NKJV)---kalabog
******************************************
to: kalabog
kung ayaw mo sa patakarang "isang bible version lang ang gagamitin" ok lang...." no problem" ....basat ako kaya kong tindigan ang aking argumento kahit isang bible versio lang ang gagamitin...diyan ako naaawa sa inyong mga ...ink...hindi nyo kayang manindigan na isang bible version lang ang gagamitin...pag nasusukol na kayo..tatakbo kayo sa ibang version na hindi nyo rin alam na puede ring gamiting pansampal sa inyo...ok ...you ask for it you've got it.....kung yan ang gusto mong tugtog..yan din ang sasayawan ko..ok..fine
talking about acts 3:15, quoting from different translation proving my argument;
At inyong pinatay ang Lumikha ng buhay: na binuhay ng Dios na maguli sa mga patay; mga saksi kami ng mga bagay na
ito.
Mga Gawa 3:15
Ang Dating Biblia
At inyong pinatay ang Lumikha ng buhay: na binuhay ng Dios na maguli sa mga patay; mga saksi kami ng mga bagay na
ito.
Mga Gawa 3:15
Ang Biblia
at inyong pinatay ang May-akda ng buhay, na muling binuhay ng Diyos mula sa mga patay; mga saksi kami sa bagay na
ito.
Mga Gawa 3:15
Ang Bagong Ang Biblia
You killed the author of life, but God raised him from the dead. We are witnesses of this.
The Acts 3:15
New International Version
and killed the Author of life, whom God raised from the dead. To this we are witnesses.
The Acts 3:15
Revised Standard Version
But the author of life you killed, whom God hath raised from the dead: of which we are witnesses.
The Acts 3:15
Douay-Rheims Version
but the originator of life ye slew, whom God raised from among the dead, whereof we are witnesses.
The Acts 3:15
Darby Bible
and you killed the Author of life, whom God raised from the dead. To this we are witnesses.
The Acts 3:15
English Standard Version
y matasteis al Autor de la vida, al cual Dios ha resucitado de los muertos; de lo que nosotros somos testigos.
Hechos 3:15
Las Sagradas Escrituras
Y matasteis al Autor de la vida, al cual Dios ha resucitado de los muertos; de lo que nosotros somos testigos.
Hechos 3:15
Reina Valera Version
e matastes o Autor da vida, a quem Deus ressuscitou dentre os mortos, do que nós somos testemunhas.
The Acts 3:15
Portuguese Bible
to sum it up;
1.ang Bibliya----lumikha ng buhay
2.Ang Dating Bibliya----lumikha ng buhay
3.Ang Bagong Ang Bibliya----lumikha ng buhay
4.NIV--author of life
5.RSV--author of life
6.Douay-Rheims---author of life
7.Darby Bible---author of life
8.ESV---author of life
9.Las Gradas Escrituras--autor dela vida
10.Reina Valera Version---autor de la vida
11.Portuguese version---autor de la vida
just pointing to one direction ..jesus is a creator
typiiu
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.
"And you killed the one who leads people to life. But God raised him from the death, and all of us can tell you what he has done
a. King James Version:
"And killed the Prince of life, whom God hath raised from the dead; whereof we are witnesses
************************************************
naaawa ako sa iyo at ginamit mo ang CEV at KJV...na wala kang kamalay-malay na ang mga yan din ang sasampal sa pagmumukha mo..alam mo kung bakit?..SIGE....ihanda mo na magkabilang pisngi mo ha mag-asawang sampal na aabutin mo..
Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to
feed the CHURCH OF GOD, which he hath purchased with his own blood.
The Acts 20:28
King James Version
Look after yourselves and everyone the Holy Spirit has placed in your care. Be like shepherds to CHURCH OF GOD. It is the flock that he bought with the blood of his own Son.
The Acts 20:28
Contemporary English Version
kung papaniwalaan mo ang mga versions na yan...dapat...paniwalaan mo na rin na ang iglesiang itinatag ni Cristo ay CHURCH OF GOD..... at hindi Church of Christ..talikuran mo na ang mga tinuro ni manalo at mga ministro mo.... na Church of Christ ang itinayo ni Cristo......kundi CHURCH OF GOD..gaya ng ipinangangaral ni Bro.Eli..
yan..yan..yan ang pandaraya nyo mga ink selective kayo..dinadampot nyo lang ang mga versiona what will suit your purpose
ano masakit ba ang umabot sa iyong mag-asawang sampal..although out of topic ang mga sinasabi ko..i'm just proving na yung mga talatang binigay mo ay siya ring wawasak sa argumento mo...
ngayon ang tanong ko..binabawi mo ba ang mga talatang ibinigay mo?===question no1. 5/9/06 7:20 am
kung ang sagot mo ay hindi..lumayas ka na sa ink dahil hindi church of christ ang itinatag ni Cristo at peke ang ink..
kung ang sagot mo naman ay oo...kailangan lamunin mo ang talatang ibinigay mo sakin..at tanggapin mo na si Cristo nga ay lumikha ng buhay..
yan ang sinasabi ko sa iyo e..nag-warning na ako sa iyo..di ka nakinig e...isang bible lang sabi ang dapat gamitin..IPINAHAMAK MO TULOY ANG SARILI MO..sa susunod makikinig ka sa akin ha?
kabisado ko na mga MODUS OPERANDI NYO AT HOKUS -POKUS...pag gusto ninyong patunayan na si Cristo ay TUNAY NA TAO ...tatakbo kayo sa Contemporary Englich version( 1 tim 2:5..truly man)
pag gusto ninyong patunayan na ang tao puedeng magng anghel tatakbo naman kayo sa Rheims-douay version
kaya hindi kayo makalaban ng debate kung isang bible version lang ang gagamitin..
hindi uubra sa akin yang mga pandaraya nyo..ibahin nyo ako
typiiu
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.
Putting links to support a previous qoute made by a poster should not be disallowed, for this will support what a poster wanted to harden his claims.--kalabog
******************************************
to: kalabog
pares na pares ka talaga kay tidus..hindi kayang manindigan sa kaniyang sarili lang..pupunta sa bible commentaries , links para makahanap ng makakakampi..talaga bang hindi nyo kayang manindigang mag-isa at inaakala nyong kulang ang argumento kaya hihingi kayo ng tulong sa iba?
at saka ang sabi ko..after refuting my arguments ..ang sabi ko..tindigan mo rin na patunayan mo sinong anghel ang kasa-kasama ng Dios sa paglalang..dapat may talata ha ..sige hintay ako ng response mo
tanong ko nga pala..sinong anghel ang kasama ng Dios sa paglalang?==question no.2 5/9/06 7:40 am
typiiu
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.
addako
(Login addako)
re:sige paramihan ng verses
No score for this post May 9 2006, 8:27 AM
post no.1 5/9/06 7:30 am
How can you descern the truth if you will not compare spiritual things with spiritual? The bible has taught us how to descern the truth and teaches us to "compare". How can you compare it you are using only one rendition/translation?
These things we also speak, not in words which man�s wisdom teaches but which the Holy Spirit teaches, comparing spiritual things with spiritual. (1 Cor. 2:13, NKJV)---kalabog
******************************************
to: kalabog
kung ayaw mo sa patakarang "isang bible version lang ang gagamitin" ok lang...." no problem" ....basat ako kaya kong tindigan ang aking argumento kahit isang bible versio lang ang gagamitin...diyan ako naaawa sa inyong mga ...ink...hindi nyo kayang manindigan na isang bible version lang ang gagamitin...pag nasusukol na kayo..tatakbo kayo sa ibang version na hindi nyo rin alam na puede ring gamiting pansampal sa inyo...ok ...you ask for it you've got it.....kung yan ang gusto mong tugtog..yan din ang sasayawan ko..ok..fine
talking about acts 3:15, quoting from different translation proving my argument;
At inyong pinatay ang Lumikha ng buhay: na binuhay ng Dios na maguli sa mga patay; mga saksi kami ng mga bagay na
ito.
Mga Gawa 3:15
Ang Dating Biblia
At inyong pinatay ang Lumikha ng buhay: na binuhay ng Dios na maguli sa mga patay; mga saksi kami ng mga bagay na
ito.
Mga Gawa 3:15
Ang Biblia
at inyong pinatay ang May-akda ng buhay, na muling binuhay ng Diyos mula sa mga patay; mga saksi kami sa bagay na
ito.
Mga Gawa 3:15
Ang Bagong Ang Biblia
You killed the author of life, but God raised him from the dead. We are witnesses of this.
The Acts 3:15
New International Version
and killed the Author of life, whom God raised from the dead. To this we are witnesses.
The Acts 3:15
Revised Standard Version
But the author of life you killed, whom God hath raised from the dead: of which we are witnesses.
The Acts 3:15
Douay-Rheims Version
but the originator of life ye slew, whom God raised from among the dead, whereof we are witnesses.
The Acts 3:15
Darby Bible
and you killed the Author of life, whom God raised from the dead. To this we are witnesses.
The Acts 3:15
English Standard Version
y matasteis al Autor de la vida, al cual Dios ha resucitado de los muertos; de lo que nosotros somos testigos.
Hechos 3:15
Las Sagradas Escrituras
Y matasteis al Autor de la vida, al cual Dios ha resucitado de los muertos; de lo que nosotros somos testigos.
Hechos 3:15
Reina Valera Version
e matastes o Autor da vida, a quem Deus ressuscitou dentre os mortos, do que nós somos testemunhas.
The Acts 3:15
Portuguese Bible
to sum it up;
1.ang Bibliya----lumikha ng buhay
2.Ang Dating Bibliya----lumikha ng buhay
3.Ang Bagong Ang Bibliya----lumikha ng buhay
4.NIV--author of life
5.RSV--author of life
6.Douay-Rheims---author of life
7.Darby Bible---author of life
8.ESV---author of life
9.Las Gradas Escrituras--autor dela vida
10.Reina Valera Version---autor de la vida
11.Portuguese version---autor de la vida
just pointing to one direction ..jesus is a creator
typiiu
ADDAKO, I wondered if you know an ENGLISH BIBLE which translate ACTS 3:15 as such "CREATOR OF LIFE" ?
I guess you will agree that "LUMIKHA" is "CREATOR" that why you ended your statement with "..just pointing to one direction ..jesus is a creator"....
QUESTION 2: IS THERE ANY ENGLISH BIBLE THAT HAS ACTS 3:15 "CREATOR OF LIFE" ?
If your answer is NO, then no need to explain, as such explanation from you would tantamount to blabbering only.
