sagdi lang:
One of the most controversial teaching of the Catholic Church is the existence of purgatory.The Protestants denied this teaching saying it's not biblical.Granting that they are right but is this teaching a grave offence against God? Does God get provoked and condemn us (Catholics) in hell just because we believe and teach that He (God) cleanse us in purgatory before admitting us to heaven? Do devils welcome Catholics with arms wide open in hell just because of our belief that God cleanses us first? But is this teaching really not biblical?
My respect goes to Protestants for some of their teachings and their strict observance of the bible. We, Catholics, don't say that Protestants will never be saved. It is written in the bible that God will judge man according to what he did (2Cor.5:10) not because you are a Catholic or because you are a Protestant. But we should know that Christ built one church (Matt.16:18-19 /acts 20:28) for the purpose of uniting all believers under Christ's supervision being the head of the church (Ephesians 5:23 / Jonh10:15-16). That in His (Christ) Church alone we'll find the fullness of the truth (1Tim.3:15). In understanding the bible we have to observe Jesus' several ways of revealing the truth.There are truths that he expressed in explicit manner and others are implied (implicit). In the bible (John 3:16 ) it was stated that for God so love the world, he gave his only son,that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. Then what is our understanding of this passage? Simple and that is that God loves his people. That He sent Jesus to us so that through believing in him we will be having eternal life. It seems we just re-stated what God has said. In this verses the truth was clearly emphasized (explicit). But in John 2:19 Jesus said "Destroy this temple,and in three days I will raise it up". Jesus did not explain what kind of temple it is that will be destroyed, that's why the Jews and even his disciples were confused. But much later they learned what Jesus meant and that is when he resurrected. John properly explained it in John 2:21-22. Also try to read John 2:20. While it is true that he (Jesus) will resurrect three days after his death, the crowd were confused what he really meant at that time, but the truth of His resurrection is already implied (implicit). To understand better let's take on Jesus' other teachings. In one of his sermons, He said that if your right eye causes you to sin,cut it off and threw it away; it is better that you lose one of your members, than that your whole body be thrown into hell...(Matt.5:29-30a) . Do Christians,specially Protestants literally follow this considering that this teaching is biblical? I don't think so.
A case in point;
Victor work as a utility man in one of the beach cottages in Aligway, a beautiful island with white sand in Mindanao. It is approximately an hour ride via pump boat from Dipolog city. Tourists from Dakak Beach Resort (Dakak is in Dapitan City and is 30 minutes bus ride away from Dipolog) also visit this place. After several years Victor got ill ,and after a few weeks his Doctor told his parents that he will not survive his illness. So his father decided to summon a priest for Victor's confession. Actually this is the problem of a non-indoctrinated Catholic, they do not know the real teaching and doctrine of the Church,they just go to confession when they think they are dying. When the priest came, he started conversing with Victor. Asking him how his Christian life is.
Priest: Do you read the bible?
Victor : Yes father, my cousin is an Adventist and he encouraged me to read the bible and join their church.
Priest : You join them?
Victor: No father there are so many things they try to avoid. (he..he..he... so it's better to be a protestant than to be a catholic joke...joke...joke...)
Priest: Hmm.. What are your sins?
Victor : That's my problem father, cause I had read in the bible that if your eye has sinned you have to take it out before entering heaven.
Priest ; Why ? what did you do?
Victor : I used to watch beautiful tourists in swimsuit in distance and when they take shower, I rush to the bathroom cause I already prepared a peep hole in every bathroom using my knife. It is my only chance to view their beauty closely when they remove their swimsuits and take shower. It's so much fun father. But I used to watch them using my right eye only. So it's only my right eye which has sinned and must be taken out.
Priest: No son, your hands had sinned also because you use it in drilling a peep hole.
Victor:You mean I have to cut my hands also?
Priest : Not necessarily because the desire is in your heart and your brain had told you to do act on it.
Victor : (In a very low voice with tears dropping slowly from his eyes) So it includes my heart and brain?Priest : Tell me more, what did you do when you saw naked ladies in bathrooms?
Victor : That's another problem father because I used to pull out my dedication and using again my hand I dedicate something to their beauty.
Priest : So meaning, you have to cut also your dedication.
Victor : So what is left from me for heaven are my stomach, feet and the left eye.
