"The Christianity of history is not Protestantism. If ever there were a safe truth it is this, and Protestantism has ever felt it so; to be deep in history is to cease to be a Protestant." (-John Henry Newman, An Essay on the Development of Christian Doctrine).

"Where the bishop is, there let the people gather; just as where ever Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church". -St. Ignatius of Antioch (ca 110 AD)a martyr later thrown to the lions, wrote to a church in Asia Minor. Antioch was also where the term "Christian" was first used.

“But if I should be delayed, you should know how to behave in the household of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and foundation of truth.” 1 Timothy 3:15

"This is the sole Church of Christ, which in the Creed we profess to be one, holy, catholic and apostolic." -CCC 811

Sunday, April 20, 2014


Happy Easter everyone!

Saturday, April 19, 2014

INQUIRER: How other faiths observe Holy Week

Pope Francis kneeling to wash the feet of people with disabilities (Source: Chron)
It's IRONICAL that an ordinary journalist of Philippine Daily Inquirer knows the REAL REASON, and ESSENCE of celebrating the HOLY WEEK, - it is the 'PASSION, DEATH and RESURRECTION' of the LORD JESUS-- while those who say they are professing "faith" in (the same) Jesus Christ downplay this celebration NEGATIVELY JUST BECAUSE it's a CATHOLIC-led HOLIDAY.  What a shame! And who doesn't know the origin and founder of these SECTS:
  • Aglipayan Church founded by Bishop Gregorio Aglipay in 1902 (Filipino former Catholic)
  • The Iglesia ni Cristo founded by Felix Manalo in 1914 (Filipino former Catholic)
  • Jehovah's Witnesses founded by Charles T. Russel in 1931 (Protestant)
  • Seventh-day Adventists founded by Helen G. White et.al. in 1863 (Protestant)
  • United Church of Christ in the Philippines founded 1901 but officially registered in 1942 by group of Evangelicals, mixed of Congregationalist, Presbyterians and Episcopalian
But the CATHOLIC CHURCH is considered as "among the oldest religious institutions in the world" (Wikipedia) and the mother of Christianity-- founded by JESUS CHRIST upon ST. PETER the APOSTLE, whom he promised that the "gates of hell" shall NOT prevail (Mt. 16:16-18). Therefore the same CHURCH now is crossing the THIRD MILLENNIUM with 266 Popes, the present is POPE FRANCIS!
MANILA, Philippines—The annual commemoration of Holy Week—marking the passion, death and resurrection of Jesus Christ, which begins on Palm Sunday, climaxes on Jesus’ crucifixion on Good Friday and culminates in the joyful celebration on Easter Sunday of the Resurrection—and its pious customs observed in Roman Catholic tradition also find expression in the mainstream Protestant denominations and evangelical churches. What follows is an informal survey of what Holy Week observances are followed by other faiths.

Aglipayan Church

The Aglipayan Church, officially the Iglesia Filipina Independiente (IFI), or the Philippine Independent Church, follows the same Holy Week observance as the Roman Catholic Church, according to Rev. Fr. Terry Revollido, rector of the Aglipay Central Theological Seminary.

“I don’t see any significant difference because we’re also following biblical narrative,” Revollido said.
Like the Roman Catholics, the Aglipayan faithful begin the Holy Week with Palm Sunday. On Maundy Thursday, there would be a celebration of the Eucharist and the washing of the feet while on Good Friday church activities include the Seven Last Words, veneration of the cross and processions. The Easter Vigil mass is held the evening of Black Saturday and the Salubong very early on Easter Sunday.

The Aglipayan Church, which calls itself the national church of the Philippines, proclaimed its break from the Catholic Church in 1902 by the members of the Unión Obrera Democrática Filipina because of the alleged mistreatment of Filipinos by the Spanish clergy. Although a Christian denomination, the IFI rejects the spiritual authority of the Pope and emphasizes patriotism in its teachings.

The members of the church are called Aglipayans after its first supreme head, Fr. Gregorio Aglipay.

Iglesia ni Cristo

The Iglesia Ni Cristo, another homegrown Christian sect, does not observe Lent or mark the special observances and services of Holy Week, as it believes that the pious customs associated with it derive from pagan traditions.

