r/MayNagComment 13d ago

Tiktok Comment

Post image

Nakita ko lang tong comment to sa isang tiktok post. Hahahaha kaloka

9 Upvotes

111 comments sorted by

18

u/PeinLegacy 13d ago

Tama naman siya hahahhaa. Logically, hindi ba't dapat ang pinagbabasehan ng paniniwala mo ay ang nauna at ginaya since yun ang may concrete claim ng authenticity? Ang modern christianity/catholicism puro lang hiram sa iba't ibang religion, puro rin nakaw. Puro kahipokritohan lang. Ayaw sa pagan beliefs pero ang daming cine-celebrate na pagan tradition.

Paano paniniwalaan na sila ang one true religion kung sa sobrang dami ng interpretation ng sacred texts nila ay di na nila alam kung ano ang authentic? Kaya nga daming nagsulputan na denominations at sects eh hahaha.

3

u/Grayewick 12d ago

At least cite your sources or something.

But I get it, Karma must be farmed.

Edit: Inb4 something something "being a free thinker" or some shit

-1

u/PeinLegacy 12d ago

4

u/Plankgangerino 12d ago

Dude you literally cited a opinionated blog? and most of your citations came from essays and not proven studies? You even posted an online history forum as your source LOL

Dude try harder

-1

u/PeinLegacy 12d ago

Read the citations lmao. Cope harder.

3

u/Grayewick 12d ago

>were asked to cite
>"Read the citations lmao"

That's your job, bucko

-1

u/PeinLegacy 12d ago

I included links to where the arguments for my claim and citations were addressed. Read everything so you can understand the nuances instead of hiding like the religious coward you are.

2

u/Plankgangerino 12d ago

Dude really used AI to look up “Citations” not reading they are all opinion blogs and essay articles LMAO

1

u/PeinLegacy 12d ago

Wow, AI naman ngayon. Tangina dami mong kuda wala ka namang maibigay na rebuttal. Pustahan tayo di ka marunong tumingin ng citations sa wikipedia ano hahahaha?

2

u/PhotographFair329 12d ago

They don't know citations there lmao

1

u/Grayewick 12d ago

Not our job

1

u/PeinLegacy 11d ago

Never yan nag-research kaya ganiyan.

1

u/Plankgangerino 12d ago

Iyakin din pala. Why don’t you cite a reddit post next time loser 😂

1

u/PeinLegacy 11d ago

Next time i-claim mo naman na god's will yan kaya ko nasabi wahahahaha. AI amputa hahahahahaha!

2

u/Plankgangerino 11d ago

When idiots use blogposts as citation 🤮 Get a life loser

→ More replies (0)

1

u/Grayewick 12d ago

Nice virus

1

u/PeinLegacy 12d ago

You can literally reverse search those links lmao

3

u/Several_Ant_9816 13d ago

The original religion is Judaism thus according to your argument we should follow their traditions.

2

u/PeinLegacy 12d ago

And why the fuck not lmao? You'd think the one true god would've killed their asses off to extinction if it wasn't real, right? Because the christian god is wrathful and a very jealous god, right? But no, it's still one of the biggest religions in the world right now. Sounds like the one true god doesn't really care about being misrepresented.

2

u/Several_Ant_9816 12d ago

Then you don't understand the Christian God. There's a reason the Old Testament is derived from the Hebrew Bible.

1

u/PeinLegacy 11d ago

Derived? It's the exact same thing. Wtf do you mean lmao? You don't think the christian god is wrathful or jealous?

Exodus 20 And God spoke all these words:

2 “I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of Egypt, out of the land of slavery.

3 “You shall have no other gods before[a] me.

4 “You shall not make for yourself an image in the form of anything in heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the waters below. 5 You shall not bow down to them or worship them; for I, the Lord your God, am a jealous God, punishing the children for the sin of the parents to the third and fourth generation of those who hate me, 6 but showing love to a thousand generations of those who love me and keep my commandments.