Priest : Not unless your feet is also responsible of taking you there.
Victor : Oh My God! So there are only my stomach and left eye left of me to heaven. And if my cousin is right that eating pork is a sin then what's left of me is only my left eye. Please Father cover my left eye before it will sin so I could have something left in heaven.
Priest : Don't you worry son, God is so merciful, his work and plan are so wonderful. I know what's in your mind. You know what, one of Jesus' apostle asked before,"Then in that case who will go to heaven? Jesus replied that God has done it for you.What is impossible to man is made possible by God (Mark 10:24-27). God will restore your body pure and clean. That is after He (God) cleanse it in the purgatory.
Victor : Is it true father?
Priest: Yes my son. Jesus did sacrifice and died for our sin. This is God's plan of salvation. What is left is man's participation in the process of salvation. Because salvation is not as easy as getting directly into heaven everything should be in order according to his plan. We must suffer also the consequences of our sins. Jesus' sacrifice is a great manifestation of God's love. But it does not mean that we are already free to do anything thinking that God will just forgive us. (dawat limpyo).
Victor: Thank God and thank you father. It's good that I did not become an Adventist because they don't have purgatory there otherwise I could have only my stomach in heaven. he...he...he...joke...joke....joke..(To the Adventists , my salute and admiration of your practice and discipline.)
Purgatory is from the latin word"purgatorium" in spanish "porgatorio" . It is a place (for) or state of cleansing. Is it biblical? Yes. First, there is the word wash and the concept of washing of sins : "When the Lord shall have washed the filth of the daughters of sion.....and by the spirit of burning.( Isa.4:4 a,b ) . Second, the word fire : And I will bring the third part through the fire, and will refine them as silver is refined, and will try them as gold is tried : They shall call on my name , and I will hear them: I will say , it is my people : and they shall say the Lord is my God. (.Zechariah 13:9 ) Mark 9:49 For every one shall be salted with fire ,and every sacrifice shall be salted with salt .In Paul's letters to the Corinthians (1 cor.3: 13-15 ) he said, " Every man's work shall be made manifest: for the day shall declare it, because it shall be revealed by fire ; and the fire shall try every man,s work of what sort it is .If any man,s work abide which he hath built thereupon, shall recieve reward. If any man,s work shall be burend, he shall be saved ; yet so as by fire .In Rev. 21:27 God said no one who has sinned and lied can enter heaven and yet everyone has sinned and lied with a few exceptions for those whom he has specially chosen. Then who will go to heaven? Protestants will answers that God has forgiven us ( Protestants ) and wiped away our sins.Yes it's true, but God's forgiveness has a condition and the verses I quoted showed that man will also suffer the consequences of their sins before the absolution. Do Protestants believe that the love that he (God the Father) has for men is more intense than that of his love for his only son, Jesus Christ? That He allowed his son to suffer while man is to do nothing but merely ask forgiveness and he shall be in heaven afterwards? Does it sound right ? Remember God is just (Psalms 7:11).If you sin less ,then you'll have less punishment,but if you have a lot of sins then your punishment is heavier. In Luke 12:47-48, Jesus stated that if you sin and have been given proper judgement then you will be placed to prison and serve your sentence till it is over.In Matt.5:26 it was shown that when it's over, then you'll be free again.Purgatory is like that and it is biblical. Protestants should not encourage their followers to just merely ask the Lord's forgiveness for their sin thinking that it ends there and they will have heaven as their reward. It's wrong for the more you sin, the more you'll be punished. In Luke.12:48, it was shown that parents should always forgive their children but in forgiveness there is always a condition. Sometimes it include reasonable punishment, reminding how they love them.For punishment is love (Heb.12:5-6)
My challenge to Protestants is to explain Jesus Christ's teaching in Matt 5:29-30 and if your counter argument is biblical then you were right in accusing Catholics of none biblical teaching about purgatory.But if your explanation is based only on how your personal interpretation and is not found in the bible ,then why do you keep on accusing us of none biblical teachings? You always give assurance (your teachings) to your followers that they are already saved. We, Catholics, teach them to struggle with the grace of God and also with faith. Read :1 Peter 5:8 /Ephesian 6:11-18/ Matt.24:13.