For instance, it believes that Palm Sunday, the beginning of Holy Week commemorating Christ’s triumphal entry to Jerusalem to fulfill his paschal mystery, has pagan origins. The INC says the palm symbolizes victory, and notes how victorious armies of pagan nations decked themselves and their chariots with palm fronds.
According to the INC, the word Easter was derived by St. Bede from Eastre, a forgotten dawn goddess. Numerous local customs held during Easter, such as the blessing of meat, eggs and other foods the partaking of which was formerly forbidden during Lent, have pagan origins, the INC believes.

Wednesday, April 16, 2014

IGLESIA KATOLIKA bilang IGLESIA NI CRISTO: Pinalitan ba ang pangalan?

Kapatid na Gene, narito ang Ilalawang Bahagi ng iyong katanungan



Catholic Church’s BIG MISTAKE.

ano po sabi sa BIBLE?

“But there is something we must tell you and everyone else in Israel. This man is standing here completely well because of the power of Jesus Christ from Nazareth. You put Jesus to death on a cross, but God raised him to life…Only Jesus has the power to save! HIS NAME IS THE ONLY ONE in all the world that can save anyone.” Acts 4:10,12

But what does the Catholic Church did?
“’Catholic’ is the ancient name by which the Church of Christ has been known for nineteen centuries, this name was given to her not for reasons of controversy, to prove something, but because it identifies her uniquely. It was first used by St. Ignatius, bishop of Antioch in Syria, who was martyred about A.D 110. The Church founded by Christ is here, for the first time, called ‘the Catholic Church’, a name clearly to denote the Church throughout the world in union with the see or diocese of Rome. It was stress the unity of the universal Church that St. Ignatius INVENTED THE NAME.” Roman Catholic, Rev. Edward Taylor, p.3

“THE COUNCIL OF TRENT made ‘Roman’ part of the official title of the church…” Roman Catholic, Rev. Edward Taylor, p.7

“In 1870, at the Vatican Council, the name ‘Roman Catholic Church’ was proposed, but it was rejected. The bishops assembled unanimously decided upon this official name: ‘The Holy Catholic Apostolic Roman Church’” Discourses on the Apsotle’s Creed, Rev. Clement Crock, p. 191

PAHAYAG: Very clear, they CHANGED THE CHURCH’S NAME. It is clear therefore that this name did not come from the bible. This is not the name of the Church established by Christ, and therefore, not the Church that will be saved. Because it is written, His name is the only one in all the world that can save anyone. (Acts 4:12)

Now, Who can prove that the Catholic Church is the Church in the 1st century? (By historical facts? Oh no, not again!) Yes. It has its historical background but what we are talking here is, if the Catholic Church is STILL, SAME and IDENTICAL with the Church in the 1st century!

Oo nga naman. Napakadaling humusga ng kapwa kaysa sa sariling kasalanan. Ipokrito po ang tawag natin sa mga taong ganyan (Basahin ang Mt. 7:4-5; Lk 6:42) Marami pong ganyan sa Iglesia ni Manalo-1914.

Isang malaking PANLILINLANG ang sabihin ng mga kumakalaban sa Santa Iglesia na NAGPALIT daw tayo ng pangalan! Kung tuus-tuusin, wala po tayong dapat palitan o baguhin sa pangalang IGLESIA KATOLIKA o CATHOLIC CHURCH sapagkat HINDI naman po ito REGISTERED TRADEMARK. Hindi po ito katulad ng Iglesia ni Kristo (INK) na nagpalit ng pangalan at ginawang Iglesia ni Cristo (INC).

At dahil nga sa REHISTRADO ang pangalang INK o INC kaya't pinangangalagaan ng batas ng  Securities and Exchange Commission na siyang nangangasiwa ng mga rehistradong pangalan. Kaya’t walang sinuman ang makakagamit ng pangalang ito ng walang pahintulot mula sa nagrehistro nito na walang iba kung hindi si Felix Y. Manalo. At ang REGISTERED TRADEMARK na IGLESIA NI CRISTO ay pinamumunuan po ngayon ng mga MANALO . Si Eduardo “Ka Ed” V. Manalo, apo ni Felix Manalo, founder ng INC ang namumuno sa ngayon.

At ganon din naman, hindi maaaring gamitin ng INC ang Church of Christ bilang opisyal na pangalan sapagkat may mga individual nang tao na nagrehistro nito.