The Only true God
To accept that Christ is God because He is called the Author of life is to accept that there are two gods: one who died and one who raised the former from the dead. This contradicts the teachings of the Scriptures. The Lord Jesus Christ Himself prove that there is only one God, the Father"
"Jesus spoke these words, lifted up His eyes to heaven, and said: “Father, the hour has come. Glorify Your Son, that Your Son also may glorify You,...And this is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom You have sent. " (Jn. 17:1,3)
Christ Himself recognized no other God besides the Father. His teachings and knowledge of the true God came not from Himself but from God who had sent Him (Jn.7:16). Furthermore, God Himself declared that there is no other God besides Him:
Remember the former things of old, For I am God, and there is no other; I am God, and there is none like Me, (Isa. 46:9 NKJV)
Unfortunately, the knowledge of the Father as the only true God is not in everyone, especially ADDAKO and Eli Soriano. (I Cor. 8:6-7).
The meaning of the 'Author of life'
Apostle John aswers thus:
"And this is the testimony: that God has given us eternal life, and this life is in His Son. 12 He who has the Son has life; he who does not have the Son of God does not have life." (I Jn. 5:11-12, NKJV)
The eternal life, which God will give those who will be saved, is in His Son, Jesus Christ, not because Christ is God but because God has given it to Him. The Bible teaches that because of sin man is deprived of life (Rom. 6:23; Rev 20:14). Through Christ, man will be forgiven his sin and will attain etrenal life. This, Christ is the Author of life.
Apostle Paul further explain this:
"For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has made me free from the law of sin and death." (Rom,. 8:2, NKJV)
Those who are in Christ will no longer be condemned (Rom. 8:1) for they have been promised eternal life, which is in Him. They will inherit the everlasting life because of their union with Him (I Cor. 15:22,TEV). Christ Himself will be the One to give eternal life to those whom God had given Him:
"Jesus spoke these words, lifted up His eyes to heaven, and said: “Father, the hour has come. Glorify Your Son, that Your Son also may glorify You, 2 as You have given Him authority over all flesh, that He should give eternal life to as many as You have given Him." (Jn. 17:1-2, NKJV)
Kalabg
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.
addako
(Login addako)
re:kainin mo ang binigay mong talata
No score for this post May 9 2006, 8:33 AM
post no.2 5/9/06 7:30 am
d. Contemporary English Version
"And you killed the one who leads people to life. But God raised him from the death, and all of us can tell you what he has done
a. King James Version:
"And killed the Prince of life, whom God hath raised from the dead; whereof we are witnesses
************************************************
naaawa ako sa iyo at ginamit mo ang CEV at KJV...na wala kang kamalay-malay na ang mga yan din ang sasampal sa pagmumukha mo..alam mo kung bakit?..SIGE....ihanda mo na magkabilang pisngi mo ha mag-asawang sampal na aabutin mo..
Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to
feed the CHURCH OF GOD, which he hath purchased with his own blood.
The Acts 20:28
King James Version
Look after yourselves and everyone the Holy Spirit has placed in your care. Be like shepherds to CHURCH OF GOD. It is the flock that he bought with the blood of his own Son.
The Acts 20:28
Contemporary English Version
kung papaniwalaan mo ang mga versions na yan...dapat...paniwalaan mo na rin na ang iglesiang itinatag ni Cristo ay CHURCH OF GOD..... at hindi Church of Christ..talikuran mo na ang mga tinuro ni manalo at mga ministro mo.... na Church of Christ ang itinayo ni Cristo......kundi CHURCH OF GOD..gaya ng ipinangangaral ni Bro.Eli..
yan..yan..yan ang pandaraya nyo mga ink selective kayo..dinadampot nyo lang ang mga versiona what will suit your purpose
ano masakit ba ang umabot sa iyong mag-asawang sampal..although out of topic ang mga sinasabi ko..i'm just proving na yung mga talatang binigay mo ay siya ring wawasak sa argumento mo...
ngayon ang tanong ko..binabawi mo ba ang mga talatang ibinigay mo?===question no1. 5/9/06 7:20 am
NO, I have posted them and it is final. I don't buy your "Mag-asawang SAMPAL" sarcasm anyway as such are you disinginious diversionary tactics to veer away from the topic. You better keep your "Mag-asawang sampal" and give them to Eli Soriano.
You are asking for ACTS 20:28, then surely I'm glad to be of service to your very simple post.
First, it is a well known fact that some early manuscripts do not read "Church of God" but instead have "Church of the Lord." Does the ADD Leader Eli Soriano tell anyone these things?
Our first witness who can testify what the early manuscripts did say is the early Christian apologist Irenaeus who wrote Against Heresies around 180-185 A.D. He writes:
"Take heed, therefore, both to yourselves, and to all the flock over which the Holy Spirit has placed you as bishops, to rule the Church of the Lord, which He has acquired for Himself through His own blood." (Book III, 14).
".....the church of the Lord which he purchased with his own blood". (ASV).
If Acts 20:28 said what Trinitarians want it to say, they also have a dilemma on their hands: God's blood. It sounds odd to anyone.
kung ang sagot mo ay hindi..lumayas ka na sa ink dahil hindi church of christ ang itinatag ni Cristo at peke ang ink..
kung ang sagot mo naman ay oo...kailangan lamunin mo ang talatang ibinigay mo sakin..at tanggapin mo na si Cristo nga ay lumikha ng buhay..
yan ang sinasabi ko sa iyo e..nag-warning na ako sa iyo..di ka nakinig e...isang bible lang sabi ang dapat gamitin..IPINAHAMAK MO TULOY ANG SARILI MO..sa susunod makikinig ka sa akin ha?
Listen to you? you must be dreaming...you have learn Bible twisting from Eli Soriano and you are telling me to listen to you.... and oh BTW please follow the rules that states ....NO UNNECESSARY COMMENTS.
kabisado ko na mga MODUS OPERANDI NYO AT HOKUS -POKUS...pag gusto ninyong patunayan na si Cristo ay TUNAY NA TAO ...tatakbo kayo sa Contemporary Englich version( 1 tim 2:5..truly man)
pag gusto ninyong patunayan na ang tao puedeng magng anghel tatakbo naman kayo sa Rheims-douay version
kaya hindi kayo makalaban ng debate kung isang bible version lang ang gagamitin..
hindi uubra sa akin yang mga pandaraya nyo..ibahin nyo ako
typiiu
The BIBLE says compare to be able to know which translation is true. Our present Bible was translated from early manuscript written in a different language, therefore up to this very time many scholars are arguing about some mistranlations. Some translations are influenced by the preconcieved ideas of the present day authors.
Our Lord Christ Himself teaches who the "only true God" is which is the Father. (John 17:13) and Eli Soriano and ADDAKO ignores this truth. All English Bible version will attest to this and yet this very simple truth is just being ignore by the people who says they know the truth..sad
ADDAKO says: "hindi uubra sa akin yang mga pandaraya nyo..ibahin nyo ako"
Yes you are truly different, seeking the truth is not your aim but you are seeking fame and glory for yourself.
Kalabg
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.
addako
(Login addako)
Re: re:umpisa na tayo
No score for this post May 9 2006, 8:41 AM
post no.3 5/9/06 7:35 am
Putting links to support a previous qoute made by a poster should not be disallowed, for this will support what a poster wanted to harden his claims.--kalabog
******************************************
to: kalabog
pares na pares ka talaga kay tidus..hindi kayang manindigan sa kaniyang sarili lang..pupunta sa bible commentaries , links para makahanap ng makakakampi..talaga bang hindi nyo kayang manindigang mag-isa at inaakala nyong kulang ang argumento kaya hihingi kayo ng tulong sa iba?
at saka ang sabi ko..after refuting my arguments ..ang sabi ko..tindigan mo rin na patunayan mo sinong anghel ang kasa-kasama ng Dios sa paglalang..dapat may talata ha ..sige hintay ako ng response mo
tanong ko nga pala..sinong anghel ang kasama ng Dios sa paglalang?==question no.2 5/9/06 7:40 am
typiiu
ADDAKO, your question is tricky and invalid.."sinong anghel ang kasama ng Dios sa paglalang?" Angels are not co-creator, it is God alone who creates as what is written in Gen 1:27. Even your stand that Christ was co-creator was disputed by the text in Gen 1:27.
One has to understand that God is speaking in terms of the plurality of his royal majesty. It was much more common in ancient times, and also in languages other than modern English, to use plural pronouns when speaking from yourself, especially if you are nobility. The idea is that the sovereign power is speaking on behalf of his subjects. It is similar to the idea of the President speaking on behalf of all Americans when he uses the words "we, "us" and "our." Other interpreters feel this passage refers to God and his council of angels. However, if we look closer, these two interpretations are really one and the same. God's royal court is his angelic court and so to speak in terms of the plurality of his majestic nobility is to speak in terms inclusively of his angels. When God says, "Let us make man in our image," he is speaking in terms of plurality because he is understood as speaking in terms of his royal court of He Himself and his angels. The "us" then in this passage is God and his angels and the "us" is the group of heavenly beings.
And the heavens shall praise thy wonders, O YAHWEH. Your faithfulness also in the assembly of the holy ones. For who in the heavens can be compared unto YAHWEH? Who among the sons of God (El) is like YAHWEH, a God to be feared in the council of the holy ones, And to be revered above all them that are round about him?
(Psalm 89:5-7).
Then YAHWEH answered Job out of the whirlwind: Who is this that darkens counsel by words without knowledge? Gird up your loins like a man, I will question you, and you shall instruct me! "Where were you when I laid the foundation of the earth? Tell me, if you know! Who determined its measurements. Surely you know! Or who stretched the line upon it? On what were its bases sunk, or who laid its cornerstone, when the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God (elohim) shouted for joy?
(Job 38:1-7).
Now the interpretation that says God is speaking in terms of his royal majesty as the Sovereign and on behalf of his royal court of angels has much force.
Genesis 3:22 says, "Then the Lord God said, "Behold, the man has become like one of us." To be consistent, ADDAKO should insist that Adam and Eve became like the persons of the Triune God who know good and evil. The word "knowing" here does not mean "knowing about" some idea conceptually but "to know" intimately by experience as in "Adam knew Eve." Of course ADDAKO would avoids this uncomfortable implication to his own interepretation. But we can say that it refers to angelic rule who do know both good and evil.
The Bible says that God is spirit and is the Father of all spirits. For this reason, angels are sons of God. In this respect, it may very well be that we are to think of the word Elohim as "the Most High God El and his angels," or, "the Most High God El who reveals himself by the plurality of his angelic spirits."
The bottom line here is that ADDAKO does not have anything here to support his doctrine except his own wishful imagination and desire to have the text say something it simply does not. There is nothing to indicate the exact numerical value of the words "us" and "our" but only ADDAKO's extraneous imagination.