Miyerkules, Pebrero 8, 2012
Martes, Enero 31, 2012
problems and solutions (continuation)
sagdi lang:
In giving an abstract question, the examiner (Philosophy professor ) expected no exact (read: right) answers to his question. His motive is to test your intellectual capacity in giving justifiable (read: logical) answers.
Problem no.1: The professor asked his student to prove that the chair he placed in front of them isn't there. Of course he expected different answers from his students. He also is expecting an answer which is a direct contrast to his question. Being a philosophical person, he knows that questions like this need a contrast philosophical statement or question as an answer.
These are the probable answers : (1) denying the chair's existence through asking a question such as"Did you place a chair sir?" or questioning the position of the chair through asking questions such as " Did you not place the chair else where?" . The professor may consider their answers are quite acceptable but what if he ask them, " Are you blind? ". So those above mentioned possible answers are not justifiable enough for they all saw the chair he placed in front of them . The only answer that he considered most logical and gave a high score goes like this: What chair sir? Perhaps this answer shows that the student admitted that the professor really placed the chair but that question was a challenge to the professor whether to deny or admit the chair's existence through answering. Anyway it is the professor's prerogative to choose the best answer.
A case in point:
A tipsy man goes home one afternoon. He took an empty pitcher threw it to his son and told him to buy tuba ( Philippines coconut wine) for him. His son picked up the pitcher from the floor and asked money from his father to buy tuba. His father replied, " Bull shit, use your initiative, you buy tuba without money." The boy walked anxiously holding a pitcher and went directly to Aling
Solidad 's store. Having an empty pitcher in his hand he whispered his problem to the good lady ; at that time there were several people drinking tuba in the store. After knowing his problem the good lady whispered something to the boy and the boy went home. When he reached home, he handed the empty pitcher to his father and told his father that it is full of tuba which he bought from Aling Solidad. Of course what do you expect? His father stood up quivering in anger but before he can do anything, his son started explaining. His son stated, " I told aling Solidad that I am going to buy tuba without money for that's what you asked of me. She said that's okay. I just have to give this pitcher to you and explain that the tuba you bought is there and that it was from her store. She told me to warn you not to drink too much because her tuba is very strong and you might get drunk. And she also told me that if you get angry she will prove to you that I bought the tuba from her." So Aling Solidad's idea is that if you want to drink and get drunk without money then try drinking and getting drunk without wine. Then those who try to give problems to others are just giving the problems back to themselves.
Priests study Theology and Philosophy. I don't know if pastors and ministers do. But there are many Catholics who have lost their faith because they felt they were misguided and misled and were given false teachings by dishonest teachers and so-called biblical scholars.
Problem 3: If God is omniscient then why does he not know that Adam hid from Him (Gen.3;9)? Before I answer this question, I would like to add few passages from the bible which might make you ask similar questions. If Jesus is God why does he not know when the earth will end when upon his second coming (Mark 13:32) ? Why does he not know who touched him (Mark 5:30) and miraculously got cured ? When a teacher will tell her student to study their lesson cause she does not know when she's going to give an examination, it does not mean that she does not really know when she will give an examination. She just wanted her student to study their lesson because she believed that margin preparation is not a guaranty to pass her examination. Jesus being God and man is also omniscient ( John 16:30). He knows everything. " In whom are hid all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge (Col. 2:3b) .He (Christ) has the power of God and the wisdom of God (1 Cor.1:24). He knows who touched him (Mark 5:30) but he just wanted the girl to appear in the public and proclaim that she was cured because of her strong faith. With regards the coming of Christ (Mark 13:32) perhaps it is a hidden divine plan and it is not a part of his (Christ) responsibility to proclaim being a man. In the case of Adam (Gen.3 :9) God the Father really knew where Adam is. He just wanted Adam to confess what had transpired between them (Adam and Eve) and satan.
Expect more in my next posts.
In giving an abstract question, the examiner (Philosophy professor ) expected no exact (read: right) answers to his question. His motive is to test your intellectual capacity in giving justifiable (read: logical) answers.
Problem no.1: The professor asked his student to prove that the chair he placed in front of them isn't there. Of course he expected different answers from his students. He also is expecting an answer which is a direct contrast to his question. Being a philosophical person, he knows that questions like this need a contrast philosophical statement or question as an answer.