Kung gagamitin man ng INC ang mga salitang “Church of Christ” ay kailangang tapatan nila ito ng Registered Trademark na nasusulat sa Tagalog, ang “Iglesia ni Cristo” (Katulad ng Centennial Logo nila sa ibaba) upang ligtas sila sa ano mga legal fermenting na maaaring ikaso sa kanila ng may-ari ng "Church of Christ."

Ganyan ang kalakaran sa mga Registered Trademarks. Kasama sa mga registered trademarks ang mga patented trademarks katulad ng kanilang unexplained logo.

Kaya’t napapansin niyo ba na kahit English na artikulo ay salitang tagalog na “Iglesia ni Cristo” pa rin ang GINAGAMIT at SINUSULAT nila instead na “Church of Christ”?

Katulad nitong news article na ito na hango mismo sa kanilang official website na www.incmedia.org
“Already in over 100 countries all over the world, the Iglesia Ni Cristo (kita niyo???!!) continues to grow at a phenomenal rate...”
Bakit di na lang nila isulat na, the “CHURCH OF CHRIST” …”??

Monday, April 14, 2014


The notorious, filthy, evil IGLESIA NI CRISTO defender by the name CONRAD J. OBLIGACION has tried many times HACKING my account.

Bonafide INC ni Manalo-1914 member!

Why? Where is CONRAD J. OBLIGACION residing? According to him (Source: Tumbukin Natin)

"Currently on assignment and based in Munich, Germany!"

Saturday, April 12, 2014

May dugo ba ang Dios? Bakit "iglesia ng Dios" ang nasa salin ng inyong Biblia (Mga Gawa 20:28)?

Maraming salamat Bro. Gene sa pagpadala mo sa akin ng inyong conversation with a member of the Iglesia ni Manalo (INM). Pipilitin po nating i-refute ang kanilang oposition sa "church of God" over "church of Christ" na nakasulat sa Acts 20:28


see bakit mo iniba? bakit naging KATHOLIKOS?? instead of Kath oleS
ok tanong ko sau yang sa greek EKKLESIA TOU THEOU o IGLESIA NG DIYOS? na BINILI NG KANYANG DUGO?? tatanggapin mo ba na DIYOS DUN AY MAY DUGO???

TANONG: tatanggapin ba natin na IGLESIA NI CRISTO ang nakalagay po dun sa GAWA 20:28?

SAGOT; OPO DAHIL si Cristo PO ang nagbuhos ng mahalaga niyang DUGO.
1 PEDRO 1:18-19Alam ninyo kung ano ang ipinantubos sa inyo sa walang kabuluhang pamumuhay na inyong minana sa inyong mga magulang. Ang ipinantubos sa inyo'y hindi ang mga bagay na nasisira o nauubos, tulad ng ginto o pilak, 19 kundi sa pamamagitan ng MAHALAGANG DUGO NI CRISTO. Siya ang korderong walang batik at kapintasan

PAHAYAG: Si Cristo po ang nagbuhos ng kanyang MAHALAGAN DUGO kaya nga ang IGLESIA ay tinawag na IGLESIA NI CRISTO dahil si CRISTO PO ANG NAGTAYO NG IGLESIA MATEO 16:18 hindi po IGLESIA KATOLIKA. ��

TANONG; Ang Diyos po ba may DUGO?

SAGOT: wala pong laman at buto kaya po siya ay ESPIRITO
juan 4:24-Ang Diyos ay Espiritu kaya dapat siyang sambahin sa espiritu at sa katotohanan.
Lucas 24:39-Tingnan ninyo ang aking mga kamay at ang aking mga paa, ako rin nga: hipuin ninyo ako, at tingnan; sapagka't ang isang ESPIRITO WALANG LAMAN at mga BUTO, na gaya ng inyong nakikita na nasa akin.

PAHAYAG: Ang Diyos po ay Espirito meaning so say wala rin po syang DUGO. kaya hindi po puedeng ikapit ang IGLESIA NG DIYOS po dyan dahil po walang DUGO ang DIYOS ang may dugo si Cristo..