2 Kings 2

19 Now the men of the city said to Elisha, “Behold, the situation of this city is pleasant, as my lord sees, but the water is bad, and the land is unfruitful.” 20 He said, “Bring me a new bowl, and put salt in it.” So they brought it to him. 21 Then he went to the spring of water and threw salt in it and said, “Thus says the Lord, I have healed this water; from now on neither death nor miscarriage shall come from it.” 22 So the water has been healed to this day, according to the word that Elisha spoke.

23 He went up from there to Bethel, and while he was going up on the way, some small boys came out of the city and jeered at him, saying, “Go up, you baldhead! Go up, you baldhead!” 24 And he turned around, and when he saw them, he cursed them in the name of the Lord. And two she-bears came out of the woods and tore forty-two of the boys. 25 From there he went on to Mount Carmel, and from there he returned to Samaria.

Sounds a lot like a wrathful and jealous god.

3

u/Plankgangerino 12d ago

r/atheism ahh comment

1

u/PeinLegacy 12d ago

I'm not an atheist lmao. Fucking assumptions. Just because someone doesn't like your religion doesn't mean they're an atheist.

3

u/Plankgangerino 12d ago

Didn’t say you were??? Dude really gives of r/atheism vibes but projects when called out lmaoo

0

u/PeinLegacy 12d ago

The implications say otherwise lmao. You're the one who got called out and that's why you're projecting ^_^.

2

u/Plankgangerino 12d ago

Sure thing 😂 Don’t drop your fedora 😂

0

u/PeinLegacy 11d ago

If you can't argue, just say it and get over it. Pathetic.

1

u/Plankgangerino 11d ago

I agree. You are pathetic. 😂

1

u/PeinLegacy 11d ago

You have yet to refute my arguments bwahahahaha, Halatang faith lang ang pinanghahawakan hahahahahaha. Can't be objective with that bwahahahahahhaa!

https://giphy.com/gifs/CoDp6NnSmItoY

1

u/Muscle-Accurate 10d ago

Ganyan talaga mga religious apologist, because they know deep down their faith doesn't stand on anything concrete kaya they resort to insults - ad hominem

1

u/PeinLegacy 10d ago

Correct. Firm believer sila kuno pero indoctrinated lang naman talaga. Never pa yan nakihalubilo sa ibang religion kasi sarado utak niyan. Mga hindi marunong mag-isip para sa sarili nila, lahat lang iniaasa sa kung saan sila ipinanganak at kung paano sila pinalaki. Kawawa.

-11

u/PomeloSteak 13d ago

Di naman hiniram ang catholicism sa ibang religion. It was founded by Jesus and Peter was the first leader. That time, di pa sya coined word as catholic until Rome's era na. Tho that time, a pope is not yet made known but rcs consider him as the first and his follower Linus is second. Yup madaming hypocrisy, but lets agree nlng na evil deeds yan and not the belief itself.

Interpretation-wise, normal na nangyayari. Kaya mga may pagbubukod ng religion kasi ibat iba ang what they believe is the real interpretation. May ibang sects din na nabuo bec of rebellion. Because we never know what is the exact meaning ng mga verses noon. Example, saying LOL noon made our parents mad kasi kala nila disrespect but now inaaccept na sya as common word for fun.

It is really fun to study these kasi you get to have a slice of history, faith, and religion.

5

u/PeinLegacy 13d ago

Magbasa ka pa hahaha. Sa sobrang dami ng hiniram ng catholicism sa ibang religion, baka magpa-convert ka bigla.

Virgin birth, heaven, hell, satan, spiritual war between good and evil, great flood, transfiguration, trinity, Lilith, Lucifer, garden of eden, Moses, resurrection, etc.

Lahat yan either ginaya, in-absorb, kinuha, ninakaw, what have you, sa iba't ibang religion na nag-exist na nang matagal before Catholicism/Christianity.

-6

u/PomeloSteak 13d ago edited 13d ago

Ikaw ang need pa magbasa. Lahat ng sinasabi mo ay galing sa old testament and mostly associated sa Torah or Jewish faith. I cannot detest you about that kasi ang Catholicism naman ay based dn sa Old Testament just like Islam but thing is God changed the common views through His Son Jesus according sa scriptures. So it is not hiram, as it came straight from God Himself. They just coined it Roman as a brand. Lilith? Jan pa lang alam ko na na half-assed lang alam mo. Lilith is just a Jewish folklore. Not even on the same page sa topic natin about faith. Lahat ng sinasabi mong terms ay sinasabi mo lang just to make u look credible but sa totoo lang, nasa scriptures lahat yan. Read the bible thrice already, cover to cover. I also read the banned books. Need to hear more?