Kalabg
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.
NO, I have posted them and it is final. I don't buy your "Mag-asawang SAMPAL" sarcasm anyway as such are you disinginious diversionary tactics to veer away from the topic. You better keep your "Mag-asawang sampal" and give them to Eli Soriano.
You are asking for ACTS 20:28, then surely I'm glad to be of service to your very simple post.
First, it is a well known fact that some early manuscripts do not read "Church of God" but instead have "Church of the Lord." Does the ADD Leader Eli Soriano tell anyone these things?
Our first witness who can testify what the early manuscripts did say is the early Christian apologist Irenaeus who wrote Against Heresies around 180-185 A.D. He writes:
"Take heed, therefore, both to yourselves, and to all the flock over which the Holy Spirit has placed you as bishops, to rule the Church of the Lord, which He has acquired for Himself through His own blood." (Book III, 14).
".....the church of the Lord which he purchased with his own blood". (ASV).
If Acts 20:28 said what Trinitarians want it to say, they also have a dilemma on their hands: God's blood. It sounds odd to anyon________KALABOG
ok..granting without accepting yang mga pinagsasasabi....( although i can prove that CHURCH OF GOD is the true church establihed by Jesus Christ).....saan nyo kinuha ang batayan nyo na CHURCH OF CHRIST ang tinatag ni Cristo?.......di ba sa Lamsa version?( acts 20:28)..... at sino ba si George Lamsa?...siya'y bible scholar na nag-translate from aramaic to english version......at alam nyo ba na si george Lamsa ay naniniwala sa trinity?..na ang paniniwala niya kay Jesus ay Dios?..kaya nang itranslate niya ang Acts 20:28...instead na ilagay niya ay CHURCH OF GOD ..ang nailagay niya ay CHURCH OF CHRIST dahil ang paniwala niya na si Cristo ay Dios....kaya kung naniniwala kayo sa translation ni lamsa dapat maniwala kayo na Dios si Cristo di ba?..tingnan mo sabi niya sa ;
Filipos 2:6....who being in the form of God, did not consider it to be robbery to equal with God
7..but made himself in no reputation and took himself in the form of servant and was in the like ness of me.
dapat tanggapin nyo rin yan sa si cristo ay nasa anyong Dios (kalagayan)
kaya ang tanong ko..naniniwala ka ba sa translation ni Lamsa?=====question no.1 5/10/06 7:30 am
kung oo sagot mo.......salamat pareho na tayong naniniwala na si Cristo ay Dios
kung hindi.....huwagmo nang paniwalaan na CHURCH OF CHRIST ang itinayo ni Cristo..at lumayas ka na sa ink dahil niloloko ka lang ni manalo
o tamo kahit anong isagot mo...deretso ka sa bangin..o ano sagot mo?
to:tidus
tulad ng pambubutatang ginawa ko kay kalabog..kung tinatanggap mo na totoo ang CEV version ..sabi sa version na yan sa ..act 20:28...
Look after yourselves and everyone the Holy Spirit has placed in your care. Be like shepherds to GOD'S CHURC. It is the flock that he bought with the blood of his own Son.
The Acts 20:28
Contemporary English Version
ANO NANINIWALA KA DIYAN?
kung ang sagot mo ay hindi...ano pang ginagawa mo?..lamunin mo ang talatang bibigay mo..uminom ka ng tubig baka ka mabilaukan..
kung ang sagot mo ay oo...ano pang hinihintay mo?..lumayas ka na diyan sa ink..dahil ang tinatag palang iglesia ni Jesus ay CHURCH OF GOD at hindi CHURCH OF CHRIST..at niloloko lang pala kayo ni manalo..
o ano..kahit anong isagot mo siguradong salpok sa pader ano? he he he
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.
NO, I have posted them and it is final. I don't buy your "Mag-asawang SAMPAL" sarcasm anyway as such are you disinginious diversionary tactics to veer away from the topic. You better keep your "Mag-asawang sampal" and give them to Eli Soriano.
You are asking for ACTS 20:28, then surely I'm glad to be of service to your very simple post.
First, it is a well known fact that some early manuscripts do not read "Church of God" but instead have "Church of the Lord." Does the ADD Leader Eli Soriano tell anyone these things?
Our first witness who can testify what the early manuscripts did say is the early Christian apologist Irenaeus who wrote Against Heresies around 180-185 A.D. He writes:
"Take heed, therefore, both to yourselves, and to all the flock over which the Holy Spirit has placed you as bishops, to rule the Church of the Lord, which He has acquired for Himself through His own blood." (Book III, 14).
".....the church of the Lord which he purchased with his own blood". (ASV).
If Acts 20:28 said what Trinitarians want it to say, they also have a dilemma on their hands: God's blood. It sounds odd to anyon________KALABOG
ok..granting without accepting yang mga pinagsasasabi....( although i can prove that CHURCH OF GOD is the true church establihed by Jesus Christ).....saan nyo kinuha ang batayan nyo na CHURCH OF CHRIST ang iinatag ni Cristo?.......di ba sa Lamsa version?( acts 20:28)..... at sino ba si George Lamsa?...siya'y bible scholar na nag-translate from aramaic to english version......at alam nyo ba na si george Lamsa ay naniniwala sa trinity?..na ang paniniwala niya kay Jesus ay Dios?..kaya nang itranslate niya ang Acts 20:28...intead na ilagay niya ay CHURCH OF GOD ..ang nailagay niya ay CHURCH OF CHRIST dahil ang paniwala niya na si Cristo ay Dios....kaya kung naniniwala kayo sa translation ni lamsa dapat maniwa;a kayo na Dios si Cristo di ba?..tingnan mo sabi niya sa ;
Filipos 2:6....who being in the form of God, did not consider it to be robbery to equal with God
7..but made himself in no reputation and took himself in the form of servant and was in the like ness of me.
dapat tanggapin nyo rin yan sa si cristo ay nasa anyong Dios..
kaya ang tanong ko..naniniwala ka ba sa translation ni Lamsa?=====question no.1 5/10/06 7:30 am
kung oo sagot mo.......salamat pareho na tayong naniniwala na si cristo ay dios
kung hindi.....huwagmo nang paniwalaan na CHURCH OF CHRIST ang itinayo ni Cristo..at lumayas ka na sa ink dahil niloloko ka lang ni manalo
o tamo kahit anong isagot mo...deretso ka sa bangin..o ano sagot mo?
to:tidus
tulad ng pambubutatang ginawa ko kay kalabog..kung tinatanggap mo na totoo ang CEV version ..sabi sa version na yan sa ..act 20:28...
Look after yourselves and everyone the Holy Spirit has placed in your care. Be like shepherds to GOD'S CHURC. It is the flock that he bought with the blood of his own Son.
The Acts 20:28
Contemporary English Version
ANO NANINIWALA KA DIYAN?
kung ang sagot mo ay hindi...ano pang ginagawa mo?..lamunin mo ang talatang bibigay mo..uminom ka ng tubig baka ka mabilaukan..
kung ang sagot mo ay oo...ano pang hinihintay mo?..lumayas ka na diyan sa ink..dahil ang tinatag palang iglesia ni Jesus ay CHURCH OF GOD at hindi CHURCH OF CHRIST..at niloloko lang pala kayo ni manalo..
o ano..kahit anong isagot mo siguradong salpok sa pader ano? he he he
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.
The BIBLE says compare to be able to know which translation is true. Our present Bible was translated from early manuscript written in a different language, therefore up to this very time many scholars are arguing about some mistranlations. Some translations are influenced by the preconcieved ideas of the present day authors.___kalabog
totoo naman yang sinabi mo e...pero yan nga ba ginawa nyo?..HINDI...dumadampot lang kayo ng version that will suit your purpose
pag gusto nyong patunayan na ang tao puedeng maging anghel tatakbo kayo sa Douay-Rheims version..at webstern dictionary...para mailusot nyo lang na si felix anghel
pag gusto nyong patunayan na CHURCH OF CHRIST ang itinayo ni Cristo..tatakbo kayo sa Lamsa version
pag gusto nyong patunayan na sinabi si Cristo TRULY MAN,,tatakbo kayo sa Contemporary english version
pag gusto ninyong patunayan na nasa bibliya ang ANG TAMANG DAAN..tatakbo kayo sa MAGANDANG BALITA BIBLIYA..(imagine gumagamit kayo ng translation ng demonyo, hindi ako nagsabi na demonyo katoliko...si felix ang nagsabi na ang katoliko at protestante ay sa demonyo==pasugo aug.1961 isssue page 39)
pag gusto ninyong patunayan na pilipinas ay fareast..tatakbo kayo sa world history
kaya kayo hindi ninyo kayang tindigan ang argumento ninyo na isang vesion lang ng bibliya gagamitin..kawawa talaga..
tumigil na kayo ..kabisadong-kabisado ko istrok nyo..style nyo bulok
to:tidus
tulad ng pambubutatang ginawa ko kay kalabog..kung tinatanggap mo na totoo ang CEV version ..sabi sa version na yan sa ..act 20:28...
Look after yourselves and everyone the Holy Spirit has placed in your care. Be like shepherds to GOD'S CHURC. It is the flock that he bought with the blood of his own Son.
The Acts 20:28
Contemporary English Version
ANO NANINIWALA KA DIYAN?
kung ang sagot mo ay hindi...ano pang ginagawa mo?..lamunin mo ang talatang bibigay mo..uminom ka ng tubig baka ka mabilaukan..
kung ang sagot mo ay oo...ano pang hinihintay mo?..lumayas ka na diyan sa ink..dahil ang tinatag palang iglesia ni Jesus ay CHURCH OF GOD at hindi CHURCH OF CHRIST..at niloloko lang pala kayo ni manalo..
o ano..kahit anong isagot mo siguradong salpok sa pader ano? he he he
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.