Sa totoo lang, nakakalungkot talagang isipin na hindi nauunawaan ng mga Manalistas ang buong pagkaTAO at pagkaDIOS ni Cristo na kanilang pinapanginoon. Sa huling paghuhukom, sila 'yung tinutukoy ni Cristong “Lumayo kayo sa akin sapagkat ‘di ko kayo nakikilala..” (Mt. 7:21-23).

Una, sasagutin ko po sa abot ng aking makakaya bilang isang ordinaryong Katoliko itong mga paratang ng mga Manalista laban sa ating Panginoong Jesus. Bagama’t hindi po ako dalubhasa sa Cristology at Theology ay pipilitin nating ipaunawa sa kanila (at sa iyong kaalaman na rin) kung bakit naniniwala tayong (mga tunay na sumasamba kay Cristo) na siya (JESUS) ay TUNAY na DIOS at TUNAY na TAO.

TANONG: tatanggapin ba natin na IGLESIA NI CRISTO ang nakalagay po dun sa GAWA 20:28?

HINDI po! Sapagkat HINDI po iyan ang ORIHINAL na nakasulat sa Gawa 20:28, “iglesia ng Dios” po at HINDI “iglesia ni Cristo.” Sa kanyang saling Biblia si Lamsa po ay hindi sumangguni sa orihinal na wikang Griego na siyang pagkakasulat ng “Mga Gawa”. Sa Griego (Greek) po kasi, ay tan ekklasian tou Theou (church of God), HINDI po “tan ekklesian tou Christou (church of Christ)..” (Basahin ang Catholic Answers). 

Sino ba si George Lamsa? Bakit po siya dirinig-diri sa pagka-Dios ni Cristo?

Una, bagama't di naniniwala sa pagka-Dios ni Cristo, si Lamsa po ay hindi kaanib ng INM-1914. Siya po ay kabilang sa iglesiang “Assyrian Church of the East”. Hindi po sila nakaugnay sa mga Orthodox o mga Katoliko. Ang kanilang mga katuruan po ay hango sa schismatic na turo ng  Nestorianism  .

Si Nestor po, na pinagmulan ng maling aral na 'yan ay kinondena ng Iglesia sa KONSILYO NG EPHESUS noon Hunyo 22, 431 A.D.

Ang mga taga-sunod po ng Nestorianism ay mga taong naniniwala sa HIWALAY na naturalesa ni Cristo—isa bilang Dios at isa bilang tao. At ang samahang ito ay KINONDENA sa KONSILYO ng CHALCEDON noong Nobyembre 1, 451 A.D.

Kaya’t nagtaka si George Lamsa kung bakit ang “Dios daw ay may dugo” sa Gawa 20:28. Sapagkat di siya naniniwala sa pagka-Dios ni Cristo.

Sabi niya, hindi raw maaaring “iglesia ng Dios” ito sapagkat ang Dios ay walang dugo at hindi siya maaaring mag-alay ng wala siya. 

Kaya’t upang masolusyunan ang kanyang problema sa verse na ito, pinalitan niya ang “iglesia ng Dios” sa “iglesia ni Cristo (TAONG MAY DUGO)” na siyang ikinatutuwa ngayon ng mga kaanib ng INM-1914 sa pag-aakalang SILA ang tinutukoy doon ni George Lamsa.

TANONG; Ang Diyos po ba may DUGO?

Natural wala.

Pero may dugo ba si Cristo? Natural meron.


Sapagkat si Cristo ay TAONG TUNAY ngunit bilang tao ay hindi nangangahulugang siya’y di na Dios.

Heto ang sabi sa Filipos 2:5-11 (NAB)

“Have among yourselves the same attitude that is also yours in Christ Jesus, who, though HE WAS IN THE FORM OF GOD (emphasis mine), did not regard equality with God something to be grasped. Rather he emptied himself, taking the form of a slave, COMING IN HUMAN LIKENESS and FOUND HUMAN IN APPEARANCE, he humbled himself, becoming obedient to death, even death on a cross. 
Because of this, God greatly exalted him and bewtowed on him the name that is above every name, that at the name of Jesus every knee should bend, of those in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father. 
Mangagkaroon kayo sa inyo ng pagiisip, na ito'y na kay Cristo Jesus din naman: Na SIYA, BAGAMA'T NASA ANYONG DIOS, ay hindi niya inaring isang bagay na nararapat panangnan ang pagkapantay niya sa Dios, Kundi bagkus hinubad niya ito, at NAGANYONG ALIPIN, NA NAKITULAD SA MGA TAO: At palibhasa'y NASUMPUNGAN SA ANYONG TAO, siya'y nagpakababa sa kaniyang sarili, na nagmasunurin hanggang sa kamatayan, oo, sa kamatayan sa krus.