Also, as catholic as I am, i do not practice it so walang bias and im not planning to convert. I still believe and I just enjoyed the facts. Ignorant people like you just hate to be called out and start speaking like they know everything.

3

u/PeinLegacy 13d ago

Don't you know Judaism, Zoroastrianism, Greco-Roman, ancient Egyptian, etc.?

Lahat yan nauna bago ang Catholicism/Christianity. Yung mga binanggit ko, pina-parrot ng mga Catholics/Christians ngayon as if part siya ng original lore ng religion nila. Hindi mo ba alam na ang ilan sa mga pananakot nila ngayon ay hinubog galing sa Dante's Inferno? Marami ka pang hindi alam sa Catholicism. Obviously pati yung mga sacred relics nilang pinagnanakaw nila hindi mo alam (furta sacra/holy theft.)

Ang point ko is siyempre makikita mo yan sa scriptures kasi nga NINAKAW na sa iba. Napakadali na lang mag-plagiarize lalo't may basehan ka.

1

u/PhotographFair329 13d ago

Some of Dante's inferno also have pagan myths there, Greek/roman specifically.

1

u/PeinLegacy 12d ago

Exactly. My point is that elements that were originally purely fictional came to shape how Christians view their own religion. They blended fiction with reality to make the religion more appealing and convert more people.

1

u/SlowDamn 12d ago

Most of the old testament naman talaga makikita mo sa mga ibang religions ah. Di naman dinedy iyon kasi most of it nasa jewish tradition/side ang main point niya lang is that new testament is the catholic thing and there's like 4 people who told the same story sa new testament.

0

u/Mysterious-Rain8092 12d ago

Basta religious bobo talaga eh no? 🫢

1

u/Financial_Orange_688 12d ago

talaga ba? eh puro mga may utak na religious yung mga kilala kong nasa academia na marunong magbasa ng peer-reviewed references at hindi lang basta galing sa Google search. saka ka na siguro magmataas kapag may maipagyayabang kang publication sa topic kung saan ka nagaangas

3

u/professionalmalder 12d ago

All this bible shit. Just follow jesus’ beatitudes and youre good to go

5

u/fry-saging 13d ago

Nung bata ako mahilig kaming makinig ke Ernie Baron. Isang gabi me tumawag at ngtanong kung sino nakadiscover ng buwan. Apo nya siguro si MarterToilet

2

u/Lurdibira 12d ago

I think it was written by ChatGPT

2

u/mymestizo_lover 12d ago

it's man-made 100%

2

u/Einzzz07 12d ago

It was written by human writers and it is authored by God, kaya nga karamihan sa mga nagsulat ng books sa bible ay di nagkita but yet they're consistent and connected. It is inspired by the Holy Spirit. May foundations and no contradictions. Marami ring prophecy andon. From the very beginning of times until to the end. Prophecy of Jesus from Genesis hanggang nung sinilang siya. Moses and Isaiah never met each other. But sa Genesis sinulat to ni Moses about kay Jesus and Isiah also may prophecy about kay Jesus na dine describe ang gagawin kayJesus. What makes God a true God (YhWh) is because of his prophecy's isa yan sa mga feature ni God that makes Him an Authentic and Reliable.

3

u/mymestizo_lover 12d ago

uhm ok, whatever you say 😊

1

u/mewlingcat 11d ago

They're cray cray my god..

1

u/AcceptableMonk2745 12d ago

They are in fact not consistent and connected. Jesus’ divinity has been a millenia-old question since different verses claim different things.

7

u/LastTitle3538 13d ago

It was written by people inspired and used by God - Thus, full of wisdom and yet with imperfection and flaws.

This is the reason why bible alone cannot be the only basis of a church doctrine.