One has to understand that God is speaking in terms of the plurality of his royal majesty. It was much more common in ancient times, and also in languages other than modern English, to use plural pronouns when speaking from yourself, especially if you are nobility. The idea is that the sovereign power is speaking on behalf of his subjects. It is similar to the idea of the President speaking on behalf of all Americans when he uses the words "we, "us" and "our." Other interpreters feel this passage refers to God and his council of angels. However, if we look closer, these two interpretations are really one and the same. God's royal court is his angelic court and so to speak in terms of the plurality of his majestic nobility is to speak in terms inclusively of his angels. When God says, "Let us make man in our image," he is speaking in terms of plurality because he is understood as speaking in terms of his royal court of He Himself and his angels. The "us" then in this passage is God and his angels and the "us" is the group of heavenly beings________kalabog
************************
to : kalabog
kung totoo ang sinasabi mo na " God is speaking in terms of plurality of his royal majesty", dapat yang style na yan ay consisitent and standard allthougout the verses from genesis to apocalipsis....tandaan mo na ang nagsusulat ng genesis ay si moises, dapat kung si moises ay consistent sa ganyang style dapat imbes na ganito ang nakasulat sa;
Genesiss 2:18.... And the LORD God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him. .
dapat ganito;
Genesis 2:18.... And the LORD God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; LET US make him an help meet for him.
o ano..di ba dapat ganun ..kung consistent si Moises sa pagsulat niya? wag nyong iapres si moises sa inyong ink na selective..you just pick verses to a certain version that will just suit your purpose and rejects the other parts that will contradicts yours
sabi mo" yung usapan sa genesis 1:26 ay usapan ng Dios and his councils of angels...so therefore,dahil sa naniniwala ka na may konseho ..therefore naniniwala ka rin na may posibilidad na may caucus sa langit?==yes or no===question no.2 5/10/06 8:20am
to:tidus
tulad ng pambubutatang ginawa ko kay kalabog..kung tinatanggap mo na totoo ang CEV version ..sabi sa version na yan sa ..act 20:28...
Look after yourselves and everyone the Holy Spirit has placed in your care. Be like shepherds to GOD'S CHURC. It is the flock that he bought with the blood of his own Son.
The Acts 20:28
Contemporary English Version
ANO NANINIWALA KA DIYAN?
kung ang sagot mo ay hindi...ano pang ginagawa mo?..lamunin mo ang talatang bibigay mo..uminom ka ng tubig baka ka mabilaukan..
kung ang sagot mo ay oo...ano pang hinihintay mo?..lumayas ka na diyan sa ink..dahil ang tinatag palang iglesia ni Jesus ay CHURCH OF GOD at hindi CHURCH OF CHRIST..at niloloko lang pala kayo ni manalo..
o ano..kahit anong isagot mo siguradong salpok sa pader ano? he he he
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.
*******************************************
post no.4 5/10/06 8:35 am
The Bible says that God is spirit and is the Father of all spirits. For this reason, angels are sons of God. In this respect, it may very well be that we are to think of the word Elohim as "the Most High God El and his angels," or, "the Most High God El who reveals himself by the plurality of his angelic spirits."_____kalabog
****************************
to : kalabog
sabi mo " The Bible says that God is spirit and is the Father of all spirits. ". ayon sa iyo ang Dios ay Ama ng mga espiritu..maliwanag yan..at di siya tatawaging Ama kung wala siyang mga anak..right?..at hindi siya magkakaroon ng anak kung hindi siya nanganganak..right?....at may talatang nagsasabi na ang Dios ay nanganak talaga.. ito yun;
Hebreo 1:5.... Sapagka’t kanino nga sa mga anghel sinabi niya kailan man, Ikaw ay aking Anak, Ikaw ay aking ipinanganak ngayon? at muli, Ako’y magiging kaniyang Ama, At siya’y magiging aking Anak?
maliwanag na ang Dios ay nanganak ayon sa talata..pero huwag mo namang isipin na ang panganganak ng Dios ay kagaya ng panganganak ng tao..ang Dios ay espiritu..therefore nanganganak siya ayon sa kaparaanan ng espiritu at hindi natin alam kung papaano yun..pero you cannot deny the fact that " ang Dios ay nanganak"..at ang ipinanganak niya ay natural espiritu rin ang kalagayan pares niya(from the logic " ang Dios ay Ama ng mga espiritu)..sino kaya itong sinabihan ng Ama na " Ako’y magiging kaniyang Ama, At siya’y magiging aking Anak"..sino kaya itong tinutukoy niya na kaniyang anak?..basauli tayo ng talata;
Mateo 3:17... At narito, ang isang tinig na mula sa mga langit, na nagsasabi, Ito ang sinisinta kong Anak, na siya kong lubos na kinalulugdan.
maliwanag na bago pa bumaba si Jesus sa lupa ay matagal na palang kasa-kasama ng Dios si Jesus sa langit at siya mismo ang ipinanganak ng Dios Ama na kawangis niya na sa langit ay pareho silang espiritu..sabi nga sa talata...wala ni isa man sa mga anghel na pinagsabihan ng Dios na kaniyang Anak na ipinanganak niya..kundi si Jesus lamang
Colosas 1:15.... Na siya ang larawan ng Dios na di nakikita, ang panganay ng lahat ng mga nilalang;
16.... Sapagka’t sa kaniya nilalang ang lahat na mga bagay, sa sangkalangitan at sa sangkalupaan, na mga bagay na nakikita at ang mga bagay na di nakikita, maging mga luklukan o mga pagsakop o mga pamunuan o mga kapangyarihan; lahat ng mga bagay ay nilalang sa pamamagitan niya at ukol sa kaniya;
kung si Cristo ang larawan ng Dios na di-nakikita..siya ang kausap ng Dios na kawangis niya sa Gen 1:26 at hindi mga anghel.
ang tanong ko sa iyo..liban sa apgiging espiritu ng mga anghel gaya ng Dios...saan pa masasabing kawangis sila ng Dios?==question no.3 5/10/06 8:45 am
to:tidus
tulad ng pambubutatang ginawa ko kay kalabog..kung tinatanggap mo na totoo ang CEV version ..sabi sa version na yan sa ..act 20:28...
Look after yourselves and everyone the Holy Spirit has placed in your care. Be like shepherds to GOD'S CHURC. It is the flock that he bought with the blood of his own Son.
The Acts 20:28
Contemporary English Version
ANO NANINIWALA KA DIYAN?
kung ang sagot mo ay hindi...ano pang ginagawa mo?..lamunin mo ang talatang bibigay mo..uminom ka ng tubig baka ka mabilaukan..
kung ang sagot mo ay oo...ano pang hinihintay mo?..lumayas ka na diyan sa ink..dahil ang tinatag palang iglesia ni Jesus ay CHURCH OF GOD at hindi CHURCH OF CHRIST..at niloloko lang pala kayo ni manalo..
o ano..kahit anong isagot mo siguradong salpok sa pader ano? he he he
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.
ako napangalanan ko kung sino kausap ng Dios..si Cristo..ikaw bakit wala kang mapangalanan?..kumbaga sa police line-up..wala kang maiturong suspect for positive identification..kaya mahina ang kaso mo...
speaking of angels? hindi ba puedeng si gabriel?si miguel? o si lucifer ?(noong mabait pa siya)..sino..sinung anghel ang kausap niya? ====question no.4 5/10/06 8:55 am
to:tidus
tulad ng pambubutatang ginawa ko kay kalabog..kung tinatanggap mo na totoo ang CEV version ..sabi sa version na yan sa ..act 20:28...
Look after yourselves and everyone the Holy Spirit has placed in your care. Be like shepherds to GOD'S CHURC. It is the flock that he bought with the blood of his own Son.
The Acts 20:28
Contemporary English Version
ANO NANINIWALA KA DIYAN?
kung ang sagot mo ay hindi...ano pang ginagawa mo?..lamunin mo ang talatang bibigay mo..uminom ka ng tubig baka ka mabilaukan..
kung ang sagot mo ay oo...ano pang hinihintay mo?..lumayas ka na diyan sa ink..dahil ang tinatag palang iglesia ni Jesus ay CHURCH OF GOD at hindi CHURCH OF CHRIST..at niloloko lang pala kayo ni manalo..
o ano..kahit anong isagot mo siguradong salpok sa pader ano? he he he
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.
addako
(Login addako)
re:may caucus pala sa langit?
No score for this post May 10 2006, 9:21 AM
post no.3 5/10/06 8:20 am
One has to understand that God is speaking in terms of the plurality of his royal majesty. It was much more common in ancient times, and also in languages other than modern English, to use plural pronouns when speaking from yourself, especially if you are nobility. The idea is that the sovereign power is speaking on behalf of his subjects. It is similar to the idea of the President speaking on behalf of all Americans when he uses the words "we, "us" and "our." Other interpreters feel this passage refers to God and his council of angels. However, if we look closer, these two interpretations are really one and the same. God's royal court is his angelic court and so to speak in terms of the plurality of his majestic nobility is to speak in terms inclusively of his angels. When God says, "Let us make man in our image," he is speaking in terms of plurality because he is understood as speaking in terms of his royal court of He Himself and his angels. The "us" then in this passage is God and his angels and the "us" is the group of heavenly beings________kalabog
************************
to : kalabog
kung totoo ang sinasabi mo na " God is speaking in terms of plurality of his royal majesty", dapat yang style na yan ay consisitent and standard allthougout the verses from genesis to apocalipsis....tandaan mo na ang nagsusulat ng genesis ay si moises, dapat kung si moises ay consistent sa ganyang style dapat imbes na ganito ang nakasulat sa;
Genesiss 2:18.... And the LORD God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him. .
dapat ganito;
Genesis 2:18.... And the LORD God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; LET US make him an help meet for him.
o ano..di ba dapat ganun ..kung consistent si Moises sa pagsulat niya? wag nyong iapres si moises sa inyong ink na selective..you just pick verses to a certain version that will just suit your purpose and rejects the other parts that will contradicts yours
ADDAKO, the Bible is consistent and precise, you don't have to twist a certain passage just to suit your agenda. The line of argument you are presenting is a plain interjection of twisted concept. You should first argue with singular prounouns used in Gen 1:27.
Thank you for citing the verse Genesis 2:18, thus making your claim that Christ was co-creator was disprove by this verse. This verse says that God alone creates.
And the LORD God said, “It is not good that man should be alone; I will make him a helper comparable to him.” (Gen. 2:18,NKJV)
The term I will make denotes the Lord God who alone "MAKE" , with "I" as singular prounoun.
This is consistent with the text in Gen. 1:27 that the Lord God alone creates.
So God created man in His own image; in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them. (Gen. 1:27,NKJV)
Therefore your argument that Christ was co-creator in Gen. 1:26 is invalid. The verse you gave Gen. 2:18 disproves your claim
sabi mo" yung usapan sa genesis 1:26 ay usapan ng Dios and his councils of angels...so therefore,dahil sa naniniwala ka na may konseho ..therefore naniniwala ka rin na may posibilidad na may caucus sa langit?==yes or no===question no.2 5/10/06 8:20am
There is truly a council of the holy ones in heaven as this is written, but to equate that there's a council of holy ones in heaven with the silly senseless story of Eli Soriano about the events of the so-called "Caucus sa Langit" is a complete insanity. The "Caucus sa Langit" story of Eli Soriano is baseless and unscriptural.
to:tidus
tulad ng pambubutatang ginawa ko kay kalabog..kung tinatanggap mo na totoo ang CEV version ..sabi sa version na yan sa ..act 20:28...