Kaya siya naman ay pinakadakila ng Dios, at siya'y binigyan ng pangalang lalo sa lahat ng pangalan; Upang sa pangalan ni Jesus ay iluhod ang lahat ng tuhod, ng nangasa langit, at ng nangasa ibabaw ng lupa, at ng nangasa ilalim ng lupa, At upang ipahayag ng lahat ng mga dila na si Jesucristo ay Panginoon, sa ikaluluwalhati ng Dios Ama.

Nakita niyo?

Mismong Biblia ang nagpapatunay na si Cristo ay NASA ANYONG DIOS ngunit hinubad niya ito at nagpakababa, sa ANYONG TAO NA KATULAD NATIN..

Sa makatuwid, si Cristo ay DIOS na nasa ANYONG TAO kaya’t SIYA AY MAY DUGO. At kahit na siya’y may dugo ay DIOS pa rin siyang tunay.. sapagkat ITO ANG KANYANG ANYO bago pa man siya'y NAGKATAWANG-TAO.

Sumatotal: Ang mga nakasulat sa Gawa 20:28 "iglesia ng Dios" ay hindi dapat palitan ninuman sa kadahilanang HINDI siya naniniwala sa pagka-Dios ni Cristo sapagkat ito ay PAMBABABOY sa Salita ng Dios at may pananagutan silang malaki sa araw ng paghuhukom (Rev. 22:19)

At dahil napag-usapan na rin natin ang pamimilit ng mga INM na si Cristo ay HINDI DIOS, isang malaking katanungan sa kanila kung bakit SINASAMBA NILA SI CRISTO na TAO?!

Hindi ba’t ang pagsamba ay nauukol LAMANG sa Dios at hindi sa tao?

Kung si Cristo ay TAO LAMANG wala siyang karapatang sambahin siya. At kung si Cristo ay tao lamang siya na mismo ang magbabawal sa tao na sambahin siya. 

Ngunit sa ating mga TUNAY na nakakakilala kay Cristo, si CRISTO AY DIOS na TUNAY. At kung siya’y DIOS nararapat lamang na siya'y SAMBAHIN!

May paglabag ba sa Biblia kung sambahin si Jesus?

Wala po! Kundi inuudyukan at inaanyayahan pa nga tayong SAMBAHIN siya!

Bakita kaya?  Sapagkat alam ng mga nagsulat ng Biblia na si CRISTO ay DIOS na tunay!

May paglabag ba sa iniuutos ng Dios na pagsamba sa DIOS lamang at hindi tao?


Sa Filipos 2:5-11, binanggit bang dalawa ang Dios noong si Cristo ay nasa ANYONG DIOS bago magkatawang tao?

Hindi rin po.

Sinabi lamang na sa pangalan ni Jesus, ang “lahat ng tuhod, ng nangasa langit, at ng nangasa ibabaw ng lupa, at ng nangasa ilalim ng lupa, At upang ipahayag ng lahat ng mga dila na si Jesucristo ay Panginoon, sa IKALULUWALHATI NG DIOS AMA.

Sa ikaluwalhati ng DIOS AMA (sapagkat may DIOS ANAK) – IISANG DIOS pa rin!

Pangalawang tanong sa mga kaanib ng INM-1914: Kung si Cristo ay TAO LAMANG bakit siya'y LUMUSOT SA DINGDING at BIGLANG NAGPAKITA sa mga apostoles (Jn. 20:11-19) o kaya'y NAGPAPAKITA SIYA SA IBA'T IBANG LUGAR AT TAO SA PAREHONG ORAS AT PAREHONG PANAHON (1 Cor 15:6)

Katangian ba ito ng isang TAO LAMANG??!! Pakipaliwanag nga mga MANLILINLANG na MANGANGARAL ng Iglesia ni Cristo (Registered Trademark)?

Kaya't SI MANALO at ng kanyang INC-1914 and dapat nating ITAKWIL-- lahat ng kanilang mga turo sapagkat ang kanilang turo ay PUNO ng PANLILINLANG at PANDARAYA! Hindi gawain ng tunay na Iglesia ang gawain ng kadiliman!