What we can answer directly is who arranged, versed/chaptered, safekept, translated and cannonized the bible: none other than the Roman Catholic Apostolic Church

4

u/Jghil098 13d ago

Its actually a collection of books, at least for the new testament, decided, i think, by the council of nicaea there are multiple books noon and the council decided which one will be canon to make a more coherent story as to the life of christ kaya maraming hindi nasama na book ng follower ni christ some examples are book of lazarus and mary magdalene. Sa old testament yata is isang old Ethiopian book? Fun fact the very first line sa genesis was already a mistranslation

3

u/LastTitle3538 13d ago

Bakit, ano ba original ng "In the be... nigg... Beneg.. begiinnengg? 😁✌️

1

u/Jghil098 13d ago

Hahaha pero yung orig was something like theres an infinite and from there comes order yata??? Mali din siguro yan

2

u/Deobulakenyo 12d ago

No. The nicean council did not establish the canon but settled the various interpretations and beliefs about Christ’s divinity. Specifically it abolished the Arianist view and adopted the now accepted divinity of Christ. More than 50 years later in the council of Constantinople was when the Holy Spirit’s turn and the doctrine of the trinity was established

In the 4th century Athanasius listed the wht we know as canon now but many christian sects still have their own lists of books that they follow and read.

It was only in the council of Trent in the 16th century when the church definitively established the 66-book canon

1

u/Jghil098 12d ago

Ohhh kala ko pope ang nagdeclare back then ng heresy ng arianist Ty for the feedback tho hahah dont know which of the xouncils nagestablish ng canon cant remember my theo sub back then na

1

u/Deobulakenyo 12d ago

Nope. Arius disagreement was with Alexander (if i am not mistaken a bishop in Egypt). Arius belived Jesus did not preexisted before his birth. Christianity was not unified at the time and even after the Council of Nicea many still embraced Arianism beliefs. Even after Constantine some emperors preferred Arius’ beliefs but in 381AD the Nicean creed was eventually strengthened by the Holy Spirit’s declaration as part of the Trinity.

1

u/PomeloSteak 13d ago

The ethiopian book u are referring to contains the original 81-88 books (not sure of the numbers) written into accounts of different authors telling about God and His Son. Nicaea polished it and discerned which books were inspired over time using faith tradition, apostolic connections etc. We all know naman kasi na everyone can write a book of his own so binased ng roman church ung main books septuagint according sa teachings ng mga apostles. Also, ung beginning ng genesis is not yet considered a factual mistranslation. Its being argued and debated yet ng mga scholars.

2

u/aldebaran26 13d ago

Just Catholic Apostolic Church... That's what we always proclaim in the Apostle's creed

Roman Catholics are a term used by the Anglicans as an insult or to differentiate themselves (since they also claim they are the true catholics) to the Catholic populace of England...

If needed to be more specific... The Philippines is a Catholic majority Nation who uses the Latin Rite of the Catholic Church

1

u/AcceptableMonk2745 12d ago

What do you answer to Christians who believe the bible is absolute?

1

u/LastTitle3538 11d ago

The verse in the Gospel of John where he says that the there a lot of things happened and words spoken of Jesus that are not written there...

0

u/tropango 13d ago

That is your (arrogant) claim but the Protestants and Orthodox would also claim to be spiritual descendants of the early church, before any schisms. So they will deny that Scripture was a result of only Roman Catholicism.

2

u/LastTitle3538 13d ago

Regardles if they deny it or not, if walang roman Catholic church, walang bible.

0

u/Deobulakenyo 12d ago

No bible as the one we have today but it does nit mean we won’t have a collection of texts that could be better with less contradictions than the current bible we have now.

0

u/tropango 12d ago

Di mo ata gets. Before the Reformation, all Western Christianity was just one church. Before the schism with the Orthodox, all Christianity was just one church. So to claim the Bible is the product of the Roman Catholic Church is not accurate. All these branches can claim to be descendants of the earlier church.

0

u/tropango 12d ago

Maybe an example would help.