These are the probable answers : (1) denying the chair's existence through asking a question such as"Did you place a chair sir?" or questioning the position of the chair through asking questions such as " Did you not place the chair else where?" . The professor may consider their answers are quite acceptable but what if he ask them, " Are you blind? ". So those above mentioned possible answers are not justifiable enough for they all saw the chair he placed in front of them . The only answer that he considered most logical and gave a high score goes like this: What chair sir? Perhaps this answer shows that the student admitted that the professor really placed the chair but that question was a challenge to the professor whether to deny or admit the chair's existence through answering. Anyway it is the professor's prerogative to choose the best answer.
A case in point:
A tipsy man goes home one afternoon. He took an empty pitcher threw it to his son and told him to buy tuba ( Philippines coconut wine) for him. His son picked up the pitcher from the floor and asked money from his father to buy tuba. His father replied, " Bull shit, use your initiative, you buy tuba without money." The boy walked anxiously holding a pitcher and went directly to Aling
Solidad 's store. Having an empty pitcher in his hand he whispered his problem to the good lady ; at that time there were several people drinking tuba in the store. After knowing his problem the good lady whispered something to the boy and the boy went home. When he reached home, he handed the empty pitcher to his father and told his father that it is full of tuba which he bought from Aling Solidad. Of course what do you expect? His father stood up quivering in anger but before he can do anything, his son started explaining. His son stated, " I told aling Solidad that I am going to buy tuba without money for that's what you asked of me. She said that's okay. I just have to give this pitcher to you and explain that the tuba you bought is there and that it was from her store. She told me to warn you not to drink too much because her tuba is very strong and you might get drunk. And she also told me that if you get angry she will prove to you that I bought the tuba from her." So Aling Solidad's idea is that if you want to drink and get drunk without money then try drinking and getting drunk without wine. Then those who try to give problems to others are just giving the problems back to themselves.
Priests study Theology and Philosophy. I don't know if pastors and ministers do. But there are many Catholics who have lost their faith because they felt they were misguided and misled and were given false teachings by dishonest teachers and so-called biblical scholars.
Problem 3: If God is omniscient then why does he not know that Adam hid from Him (Gen.3;9)? Before I answer this question, I would like to add few passages from the bible which might make you ask similar questions. If Jesus is God why does he not know when the earth will end when upon his second coming (Mark 13:32) ? Why does he not know who touched him (Mark 5:30) and miraculously got cured ? When a teacher will tell her student to study their lesson cause she does not know when she's going to give an examination, it does not mean that she does not really know when she will give an examination. She just wanted her student to study their lesson because she believed that margin preparation is not a guaranty to pass her examination. Jesus being God and man is also omniscient ( John 16:30). He knows everything. " In whom are hid all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge (Col. 2:3b) .He (Christ) has the power of God and the wisdom of God (1 Cor.1:24). He knows who touched him (Mark 5:30) but he just wanted the girl to appear in the public and proclaim that she was cured because of her strong faith. With regards the coming of Christ (Mark 13:32) perhaps it is a hidden divine plan and it is not a part of his (Christ) responsibility to proclaim being a man. In the case of Adam (Gen.3 :9) God the Father really knew where Adam is. He just wanted Adam to confess what had transpired between them (Adam and Eve) and satan.
Expect more in my next posts.
Biyernes, Enero 27, 2012
problems and solutions
Sagdi Lang: Some people say that if there is problem then there is always a solution. But why is it that there were people who committed suicide because of their problem ? Does it mean that there were no solutions to their problems or is suicide the only solution?
HERE LET'S TAKE A LOOK AT SOME PROBLEMS AND THE CORRESPONDING SOLUTION.
Problem 1&2 : In a Philosophy class in a certain university a professor is giving a final exam to his students. He took one chair in front of his students and instructed them to prove to him that the chair he placed in front of them is not existing. That was the first question. The second question goes this way : Prove to me that the mathematical equation one plus one equals to three is correct ( 1 + 1=3 ).
Problem 3: A Catholic was trying to prove God's existence to his friend. He tried to apply Aristotle's Transcendental Philosophy. He explained that everything in this world is in order: the universe for example manifest this order with all the planets and heavenly bodies not colliding with each other. That if something exists someone is responsible for its existence . That God is omnipotent and nothing is impossible to God . But his friend (atheist) smiled sarcastically and replied that if it's true that God is omnipotent and omniscient , why did he not saw Adam when he (Adam) was trying to hide from him in the garden of Eden (Gen. 3:9). If nothing is impossible to Him (God) then can He make square round ? If it is true then that every existence has a cause then who was the cause of God's existence? He then concluded that if you as a Christian do not fully understand your God then how can Christians possibly make him believe of that something which is incomprehensible even for Christians (believers of God).