Para sa karagdagang kaalaman, mangyaring basahin ang mga sumusunod:

-DIVINITY OF CHRIST mula sa Catholic Answers
-I BELIEVE IN JESUS CHRIST mula sa Official Catechism of the Catholic Church
-INCARNATION & DIVINITY mula sa Catholic Faith Blog
-THE DIVINITY OF CHRIST mula sa Catholic News Agency Apologetics

Tuesday, April 8, 2014

Bakit CIUDAD DE VICTORIA ang tawag sa lugar na tinayuan ng “Iglesia ni Cristo Arena”?

Hindi sikreto ang itinatayong malaking gusali ng pamilya ni Felix Manalo. Kung ito’y matatapos ngayong taon, ito ay tatanghaling pinakamalaking indoor arena sa buong mundo—pasok sa Guinness Book of Records.

Bagamat maipagmamalaking maituturing ito ng bansang Pilipinas ngunit hindi naman ito pag-aari ng bansa at hindi lahat ng Pilipino ay kaanib ng Iglesia ni Cristo (Registered Trademark). Mangyari kasing halos mahigit kumulang lamang na 4 milyon ang kanilang mga kaanib laban sa halos 80-85% na mga Katoliko. Sa buong populasyon ng bansa 2.3% lamang ang kanilang bilang ayon sa Wikipedia

Sinasabi ng pamunuan ng INC-1914 na ito’y bukas sa mga Sports Events ng bansa, ngunit wala silang malinaw na patakaran kung maari ba itong pagdausan ng malalaking gathering tulad ng mga El-Shaddai ni Mike Velarde o ang Bible Exposition ng ADD (Ang Dating Daan) o ng grupo ni Eddie Vilanueva ng Jesus is Lord Church o ng Catholic World Youth Day.

Di bale na. Hindi lang naman kasi tayo pwedeng hihirit sapagkat ang intention naman ng gusaling yan ay upang MAIPALAGANAP ang aral ni FELIX MANALO at ang angkan ng mga MANALO.

Ang “Philippine Arena” ay itinatayo sa may Bucaue, Bulacan sa CIUDAD DE VICTORIA sa Español—sa English ay “City of Victory”.

Bakit hindi tinagalog ang “Ciudad de Victoria”?

Lalabas kasi na masyadong obvious na!

Yung INC nga ay pinapangalanang Iglesia ni Manalo. Eh kung tatagalugin pa nila ang Ciudad de Victoria ay sigurado ay malaking batikos na naman ito sa pamilyang Manalo na siyang may-ari ng INC.

Ang Ciudad de Victoria ay sadyang pinili dahil akmang-akma ito sa pangalan ng nagtatag ng Iglesia ni Cristo na si MANALO.

Ang “Victoria” kasi sa Tagalog ay “Tagumpay” o "Pagwawagi" at ang ibig sabihin ng Tagumpay ay MANALO.

Kaya’t ang CIUDAD DE VICTORIA kapag Tinagalog na ay magiging LUNGSOD NG MANALO!

Ganon din naman ang kanilang New Era University (kuha sa pangalan ni EraÑo-Era New)—Manalong Manalo talaga ang lahat ng mga establisimiento ng Iglesia ni Cristo-1914.

Ito’y sapagkat ang Iglesia ni Cristo ay tatag ni Felix Manalo kaya’t nararapat lamang na sa kanila ang lahat ng mga pamamahala at ari-arian nito sa batas ng bansa.

PASUGO Agosto-Setyembre 1964, p. 5
“Kailan napatala sa Pamahalaan o narehistro ang INK sa Pilipinas? Noong Hulyo 27, 1914. Tunay nga na sinasabi sa rehistro na si Kapatid na F. Manalo ang nagtatag ng INK."

PASUGO Mayo 1952, p. 4
“Kung ang babalingan ng pag-uusapan ay ang nagtatag, dapat na siya ang may-ari ng itinatag, at sa kanya rin manggagaling ang mga aral at turo na ipinatutupad."
Kita niyo na?