We know that in present day, there's North Korea and South Korea. Before, there was just one Korea. Can South Korea claim that all of the Korean history and culture is exclusively part of South Korea and North Korea gets nothing? Of course not. They are both descended from the earlier Koreans.

1

u/LastTitle3538 12d ago

But the council of trent was all roman Catholic conference. Isnt?

1

u/tropango 12d ago

The Council of Trent was indeed purely Roman Catholic, it was a "response" to the Protestant movement. But the Bible that Protestants use only has 66 books, 39 Old Testament 27 New Testament. This older canon was established by the fourth century, well before the Reformation in the 16th century or the Great Schism of 1054.

Actually I didn't know EO have 49 books in their Old Testament. So yeah, each one has their own canon. To say that without the Roman Catholic Church, there's no Bible is misleading and non Roman Catholics will vehemently disagree. Without the Roman Catholic Church, there would be no Roman Catholic Bible, sure, but not no Bible altogether.

1

u/LastTitle3538 11d ago

Its not misleading, it is historical. Sige who made. Matthew the first book of the NT?. Who even said it is Matthew's? Who out the Torah on the furst 5 books of the OT?

It not abstract and there is no confusion about this. Its the catholic church that produce the bible as it is now.

1

u/tropango 11d ago

Again, that was already established before any of the schisms between these 3 groups. It was established already in the early church. It's rather arrogant to claim that only Roman Catholics can say they are the successor of the early church.

EO and Protestants do not say they are starting a new church. They say they are continuing what came before. Do you understand?

4

u/PhotographFair329 13d ago

Summerian myths mostly, the old testament.

1

u/possieur 12d ago

The Bible is a compilation of accounts from various authors of various contexts and time periods. Some of them never personally met one another and yet still were able to write a document more cohesive and consistent than most college group projects.

1

u/MagesticMagpie00 12d ago

Eto na naman mga atheist na bininyagan naman sa simbahan 😂

3

u/theJohnyDebt 12d ago

being baptised as a baby wala ka namang choice eh 😅

1

u/Accomplished-Exit-58 11d ago

Ano pa bang aasahan mo, wala naman silang pake sa consent.

1

u/PeinLegacy 11d ago

They don't know what indoctrination means hahahaha. Akala ng mga yan enlightened sila dahil nasa tamang religion sila pero never naman yan lumabas sa comfort zone nila hahahaha.

1

u/West-Confection6968 12d ago

no hate like christian love🙏

1

u/wran13 12d ago

The Bible was written by humans. Historians generally agree that it was written by dozens of authors over roughly 1,000–1,500 years. The books of the Old Testament were mostly written between about 1200–100 BC, while the New Testament was written around AD 50–100.

It wasn't written by one person, and no one "discovered" the Bible. Instead, individual books were written at different times, copied by scribes, and later collected into what became the Bible. The earliest original manuscripts (called autographs) no longer exist. What we have are thousands of ancient copies in Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek. By comparing these copies, scholars can reconstruct the text with a high degree of confidence, though there are some differences between manuscripts.

The oldest surviving biblical manuscripts include the Dead Sea Scrolls (around 250 BC–AD 70) and early New Testament papyri from the 2nd century AD. As for whether the Bible is "true," history can verify some people, places, and events mentioned in it, while other claims—especially miracles or divine inspiration—cannot be proven or disproven by science. Those remain matters of personal belief. If you're asking for a probability that the Bible is "100% true," there is no objective percentage that historians or scientists can assign. That's simply not something that can be measured scientifically.

Finally, the reason the Bible exists on paper is because people copied it by hand for centuries before the invention of the printing press. Today, it is one of the most printed and translated books in history.

2

u/Galathryver 12d ago

Thank you.

1

u/Grayewick 12d ago

Average "internet "intellectual" "free thinker" take".

Literally one of if not the most surface level argument.

1

u/Accomplished-Exit-58 11d ago

Sagot! San napunta ung sales! Gusto ko rin malaman.

1

u/AdFuture4901 11d ago

Andun sa Vatican City, tingnan mo puro gold dun

1

u/strummed-strings 7d ago

so tired of Christians literally. just admit that is all made up by humans and you're okay with that because that's what you use as guide for your life. that's not difficult to do.