Answer for problem no.2 :
If the mathematical equation one minus one equals one (1-1=1) is correct, then the mathematical equation of one plus one equals three (1+1 =3) is right.
The answers and explanations for the other problems mentioned above will be discussed on my next posts but my answers may not be necessarily right . Nevertheless here we just discuss things and not debate on issues. Here we provide for good arguments but we have to remember that what is true for me may not be for you. We have to abide by the the philosophical rule in sharing of ideas: what's mine is not yours and what is yours is not mine.
NOTE : Iyong solusyon at paliwanag sa mga paksang napag-uusapan isusunod ko na lang.. Bukas tayo sa inyong mga ideya ,komentaryo,at puna at kahit anong tanong . tungkol sa katolikong pananampalataya. Ito ay subukan kong sagutin. . Dahil sa inyo matoto tayo.
HERE LET'S TAKE A LOOK AT SOME PROBLEMS AND THE CORRESPONDING SOLUTION.
Problem 1&2 : In a Philosophy class in a certain university a professor is giving a final exam to his students. He took one chair in front of his students and instructed them to prove to him that the chair he placed in front of them is not existing. That was the first question. The second question goes this way : Prove to me that the mathematical equation one plus one equals to three is correct ( 1 + 1=3 ).
Problem 3: A Catholic was trying to prove God's existence to his friend. He tried to apply Aristotle's Transcendental Philosophy. He explained that everything in this world is in order: the universe for example manifest this order with all the planets and heavenly bodies not colliding with each other. That if something exists someone is responsible for its existence . That God is omnipotent and nothing is impossible to God . But his friend (atheist) smiled sarcastically and replied that if it's true that God is omnipotent and omniscient , why did he not saw Adam when he (Adam) was trying to hide from him in the garden of Eden (Gen. 3:9). If nothing is impossible to Him (God) then can He make square round ? If it is true then that every existence has a cause then who was the cause of God's existence? He then concluded that if you as a Christian do not fully understand your God then how can Christians possibly make him believe of that something which is incomprehensible even for Christians (believers of God).
Answer for problem no.2 :
If the mathematical equation one minus one equals one (1-1=1) is correct, then the mathematical equation of one plus one equals three (1+1 =3) is right.
The answers and explanations for the other problems mentioned above will be discussed on my next posts but my answers may not be necessarily right . Nevertheless here we just discuss things and not debate on issues. Here we provide for good arguments but we have to remember that what is true for me may not be for you. We have to abide by the the philosophical rule in sharing of ideas: what's mine is not yours and what is yours is not mine.
NOTE : Iyong solusyon at paliwanag sa mga paksang napag-uusapan isusunod ko na lang.. Bukas tayo sa inyong mga ideya ,komentaryo,at puna at kahit anong tanong . tungkol sa katolikong pananampalataya. Ito ay subukan kong sagutin. . Dahil sa inyo matoto tayo.
what is life and death ?
sagdi lang :
For me, life is God's examination , and death is the time limit. We are given time to take God's exam. It's easy , so easy as answering true or false in our usual classroom exam. The only problem is we have to study our lesson , so that we can distinguish when and where to answer true or false in God's every question. He gives us freedom when it comes to the method of taking the exam and enough time to study our lesson. Perhaps all answers of His questions are found in the bible as it is God's given reference for us to be guided in knowing Him more. It's quite simple but a little bit complicated.
A case in point would be one of my friends (before he is a Catholic but now he is claiming to be a Born Again Christian). He decided to leave his job and perhaps become a full time preacher of their church. I really am not sure to what his position is. When his mother asked him with regards the reason why he left his job, his response was , "Don't you worry mama God will provide", quoting (Matt 6: 26,33) when God said : Behold the fowls of the air: for they sow not, neither do they reap, nor gather into barns; yet your heavenly father feed them. That seek first the kingdom of God and His righteousness and everything shall be added unto you .