Look after yourselves and everyone the Holy Spirit has placed in your care. Be like shepherds to GOD'S CHURC. It is the flock that he bought with the blood of his own Son.
The Acts 20:28
Contemporary English Version
ANO NANINIWALA KA DIYAN?
kung ang sagot mo ay hindi...ano pang ginagawa mo?..lamunin mo ang talatang bibigay mo..uminom ka ng tubig baka ka mabilaukan..
kung ang sagot mo ay oo...ano pang hinihintay mo?..lumayas ka na diyan sa ink..dahil ang tinatag palang iglesia ni Jesus ay CHURCH OF GOD at hindi CHURCH OF CHRIST..at niloloko lang pala kayo ni manalo..
o ano..kahit anong isagot mo siguradong salpok sa pader ano? he he he
This is clear viloation of the afformentioned rules, posting "UNNECESSARY COMMENTS"
Just wondering what ADDAKO's will say to himself?
ADDAKO who's "BASTOS..WALNG URBANIDAD..WALANG MODO" These are the very words you uttered to a poster here when he gets in between the discussion..so why are you trying to tease bro Tidus? Looks like you are trying to do diversionary tactics and would try to make this discussion a melee.
Please stick to the topic. Refrain from posting irrelevant and unnecessary comments. THANKS
Kalabg
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.
Re: re:pano naging kawangis ng Dios ang mga anghel?
No score for this post
May 10 2006, 2:48 PM
addako
(Login addako)
re:pano naging kawangis ng Dios ang mga anghel?
No score for this post May 10 2006, 9:50 AM
*******************************************
post no.4 5/10/06 8:35 am
The Bible says that God is spirit and is the Father of all spirits. For this reason, angels are sons of God. In this respect, it may very well be that we are to think of the word Elohim as "the Most High God El and his angels," or, "the Most High God El who reveals himself by the plurality of his angelic spirits."_____kalabog
****************************
to : kalabog
sabi mo " The Bible says that God is spirit and is the Father of all spirits. ". ayon sa iyo ang Dios ay Ama ng mga espiritu..maliwanag yan..at di siya tatawaging Ama kung wala siyang mga anak..right?..at hindi siya magkakaroon ng anak kung hindi siya nanganganak..right?....at may talatang nagsasabi na ang Dios ay nanganak talaga.. ito yun;
Hebreo 1:5.... Sapagka�t kanino nga sa mga anghel sinabi niya kailan man, Ikaw ay aking Anak, Ikaw ay aking ipinanganak ngayon? at muli, Ako�y magiging kaniyang Ama, At siya�y magiging aking Anak?
maliwanag na ang Dios ay nanganak ayon sa talata..pero huwag mo namang isipin na ang panganganak ng Dios ay kagaya ng panganganak ng tao..ang Dios ay espiritu..therefore nanganganak siya ayon sa kaparaanan ng espiritu at hindi natin alam kung papaano yun..pero you cannot deny the fact that " ang Dios ay nanganak"..at ang ipinanganak niya ay natural espiritu rin ang kalagayan pares niya(from the logic " ang Dios ay Ama ng mga espiritu)..sino kaya itong sinabihan ng Ama na " Ako�y magiging kaniyang Ama, At siya�y magiging aking Anak"..sino kaya itong tinutukoy niya na kaniyang anak?..basauli tayo ng talata;
Mateo 3:17... At narito, ang isang tinig na mula sa mga langit, na nagsasabi, Ito ang sinisinta kong Anak, na siya kong lubos na kinalulugdan.
maliwanag na bago pa bumaba si Jesus sa lupa ay matagal na palang kasa-kasama ng Dios si Jesus sa langit at siya mismo ang ipinanganak ng Dios Ama na kawangis niya na sa langit ay pareho silang espiritu..sabi nga sa talata...wala ni isa man sa mga anghel na pinagsabihan ng Dios na kaniyang Anak na ipinanganak niya..kundi si Jesus lamang
You are making senseless story out of the blue. The verses you presented does not says about your imaginary conclusion. Your are qouting a verse out of ignorance.
Now in Hebrews 1:5 the writer continues in the same vein of thought in harmony with the overall scriptures. The verse that says "You are my Son, Today I have begotten you" refers not to his incarnation, nor to God begetting Jesus in eternity, but to begetting Jesus at his resurrection. The very same idea is found at Acts 13:30-33 which says:
""But God raised Him from the dead....God has fulfilled this promise to our children in that He raised up Jesus, as it is also written in the second Psalm, 'You are my Son, today I have begotten you.'" (Acts 13:30-33).
It is rather obvious here the passage refers to Jesus being begotten a Son is a reference to his resurrection. A similar idea concerning our own resurrection sonship is found at Romans 8:14-23. Now, it is difficult for some to understand how the Son of God could be begotten the Son of God at the resurrection. Let us look at one more passage first.
"concerning his Son who is begotten of the seed of David according to the flesh, fixed (horizo) Son of God in power according to the Spirit of Holiness by his resurrection from the dead."
Notice the parallelism here: Son of David according to the flesh, Son of God according to the Spirit. In 1 Corinthians 15:45, Paul explains that Jesus' physical body was raised life-making or life-giving Spirit. Physical fleshly body and spirit became one new nature, a new creation of spirit and flesh in one agreed, indivisible and without horizon, the firstfruits of the new creation, the new heavens and earth, Jesus, the firstborn of the dead.
Jesus is the firsborn of the dead (Rom 8:29; Col 1:18: Rev 1:5) by his resurrection and when God brought this firstborn, the firstfruit (1 Cor 15:23) of many brothers (Rom 8:18-29), into the heavenly economy or community, he said "Today I have begotten you," and "let all God's angels worship him." The angels must now bow down to him because the Father has given him all authority and power and the angels are subjected to him (Mt 28:18; Acts 2:36; 1 Pet 3:22) and as the writer is showing us here he is seated at the right hand of the throne of God and as such angels are obligated to bow down to him. Indeed, this very passage emphasizes it over and over again. v.2:9 Again and again, the message is repeated that since Jesus suffered and died for our sins and has risen to the throne of God, he is above the angels, because he, not the angels, sits at the right hand of God.
Colosas 1:15.... Na siya ang larawan ng Dios na di nakikita, ang panganay ng lahat ng mga nilalang;
16.... Sapagka�t sa kaniya nilalang ang lahat na mga bagay, sa sangkalangitan at sa sangkalupaan, na mga bagay na nakikita at ang mga bagay na di nakikita, maging mga luklukan o mga pagsakop o mga pamunuan o mga kapangyarihan; lahat ng mga bagay ay nilalang sa pamamagitan niya at ukol sa kaniya;
kung si Cristo ang larawan ng Dios na di-nakikita..siya ang kausap ng Dios na kawangis niya sa Gen 1:26 at hindi mga anghel.
ang tanong ko sa iyo..liban sa apgiging espiritu ng mga anghel gaya ng Dios...saan pa masasabing kawangis sila ng Dios?==question no.3 5/10/06 8:45 am
This kind of out of the blue conclusions can really knock out a man from his seat It would be very dishonest for ADDAKO to claim as such..sigh
Anyway, to enlightened him:
Does ADDAKO ever notice that "man" was made in the image and likeness of God and this did not make him God? Does he ever claim that Adam was "God," having been made in the image and likeness of the invisible God? No of course not; that would not suit his agenda here for this particular passage. (Gen. 1:27, Gen. 9:6)
As usual, ADDAKO has nothing but his vain imaginations. The passage is discussing Jesus' risen nature of glory, something we too will share (1 Cor 15:49; Rom 8:29; Php 3:20-21) and like Jesus, we won't be "God" either.
to:tidus
tulad ng pambubutatang ginawa ko kay kalabog..kung tinatanggap mo na totoo ang CEV version ..sabi sa version na yan sa ..act 20:28...
Look after yourselves and everyone the Holy Spirit has placed in your care. Be like shepherds to GOD'S CHURC. It is the flock that he bought with the blood of his own Son.
The Acts 20:28
Contemporary English Version
ANO NANINIWALA KA DIYAN?
kung ang sagot mo ay hindi...ano pang ginagawa mo?..lamunin mo ang talatang bibigay mo..uminom ka ng tubig baka ka mabilaukan..
kung ang sagot mo ay oo...ano pang hinihintay mo?..lumayas ka na diyan sa ink..dahil ang tinatag palang iglesia ni Jesus ay CHURCH OF GOD at hindi CHURCH OF CHRIST..at niloloko lang pala kayo ni manalo..
o ano..kahit anong isagot mo siguradong salpok sa pader ano? he he he
This is a clear viloation of the afformentioned rules, posting "UNNECESSARY COMMENTS"
Just wondering what ADDAKO's will say to himself?
ADDAKO who's "BASTOS..WALNG URBANIDAD..WALANG MODO" These are the very words you uttered to a poster here when he gets in between the discussion..so why are you trying to tease bro Tidus? Looks like you are trying to do diversionary tactics and would try to make this discussion a melee.
Please stick to the topic. Refrain from posting irrelevant and unnecessary comments. Your argument on this topic has been answered, please read them. Thank you.
Kalabg
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.
Re: re:sinong anghel ang kausap ng Dios sa gen 1:26
No score for this post
May 10 2006, 3:22 PM
addako
(Login addako)
re:sinong anghel ang kausap ng Dios sa gen 1:26
No score for this post May 10 2006, 9:56 AM
post no.5 5/10/06 8:55 am
to: kalabog
ako napangalanan ko kung sino kausap ng Dios..si Cristo..ikaw bakit wala kang mapangalanan?..kumbaga sa police line-up..wala kang maiturong suspect for positive identification..kaya mahina ang kaso mo...
speaking of angels? hindi ba puedeng si gabriel?si miguel? o si lucifer ?(noong mabait pa siya)..sino..sinung anghel ang kausap niya? ====question no.4 5/10/06 8:55 am
ADDAKO your answer is base on conclusion only and the kind of questions he is throwing shows his ignorance of the scriptures
The Angelic court of God
In Isaiah 6:8, God asked "Whom shall I send? And who will go with us?" (NIV)
In the first question, God used the singular pronoun "I", whereas the second, the plural prounoun "us".