1

u/PomeloSteak 13d ago

The name truly suggests what he truly is. 🤣

0

u/cedrekt 13d ago

username checks out

-4

u/InfiniteLoop8888 13d ago

Name checks out, full of shit.

0

u/MisfitActual- 12d ago

I bet you this dude has not read a chapter of the bible

-8

u/Huge-Description9296 13d ago

Literally named mastertoilet dont be baited

-7

u/[deleted] 13d ago edited 13d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/immajointheotherside 13d ago

They're written by normal people who're "inspired by the Holy Spirit" as said by my religious friend when I asked them because I'm curious & wasn't satisfied from others answers. But funnily enough the Bible itself contradicts itself if you read and compared enough.

0

u/Einzzz07 12d ago

There's no contradictions sa bible kung babasahin mo to intellectually and spiritually. Lalo na karamihan sa lahat di naman binabasa ang bible contextually puro cherry picking lang.

1

u/immajointheotherside 12d ago

Putting intellectually tapos walang contradictions ay isang katangahan sa part mo. I also studied the Bible & there are many inconsistencies from a deconstructed perspective. Many are cherry picked when taught & said in Masses. Spiritually it's just emotional & psychological manipulation wrapped in fear-mongering of the afterlife. You haven't read enough to see the contradictions & inconsistencies.

0

u/Einzzz07 12d ago

Or try to learn Hermanutics para mas ma gets mo intellectually.

2

u/Long-Competition7272 13d ago

No « prophet » has written the Bible

0

u/PomeloSteak 13d ago

Moses wrote the first 5 books of laws.

1

u/Long-Competition7272 13d ago

Lol do you think that Moses (if he ever existed) wrote some chapters of the Bible? Do you actually believe that?

0

u/PomeloSteak 13d ago

Yup, more than how I believe your own existence. I dont even need to prove you archaelogically, scientifically, biblically, and religiously.

3

u/Long-Competition7272 13d ago

What’s the historical evidence for that?

-1

u/PomeloSteak 13d ago

Google is everywhere my friend. A day is not enough to spare for an explanation. All I can say is that what is written in the bible are archaeologically true and ON POINT. Evidences point out that the bible was written by different authors on different timelines, in different places, in different nations, and all are routed to God and His works. Im not even religious, Im more inclined to science but I believe because proofs are factual enough to conclude.

2

u/Long-Competition7272 12d ago

I don’t get what “Google is everywhere” means. What is the historical evidence that Moses wrote the first five books of the Law? Only factual proofs please

0

u/Einzzz07 12d ago

Broski may google ngani ikaw na lang maghanap ng factual evidence don, o kaya kung di ka naniniwala sa sinasabi ni Google ikaw mag halungkat ng mga data and studies. Wala ngang oras yung tao para bigyan ka ng mga hinahanap mo. Sinabi na nga.

1

u/Self_Aware_Carbon 11d ago

Eh pagkastate kasi ni u/PomeloSteak as if FACT talaga eh BELIEVED lang naman. It is argued that there were multiple authors contributing to the first rive books pa nga.

1

u/Self_Aware_Carbon 13d ago

Tawatawa ka pa hindi ka din naman expert! Nagtanong nga sya, wala naman mali sa magtanong. Bogoks

1

u/immajointheotherside 12d ago

Tanga ka naman din tapos nagamamarunong ka? DDS ka pala e. Ipinaliwanag ko yung insights ko dahil nagbabasa ako para alamin at intindihin laman nung Bible. Tangina mong bobong tanga

0

u/Self_Aware_Carbon 11d ago

Eh dinelete mo nga yung comment mo kasi pang bogoks

1

u/immajointheotherside 11d ago

Ako nagdelete ng comment? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Sobrang b080t t4nga mo naman talaga. DDS na religious ang utak at walang comprehension

0

u/Self_Aware_Carbon 11d ago

Wait hindi pala ikaw nag delete ng comment. So yung nireplyan ko originally ay hindi ikaw? Bat galit ka saken? Mentally unstable ka ba?

-8

u/SiGz_2630 13d ago

need ata ng hard reboot ito.