But later on his mother commented against his words saying, "Sabi mo Dong (his nickname) God provides, mama provides man lagi" ( You were saying God will provide but it's actually me providing ). Will I don't know if God used his mother to fulfill His (God) promise ( i.e providing for His creations). You know, we need to learn the hermeneutics of the bible for to properly understand every passage in the bible. Matt .6:33 does not imply that you don't have to worry or work. If you have that spirit you will know the transcendence of God.You will know that man need to work honestly and righteously in order to live (Gen.3:19) . That if a person will not work then he shall not eat (read: live) 2 Thessalonians 3:10. Even birds have to actively look for worms ,cause worms will never jump into their nest.
For me, life is God's examination , and death is the time limit. We are given time to take God's exam. It's easy , so easy as answering true or false in our usual classroom exam. The only problem is we have to study our lesson , so that we can distinguish when and where to answer true or false in God's every question. He gives us freedom when it comes to the method of taking the exam and enough time to study our lesson. Perhaps all answers of His questions are found in the bible as it is God's given reference for us to be guided in knowing Him more. It's quite simple but a little bit complicated.
A case in point would be one of my friends (before he is a Catholic but now he is claiming to be a Born Again Christian). He decided to leave his job and perhaps become a full time preacher of their church. I really am not sure to what his position is. When his mother asked him with regards the reason why he left his job, his response was , "Don't you worry mama God will provide", quoting (Matt 6: 26,33) when God said : Behold the fowls of the air: for they sow not, neither do they reap, nor gather into barns; yet your heavenly father feed them. That seek first the kingdom of God and His righteousness and everything shall be added unto you .
But later on his mother commented against his words saying, "Sabi mo Dong (his nickname) God provides, mama provides man lagi" ( You were saying God will provide but it's actually me providing ). Will I don't know if God used his mother to fulfill His (God) promise ( i.e providing for His creations). You know, we need to learn the hermeneutics of the bible for to properly understand every passage in the bible. Matt .6:33 does not imply that you don't have to worry or work. If you have that spirit you will know the transcendence of God.You will know that man need to work honestly and righteously in order to live (Gen.3:19) . That if a person will not work then he shall not eat (read: live) 2 Thessalonians 3:10. Even birds have to actively look for worms ,cause worms will never jump into their nest.
Linggo, Enero 22, 2012
Test Message
There is a saying that goes: Only fools don't change their mind. Agree or disagree? To us here, there's seems to be a mistake in it. Because, isn't a fool sometimes laugh at one time and becomes mad at another? That's why we sometimes advise that we should avoid a fool because his mind is changeable. So the truth is, fools change their mind, right?
According to them, no man is perfect. But aren't we created by God? And God is perfect. And no one comes imperfect from something that isn't perfect. Will not God be angry when we say that his work remains imperfect? They say, the reason of it is because man sins and commit mistakes. To us here, that makes man perfect, because if you do not sin and do not commit mistakes, you aren't a human anymore. Sin and mistakes makes a man perfect. If we wipe perfection to God alone, so we must avoid the word perfect in any means unless it is attributed to God only. But sometimes, I perfected in my examination. If I am not perfect, how comes that I get perfect? Don't you know that there are "perfect" things that you use now that comes from man himself? Examples are: cellphones, laptops etc. If man is not perfect, then nothing can come out of man which is perfect. So I believe that there are two kinds of perfection: perfection in terms of finity and perfection in terms of infinity. And these two perfections are two different things.
According to them, no man is perfect. But aren't we created by God? And God is perfect. And no one comes imperfect from something that isn't perfect. Will not God be angry when we say that his work remains imperfect? They say, the reason of it is because man sins and commit mistakes. To us here, that makes man perfect, because if you do not sin and do not commit mistakes, you aren't a human anymore. Sin and mistakes makes a man perfect. If we wipe perfection to God alone, so we must avoid the word perfect in any means unless it is attributed to God only. But sometimes, I perfected in my examination. If I am not perfect, how comes that I get perfect? Don't you know that there are "perfect" things that you use now that comes from man himself? Examples are: cellphones, laptops etc. If man is not perfect, then nothing can come out of man which is perfect. So I believe that there are two kinds of perfection: perfection in terms of finity and perfection in terms of infinity. And these two perfections are two different things.
Mag-subscribe sa:
Mga Post (Atom)