Why the shift in number? God was acknowledging the presence of the angels and other beings that encircle His throne:
"Then I looked and heard the voice of many angels, numbering thousands upon thousands, and ten thousand times ten thousand. They encircled the throne and the living creatures and the elders." (Rev. 5:11)
The angels include the Seraphim:
"In the year King Uzziah died, I saw the Lord. He was sitting on a lofty throne, and the train of his robe filled the Temple. Hovering around him were mighty seraphim, each with six wings. With two wings they covered their faces, with two they covered their feet, and with the remaining two they flew. (Is. 6:1-2, NLT)
and also the cherubim:
"After he drove the man out, he placed on the east side of the Garden of Eden cherubim and a flaming sword flashing back and forth to guard the way to the tree of life."
ADDAKO says: "sino..sinung anghel ang kausap niya?"
ADDAKO can you name all the "thousands upon thousands, and ten thousand times ten thousand angels" mentioned in Rev. 5:11.
ADDAKO's ignorance of the Biblical passages is very prominent
to:tidus
tulad ng pambubutatang ginawa ko kay kalabog..kung tinatanggap mo na totoo ang CEV version ..sabi sa version na yan sa ..act 20:28...
Look after yourselves and everyone the Holy Spirit has placed in your care. Be like shepherds to GOD'S CHURC. It is the flock that he bought with the blood of his own Son.
The Acts 20:28
Contemporary English Version
ANO NANINIWALA KA DIYAN?
kung ang sagot mo ay hindi...ano pang ginagawa mo?..lamunin mo ang talatang bibigay mo..uminom ka ng tubig baka ka mabilaukan..
kung ang sagot mo ay oo...ano pang hinihintay mo?..lumayas ka na diyan sa ink..dahil ang tinatag palang iglesia ni Jesus ay CHURCH OF GOD at hindi CHURCH OF CHRIST..at niloloko lang pala kayo ni manalo..
o ano..kahit anong isagot mo siguradong salpok sa pader ano? he he he
This is a clear viloation of the afformentioned rules, posting "UNNECESSARY COMMENTS"
Just wondering what ADDAKO's will say to himself?
ADDAKO who's "BASTOS..WALNG URBANIDAD..WALANG MODO" These are the very words you uttered to a poster here when he gets in between the discussion..so why are you trying to tease bro Tidus? Looks like you are trying to do diversionary tactics and would try to make this discussion a melee.
Please stick to the topic. Refrain from posting irrelevant and unnecessary comments. Your argument on this topic has been answered, please read them. Thank you.
Kalabg
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.
addako
(Login addako)
re:naniniwala ka sa Lamsa version?
No score for this post May 10 2006, 8:33 AM
post no.1 /10/06 6:45 am
NO, I have posted them and it is final. I don't buy your "Mag-asawang SAMPAL" sarcasm anyway as such are you disinginious diversionary tactics to veer away from the topic. You better keep your "Mag-asawang sampal" and give them to Eli Soriano.
You are asking for ACTS 20:28, then surely I'm glad to be of service to your very simple post.
First, it is a well known fact that some early manuscripts do not read "Church of God" but instead have "Church of the Lord." Does the ADD Leader Eli Soriano tell anyone these things?
Our first witness who can testify what the early manuscripts did say is the early Christian apologist Irenaeus who wrote Against Heresies around 180-185 A.D. He writes:
"Take heed, therefore, both to yourselves, and to all the flock over which the Holy Spirit has placed you as bishops, to rule the Church of the Lord, which He has acquired for Himself through His own blood." (Book III, 14).
".....the church of the Lord which he purchased with his own blood". (ASV).
If Acts 20:28 said what Trinitarians want it to say, they also have a dilemma on their hands: God's blood. It sounds odd to anyon________KALABOG
ok..granting without accepting yang mga pinagsasasabi....( although i can prove that CHURCH OF GOD is the true church establihed by Jesus Christ).....saan nyo kinuha ang batayan nyo na CHURCH OF CHRIST ang tinatag ni Cristo?.......di ba sa Lamsa version?( acts 20:28)..... at sino ba si George Lamsa?...siya'y bible scholar na nag-translate from aramaic to english version......at alam nyo ba na si george Lamsa ay naniniwala sa trinity?..na ang paniniwala niya kay Jesus ay Dios?..kaya nang itranslate niya ang Acts 20:28...instead na ilagay niya ay CHURCH OF GOD ..ang nailagay niya ay CHURCH OF CHRIST dahil ang paniwala niya na si Cristo ay Dios....kaya kung naniniwala kayo sa translation ni lamsa dapat maniwala kayo na Dios si Cristo di ba?..tingnan mo sabi niya sa ;
Filipos 2:6....who being in the form of God, did not consider it to be robbery to equal with God
7..but made himself in no reputation and took himself in the form of servant and was in the like ness of me.
dapat tanggapin nyo rin yan sa si cristo ay nasa anyong Dios (kalagayan)
kaya ang tanong ko..naniniwala ka ba sa translation ni Lamsa?=====question no.1 5/10/06 7:30 am
kung oo sagot mo.......salamat pareho na tayong naniniwala na si Cristo ay Dios
kung hindi.....huwagmo nang paniwalaan na CHURCH OF CHRIST ang itinayo ni Cristo..at lumayas ka na sa ink dahil niloloko ka lang ni manalo
o tamo kahit anong isagot mo...deretso ka sa bangin..o ano sagot mo?
ADDAKO, you are again making senseless story about George Lamsa. Shame on you to claim something that Lamsa never claimed.
This is what Dr. George Lamsa has to say about Acts 20:28, please compare it with your hallucinating story
Mr. George Lamsa explained why he used the expression "church of Christ." In the New Testament Commentary, he said:
"Jesus was not called God in those early days. The term generally used by his disciples and their followers was Maran, 'our Lord', and Eshoo, 'Jesus'. Peter, on the day of Pentecost, called him "Jesus of Nazareth, a man approved of God among you by miracles and wonders and signs'...(Acts. 2:22).
"Jewish Chistians could not have used the term God, because in their eyes God is spirit, and spirit has no flesh and blood." (p. 149)
Mr. Lamsa is a scholar who belongs to the race of Hebrews in Palestine who, until today, has kept much of the old customs and traditions as well as the language spoken by he Palestinians in the time of Christ, Thus, his words carries significant weight.
The Church of Christ upholds that the Lamsa's translation, which uses "church of Christ," is the accurate one. As he explained, "Lord" in this verse cannot refer to God, for God is spirit in nature (Jn. 4:24). A spirit has no flesh and bones as taught by Christ Himself:
ADDAKO, it not only the LAMSA version that is being used by us, but even the oldest Greek Manuscript which I doubt you know how to read
to:tidus
tulad ng pambubutatang ginawa ko kay kalabog..kung tinatanggap mo na totoo ang CEV version ..sabi sa version na yan sa ..act 20:28...
Look after yourselves and everyone the Holy Spirit has placed in your care. Be like shepherds to GOD'S CHURC. It is the flock that he bought with the blood of his own Son.
The Acts 20:28
Contemporary English Version
ANO NANINIWALA KA DIYAN?
kung ang sagot mo ay hindi...ano pang ginagawa mo?..lamunin mo ang talatang bibigay mo..uminom ka ng tubig baka ka mabilaukan..
kung ang sagot mo ay oo...ano pang hinihintay mo?..lumayas ka na diyan sa ink..dahil ang tinatag palang iglesia ni Jesus ay CHURCH OF GOD at hindi CHURCH OF CHRIST..at niloloko lang pala kayo ni manalo..
o ano..kahit anong isagot mo siguradong salpok sa pader ano? he he he
This is a clear viloation of the afformentioned rules, posting "UNNECESSARY COMMENTS"
Just wondering what ADDAKO's will say to himself?
ADDAKO who's "BASTOS..WALNG URBANIDAD..WALANG MODO" These are the very words you uttered to a poster here when he gets in between the discussion..so why are you trying to tease bro Tidus? Looks like you are trying to do diversionary tactics and would try to make this discussion a melee.
Please stick to the topic. Refrain from posting irrelevant and unnecessary comments. Your argument on this topic has been answered, please read them. Thank you.
Kalabg
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.
addako
(Login addako)
re:style nyo bulok
No score for this post May 10 2006, 8:53 AM
post no.2 5/10/06 7:45 1m
The BIBLE says compare to be able to know which translation is true. Our present Bible was translated from early manuscript written in a different language, therefore up to this very time many scholars are arguing about some mistranlations. Some translations are influenced by the preconcieved ideas of the present day authors.___kalabog
totoo naman yang sinabi mo e...pero yan nga ba ginawa nyo?..HINDI...dumadampot lang kayo ng version that will suit your purpose
pag gusto nyong patunayan na ang tao puedeng maging anghel tatakbo kayo sa Douay-Rheims version..at webstern dictionary...para mailusot nyo lang na si felix anghel
pag gusto nyong patunayan na CHURCH OF CHRIST ang itinayo ni Cristo..tatakbo kayo sa Lamsa version
pag gusto nyong patunayan na sinabi si Cristo TRULY MAN,,tatakbo kayo sa Contemporary english version
pag gusto ninyong patunayan na nasa bibliya ang ANG TAMANG DAAN..tatakbo kayo sa MAGANDANG BALITA BIBLIYA..(imagine gumagamit kayo ng translation ng demonyo, hindi ako nagsabi na demonyo katoliko...si felix ang nagsabi na ang katoliko at protestante ay sa demonyo==pasugo aug.1961 isssue page 39)
pag gusto ninyong patunayan na pilipinas ay fareast..tatakbo kayo sa world history
kaya kayo hindi ninyo kayang tindigan ang argumento ninyo na isang vesion lang ng bibliya gagamitin..kawawa talaga..
tumigil na kayo ..kabisadong-kabisado ko istrok nyo..style nyo bulok
Hmmm...looks like all your rubbish talking is having a boomerang effect on you.
I wonder where you get the story you mended for Dr. George Lamsa, does Eli Soriano told you that senseless story like how he told you about "Caucus sa Langit".
I can imagine how Eli Soriano mistaken the "DAY" as "SUN" in Tagalog version of Romans 13:13 with the tagalog term "araw". Goosh Eli Soriano is like a stupid clown in national TV, airing his stupid mistake. He fall short in comparing the verse with other translation.
to:tidus
tulad ng pambubutatang ginawa ko kay kalabog..kung tinatanggap mo na totoo ang CEV version ..sabi sa version na yan sa ..act 20:28...
Look after yourselves and everyone the Holy Spirit has placed in your care. Be like shepherds to GOD'S CHURC. It is the flock that he bought with the blood of his own Son.
The Acts 20:28
Contemporary English Version
ANO NANINIWALA KA DIYAN?
kung ang sagot mo ay hindi...ano pang ginagawa mo?..lamunin mo ang talatang bibigay mo..uminom ka ng tubig baka ka mabilaukan..
kung ang sagot mo ay oo...ano pang hinihintay mo?..lumayas ka na diyan sa ink..dahil ang tinatag palang iglesia ni Jesus ay CHURCH OF GOD at hindi CHURCH OF CHRIST..at niloloko lang pala kayo ni manalo..
o ano..kahit anong isagot mo siguradong salpok sa pader ano? he he he
This is a clear viloation of the afformentioned rules, posting "UNNECESSARY COMMENTS"
Just wondering what ADDAKO's will say to himself?
ADDAKO who's "BASTOS..WALNG URBANIDAD..WALANG MODO" These are the very words you uttered to a poster here when he gets in between the discussion..so why are you trying to tease bro Tidus? Looks like you are trying to do diversionary tactics and would try to make this discussion a melee.
Please stick to the topic. Refrain from posting irrelevant and unnecessary comments. Your argument on this topic has been answered, please read them. Thank you.
Kalabg
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.
addako
(Login addako)
re:naniniwala ka sa Lamsa version?
No score for this post May 10 2006, 8:35 AM
post no.1 /10/06 6:45 am
NO, I have posted them and it is final. I don't buy your "Mag-asawang SAMPAL" sarcasm anyway as such are you disinginious diversionary tactics to veer away from the topic. You better keep your "Mag-asawang sampal" and give them to Eli Soriano.
You are asking for ACTS 20:28, then surely I'm glad to be of service to your very simple post.
First, it is a well known fact that some early manuscripts do not read "Church of God" but instead have "Church of the Lord." Does the ADD Leader Eli Soriano tell anyone these things?
Our first witness who can testify what the early manuscripts did say is the early Christian apologist Irenaeus who wrote Against Heresies around 180-185 A.D. He writes:
"Take heed, therefore, both to yourselves, and to all the flock over which the Holy Spirit has placed you as bishops, to rule the Church of the Lord, which He has acquired for Himself through His own blood." (Book III, 14).
".....the church of the Lord which he purchased with his own blood". (ASV).
If Acts 20:28 said what Trinitarians want it to say, they also have a dilemma on their hands: God's blood. It sounds odd to anyon________KALABOG
ok..granting without accepting yang mga pinagsasasabi....( although i can prove that CHURCH OF GOD is the true church establihed by Jesus Christ).....saan nyo kinuha ang batayan nyo na CHURCH OF CHRIST ang iinatag ni Cristo?.......di ba sa Lamsa version?( acts 20:28)..... at sino ba si George Lamsa?...siya'y bible scholar na nag-translate from aramaic to english version......at alam nyo ba na si george Lamsa ay naniniwala sa trinity?..na ang paniniwala niya kay Jesus ay Dios?..kaya nang itranslate niya ang Acts 20:28...intead na ilagay niya ay CHURCH OF GOD ..ang nailagay niya ay CHURCH OF CHRIST dahil ang paniwala niya na si Cristo ay Dios....kaya kung naniniwala kayo sa translation ni lamsa dapat maniwa;a kayo na Dios si Cristo di ba?..tingnan mo sabi niya sa ;
Filipos 2:6....who being in the form of God, did not consider it to be robbery to equal with God
7..but made himself in no reputation and took himself in the form of servant and was in the like ness of me.
dapat tanggapin nyo rin yan sa si cristo ay nasa anyong Dios..
kaya ang tanong ko..naniniwala ka ba sa translation ni Lamsa?=====question no.1 5/10/06 7:30 am
kung oo sagot mo.......salamat pareho na tayong naniniwala na si cristo ay dios
kung hindi.....huwagmo nang paniwalaan na CHURCH OF CHRIST ang itinayo ni Cristo..at lumayas ka na sa ink dahil niloloko ka lang ni manalo
o tamo kahit anong isagot mo...deretso ka sa bangin..o ano sagot mo
ADDAKO, you are again making senseless story about George Lamsa. Shame on you to claim something that Lamsa never claimed.
This is what Dr. George Lamsa has to say about Acts 20:28, please compare it with your hallucinating story
Mr. George Lamsa explained why he used the expression "church of Christ." In the New Testament Commentary, he said:
"Jesus was not called God in those early days. The term generally used by his disciples and their followers was Maran, 'our Lord', and Eshoo, 'Jesus'. Peter, on the day of Pentecost, called him "Jesus of Nazareth, a man approved of God among you by miracles and wonders and signs'...(Acts. 2:22).
"Jewish Chistians could not have used the term God, because in their eyes God is spirit, and spirit has no flesh and blood." (p. 149)
Mr. Lamsa is a scholar who belongs to the race of Hebrews in Palestine who, until today, has kept much of the old customs and traditions as well as the language spoken by he Palestinians in the time of Christ, Thus, his words carries significant weight.
The Church of Christ upholds that the Lamsa's translation, which uses "church of Christ," is the accurate one. As he explained, "Lord" in this verse cannot refer to God, for God is spirit in nature (Jn. 4:24). A spirit has no flesh and bones as taught by Christ Himself:
ADDAKO, it not only the LAMSA version that is being used by us, but even the oldest Greek Manuscript which I doubt you know how to read
to:tidus
tulad ng pambubutatang ginawa ko kay kalabog..kung tinatanggap mo na totoo ang CEV version ..sabi sa version na yan sa ..act 20:28...
Look after yourselves and everyone the Holy Spirit has placed in your care. Be like shepherds to GOD'S CHURC. It is the flock that he bought with the blood of his own Son.
The Acts 20:28
Contemporary English Version
ANO NANINIWALA KA DIYAN?
kung ang sagot mo ay hindi...ano pang ginagawa mo?..lamunin mo ang talatang bibigay mo..uminom ka ng tubig baka ka mabilaukan..
kung ang sagot mo ay oo...ano pang hinihintay mo?..lumayas ka na diyan sa ink..dahil ang tinatag palang iglesia ni Jesus ay CHURCH OF GOD at hindi CHURCH OF CHRIST..at niloloko lang pala kayo ni manalo..
o ano..kahit anong isagot mo siguradong salpok sa pader ano? he he he
This is a clear viloation of the afformentioned rules, posting "UNNECESSARY COMMENTS"
Just wondering what ADDAKO's will say to himself?
ADDAKO who's "BASTOS..WALNG URBANIDAD..WALANG MODO" These are the very words you uttered to a poster here when he gets in between the discussion..so why are you trying to tease bro Tidus? Looks like you are trying to do diversionary tactics and would try to make this discussion a melee.
Please stick to the topic. Refrain from posting irrelevant and unnecessary comments. Your argument on this topic has been answered, please read them. Thank you.
Kalabg
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.
dahil itong si i3answer ay nagdi-display ng kabastusan dahil ang debateng ito ay para lang dapat sa ating 2 ..ewan ko ba kung bakit itong si i3answer ..hindi naman siya kasali d2...singit nang singit..sinaway ko na siya...at hiniling sa inyo na pagsabihan nyo na itigil ang kabastusan pero deadma lang kayo..kaya kalabog...gusto kong turuan ng leksyon itong brod ninyong bastos na ito...kaya ang debate natin ay puputulin ko na...at si i3answer na ang magpapatuloy ng sinimulan nating tema" sino ang kausap ng Dios sa gen.1:26?..siya na ang magpapatuloy ng stand mo...yun ay kung may tiwala ka sa bopol na ito?..gagawa ako ng bagong thread(but same topic)" addako vs.i3answer...a continuation of addako vs.kalabog
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.
Re: Gen 1:26 "Kalabog vs addako" Si Jesus o ang mga Anghel ang kausap ng Dios
No score for this post
May 14 2006, 4:49 AM
[ddako (Login addako)
re:dahil bastos si i3answer....
No score for this post May 13 2006, 8:46 AM
to : kalabog
dahil itong si i3answer ay nagdi-display ng kabastusan dahil ang debateng ito ay para lang dapat sa ating 2 ..ewan ko ba kung bakit itong si i3answer ..hindi naman siya kasali d2...singit nang singit..sinaway ko na siya...at hiniling sa inyo na pagsabihan nyo na itigil ang kabastusan pero deadma lang kayo..kaya kalabog...gusto kong turuan ng leksyon itong brod ninyong bastos na ito...kaya ang debate natin ay puputulin ko na...at si i3answer na ang magpapatuloy ng sinimulan nating tema" sino ang kausap ng Dios sa gen.1:26?..siya na ang magpapatuloy ng stand mo...yun ay kung may tiwala ka sa bopol na ito?..gagawa ako ng bagong thread(but same topic)" addako vs.i3answer...a continuation of addako vs.kalabog]
Say that to yourself. You're just probably taking advantage of Bro. Kalabog's absence in this forum during weekends. So kanino ngayon lumalapat yung sinasabi mong "bastos" addako?
Anyways, let's go back to the topic. Tanong ko sa iyo, si Cristo ba ay isa rin manlalalang (creator) tulad ng Ama? Hihintayin ko ang sagot mo.
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.
Re: Gen 1:26 "Kalabog vs addako" Si Jesus o ang mga Anghel ang kausap ng Dios
No score for this post
May 15 2006, 9:03 AM
addako
(Login addako)
re:dahil bastos si i3answer....
No score for this post May 13 2006, 8:46 AM
to : kalabog
dahil itong si i3answer ay nagdi-display ng kabastusan dahil ang debateng ito ay para lang dapat sa ating 2 ..ewan ko ba kung bakit itong si i3answer ..hindi naman siya kasali d2...singit nang singit..sinaway ko na siya...at hiniling sa inyo na pagsabihan nyo na itigil ang kabastusan pero deadma lang kayo..kaya kalabog...gusto kong turuan ng leksyon itong brod ninyong bastos na ito...kaya ang debate natin ay puputulin ko na...at si i3answer na ang magpapatuloy ng sinimulan nating tema" sino ang kausap ng Dios sa gen.1:26?..siya na ang magpapatuloy ng stand mo...yun ay kung may tiwala ka sa bopol na ito?..gagawa ako ng bagong thread(but same topic)" addako vs.i3answer...a continuation of addako vs.kalabog
Isa lang ang nauunawaan ko sa pahayag ni ADDAKO, ang pagtanggap niya ng kanyang pagkatalo sa isang maginoong diskusyon.
Kung inaakala ni ADDAKO na makakabawi sa paggawa ng bagong thread ay mali, isang pagtakas ang gusto niyang mangyari dahil ni isang tanong ko wala siyang sinagot kundi ang sagot niya sa mga tanong ko ay tanong din
Kalabg
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.
Re: Gen 1:26 "Kalabog vs addako" Si Jesus o ang mga Anghel ang kausap ng Dios
No score for this post
May 15 2006, 5:10 PM
Kaya naman sa Debate namin eh parang interview ang kinalabasan... ADDAKO... Kawawa ka naman lagi kang subsob sa debate... wala ka pang naipanalo ah... mahiya ka naman
Siguro naman pwede nang magpost dito kasi talo na si ADDAKO eh
TIDUS
<--- Addako kapag sumasagot
<--- Addako kapag hindi na kayang sumagot
<--- Addako kapagsuko na sa debate
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.
Re: Gen 1:26 "Kalabog vs addako" Si Jesus o ang mga Anghel ang kausap ng Dios
No score for this post
June 28 2006, 7:50 AM
talo na si addako? no hard feelings mga inc members pero mas maliwnag pa nga at nasa bibliya ang mga isinasagot niya magaling din naman si kalabog sa pagsagot pero yung ibang paliwanag niya sa talatang apoc. 5:11 malabo talaga eh, sabi niya sa mga anghel... lalangin natin ang tao ayon sa ating larawan tapos siya lang pala ang gagawa? medyo natatawa lang ako dun may pagka non sense kasi eh.
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.
Re: Gen 1:26 "Kalabog vs addako" Si Jesus o ang mga Anghel ang kausap ng Dios
No score for this post
June 28 2006, 8:06 AM
[(Login EasternShadow)
Re: Gen 1:26 "Kalabog vs addako" Si Jesus o ang mga Anghel ang kausap ng Dios
No score for this post June 28 2006, 7:50 AM
talo na si addako? no hard feelings mga inc members pero mas maliwnag pa nga at nasa bibliya ang mga isinasagot niya magaling din naman si kalabog sa pagsagot pero yung ibang paliwanag niya sa talatang apoc. 5:11 malabo talaga eh, sabi niya sa mga anghel... lalangin natin ang tao ayon sa ating larawan tapos siya lang pala ang gagawa? medyo natatawa lang ako dun may pagka non sense kasi eh.]
Akala ko ba hindi ka ADD member? Tapos kumakampi ka kay Addako?
O baka naman ikaw din si Addako, nag-iba ka lang ng login name?
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.
Re: Gen 1:26 "Kalabog vs addako" Si Jesus o ang mga Anghel ang kausap ng Dios
No score for this post
June 28 2006, 10:48 AM
jeff
(Login EasternShadow)
Re: Gen 1:26 "Kalabog vs addako" Si Jesus o ang mga Anghel ang kausap ng Dios
No score for this post June 28 2006, 7:50 AM
talo na si addako? no hard feelings mga inc members pero mas maliwnag pa nga at nasa bibliya ang mga isinasagot niya magaling din naman si kalabog sa pagsagot pero yung ibang paliwanag niya sa talatang apoc. 5:11 malabo talaga eh, sabi niya sa mga anghel.
Ano ang malabo sa Apoc 5:11? Kaya mo bang bigyan ng pangalan ang libo-libong Anghel sa talatang iyan?
ADDAKO does not prove anything anything related to the main topic. If you say he presented it clearly then please post here the verse that supports his claims regarding the main topic. If you can not post even a single verse then your vain reasoning is just a trash
.. lalangin natin ang tao ayon sa ating larawan tapos siya lang pala ang gagawa? medyo natatawa lang ako dun may pagka non sense kasi eh.
Either you have dark shades or just playing blind
Have you read Gen. 1:27, if you haven't yet...please read and say again your rehearsed childish acts to yourself.
I guess you're too lazy to do that, here please read:
So God created man in Hisown image; in the image of God Hecreated him; male and female Hecreated them. (Gen. 1:27,NKJV)
Now Jeff, can you distiguish the singular pronoun "He" and "His" in this verse? can you equate your preconcieved idea of "us" into this very bold singular pronouns "He" and "His"?
Are you laughing at yourself as in LOL!
Kalabg
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.
NGOOOOKK NGOKKKK hehe kawawang Juan, napakababaw ng pang unawa
TIDUS
Psalm 6:1-4
1 O LORD , do not rebuke me in your anger
or discipline me in your wrath.
2 Be merciful to me, LORD , for I am faint;
O LORD , heal me, for my bones are in agony.
3 My soul is in anguish.
How long, O LORD , how long?
4 Turn, O LORD , and deliver me;
save me because of your unfailing love.
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.
Re: Gen 1:26 "Kalabog vs addako" Si Jesus o ang mga Anghel ang kausap ng Dios
No score for this post
June 29 2006, 4:20 AM
di ako kakampi ni addako pero nagkataon lang siguro na pareho kaming tumatanggap sa kung ano ang nakasulat, ang paliwanag ng bibliya tungkol sa nakasulat at hindi ng paliwanag ng tao
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.
Re: Gen 1:26 "Kalabog vs addako" Si Jesus o ang mga Anghel ang kausap ng Dios
No score for this post
June 29 2006, 8:23 AM
[Jeff (Login EasternShadow)
Re: Gen 1:26 "Kalabog vs addako" Si Jesus o ang mga Anghel ang kausap ng Dios
No score for this post June 29 2006, 4:20 AM
di ako kakampi ni addako pero nagkataon lang siguro na pareho kaming tumatanggap sa kung ano ang nakasulat, ang paliwanag ng bibliya tungkol sa nakasulat at hindi ng paliwanag ng tao]
Ganun ba? Bueno, saan sa Biblia nakasulat na ang Diyos ay may puwet gaya ng paniniwala ni addako?
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.
Re: Gen 1:26 "Kalabog vs addako" Si Jesus o ang mga Anghel ang kausap ng Dios
No score for this post
June 29 2006, 12:49 PM
jeff
(Login EasternShadow)
Re: Gen 1:26 "Kalabog vs addako" Si Jesus o ang mga Anghel ang kausap ng Dios
No score for this post June 29 2006, 4:20 AM
di ako kakampi ni addako pero nagkataon lang siguro na pareho kaming tumatanggap sa kung ano ang nakasulat, ang paliwanag ng bibliya tungkol sa nakasulat at hindi ng paliwanag ng tao
Let us see if you really do meant what you are saying, speaking in behalf of someone you don't even know and don't even know his true intension seems like you are grasping for help.
You and ADDAKO are on the same boat, and I do understand your defense attitude. I'll tell one truth read John 17:1,3 this verse is very plain and straightforward and teaches us on how to attain salvation. Then compare this with the frequent used verse of Trinitarians like John 1:1, Titus 2:13, Eph 2:6-8, Heb 1:8 which are translated in many ways to swing to their man-made doctrines.
Kalabg
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.
Re: Gen 1:26 "Kalabog vs addako" Si Jesus o ang mga Anghel ang kausap ng Dios
No score for this post
June 29 2006, 9:30 PM
ganun ba talaga paniwala ninyo na kung pareho ng paniniwala ang isang tao sa paniniwala ng mga taga add eh miyembro na rin sila ng add? kung ganon magiging miyembro na rin ako ng add katulad ng nangyari sa isa dito na pilit ninyong pinaniniwalaang add member na ayon sa isa ninyong kasamahan eh baptist naman pala.
kanswer eto..
At nilalang ng Dios ang tao ayon sa kaniyang sariling larawan, ayon sa larawan ng Dios siya nilalang; nilalang niya sila na lalake at babae.
Genesis 1:27
Ang Dating Biblia
... kung ikaw naniniwala kang nilalang ka ng Diyos ayon sa kanyang sariling larawan, tatanggapin mo may puwet ang Diyos. hindi rin ibig sabihin na kung ano nakikita mong itsura ng puwet ng tao eh ganun din ang sa Diyos dahil ayon na rin sa inyo, ang Diyos ay espiritu walang laman at buto.
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.
Re: Gen 1:26 "Kalabog vs addako" Si Jesus o ang mga Anghel ang kausap ng Dios
No score for this post
June 30 2006, 7:54 AM
[jeff (Login EasternShadow)
Re: Gen 1:26 "Kalabog vs addako" Si Jesus o ang mga Anghel ang kausap ng Dios
No score for this post June 29 2006, 9:30 PM
ganun ba talaga paniwala ninyo na kung pareho ng paniniwala ang isang tao sa paniniwala ng mga taga add eh miyembro na rin sila ng add? kung ganon magiging miyembro na rin ako ng add katulad ng nangyari sa isa dito na pilit ninyong pinaniniwalaang add member na ayon sa isa ninyong kasamahan eh baptist naman pala.
Nakakaawa ka pre, pati ikaw nauto ni edchin tsk tsk.. baptist ba yung gumagamit ng mga salitang "siraulo" at "tanga"? FYI ADD ang may gayong trademark.
kanswer eto..
At nilalang ng Dios ang tao ayon sa kaniyang sariling larawan, ayon sa larawan ng Dios siya nilalang; nilalang niya sila na lalake at babae.
Genesis 1:27
Ang Dating Biblia
... kung ikaw naniniwala kang nilalang ka ng Diyos ayon sa kanyang sariling larawan, tatanggapin mo may puwet ang Diyos. hindi rin ibig sabihin na kung ano nakikita mong itsura ng puwet ng tao eh ganun din ang sa Diyos dahil ayon na rin sa inyo, ang Diyos ay espiritu walang laman at buto.
Eli Soriano: "Pero hindi ibig sabihin, sa langit eh may upuan ang Dios, eh ibig sabihin may puwet na ang Dios. Hindi po...hindi po ganon ang Biblia kapatid."
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.
Current Topic - Gen 1:26 "Kalabog vs addako" Si Jesus o ang mga Anghel ang kausap ng Dios
Talakayan ng mga duktrina at sinasabi ni Eli Soriano at ng kanyang Ang Dating Daan.
Ano mang mga isyu tungkol kay Eli Soriano ng Ang Dating Daan ay pwedeng pag-usapan dito. Lahat ng taga-pagtangol ng Ang Dating Daan ni Eli Soriano ay ina-anyayahan na ipagtangol ang anumang sa inaakala nyong di wasto ang mga sinasabi dito sa forum na ito at makaka-asa kayong di mawawala o di mabubura ang inyong mga kasagutan.
Ang maaari lang mabura o ma-delete ay ang mga sumusunod....
1.Malicious codes
2.Mga pics na hindi na katangap-tangap
3.Nang-gugulo lamang sa forum
Listahan ng IP Kaanib sa Ang Dating Daan ni Eli Soriano na nangugulo dito sa forum.....
g
<--- Addako kapag sumasagot
<--- Addako kapag hindi na kayang sumagot
<--- Addako kapagsuko na sa debate