At pagpapatayo ng malaking areana ay para sa kanilang ika-100 taong anibersaryo ng TAGUMPAY ng mga MANALO sa kasaysayan ng pagkakatatag ng Iglesia ni Cristo (Registered Trademark).

Monday, April 7, 2014

The Difference between the Catholic Church and the local cult called Iglesia ni Cristo


IGLESIA NI CRISTO Ministers brag "That's in the Bible".. but whose Bible is it? It's the Bible of the Protestants and Catholics whom they consider as agents of Satan.


Join the debate here at MONK'S HOBBIT

Sunday, April 6, 2014


Sa isang artikolong sinulat ni Bienvenido C. Santiago (http://inc-ako.blogspot.com/), isang Ministro ng INC ni Manalo, nabanggit niya roon ang kahalagahan ng Iglesias a pagliligtas ng Dios sa sanlibutan. 

Bulag sa katotohanan, ibinibintang niya sa ibang mga mangangaral ang PAGLILIHIS daw nila sa katotohanan samantalang MISMONG mga MINISTRO ng INC ang mga gumagamit ng PANDARAYA at KASINUNGALINGAN upang maitago, mailihis at MANLINLANG ng kanilang mga kaanib.

Katulad na lamang ng kanilang ipinalabas na TV segment. Isang PARI raw ng Iglesia Katolika ang umanib na sa INC. Ngunit ang katotohanan pala ay isa siyang pari ng “The Apostolic Catholic Church Poon Bato, Inc.” na tatag nina John Florentine L. Teruel and Maria Virginia Peñaflor Leonzon noong 1992 sa Bataan. At ayon sa Wikipedia ay HIWALAY na po sila sa IGLESIA KATOLIKA! Sa ibang salita, sila po ang NAGPATIWALAG sa kanilang mga sarili at nagtatag ng kanilang pekeng “Catholic Church”.

Bagamat kopyang-kopya ng mga nagpapanggap na Katoliko ang mga gawain at mga kasuotan ng isang lehitimong paring Katoliko, HINDI pa rin po sila lehitimong Katoliko! Katulad lamang po sila ng mga INC na huwad—nagpapanggap na mga tunay ngunit peke.

[Basahin ang aking naunang artikulong pinamagatang: A Fake "Catholic" Priest's Convertion: How Ministers of the Iglesia ni Cristo® Deceived its own viewers!]


Heto po ang panimula ni G. Santiago (Mula sa Pasugo: God’s Message Magazine: October 2008/ Vol. 60 / No. 10 / ISSN 01-16-1636, pp 19-20):

"ANG MALINAW NA aral ng Biblia tungkol sa kahalagahan ng Iglesia para sa kaligtasan ng kaluluwa ng tao ay pilit na pinalalabo ng ibang mga tagapangaral. Inililihis nila ang tao sa katotohanan upang hindi makita ang kahalagahan at kaugnayan ng pag-anib ng tao sa tunay na Iglesia sa pagliligtas na gagawin ni Cristo."

Ayon kay G. Bienvenido, mahalaga raw po ang pag-anib ng isang tao sa "tunay" na Iglesia sa kaligtasan ng kaluluwa. Ngunit ang bintang niya ay pilit daw "inililihis" ng ibang mangangaral ang katotohanan upang "hindi makita" ang kahalagahan daw ng pag-anib sa "tunay" na iglesia.

Sa dinami-rami ng mga NAG-AANGKING mga "TUNAY" na mga iglesia, alin nga ba sa kanila ang may mga taglay na katangian upang masuri at malaman natin kung ang mga ito ba'y tunay o huwad?

Friday, April 4, 2014

The 21 Ecumenical Councils and their Chief Doctrines

The Second Vatican Council (Photo Courtesy of Catholics On Call
From it's more than 2,000 year existence of the CHURCH, so far she has 21 Ecumenical Councils often overlooked by quasi-christian churches and cults such as the fake Iglesia ni Cristo (Registered Trademark) founded by Felix Manalo in the Philippines. Here are the summary from Catholic Online:

1. The First Council of Nicaea (A.D. 325) 
This Council, the first Ecumenical Council of the Catholic Church, was held in order to bring out the true teaching of the Church as opposed by the heresy of Arius. It formally presented the teaching of the Church declaring the divinity of God the Son to be one substance and one nature with that of God the Father. There were twenty canons drawn up, in which the time of celebrating Easter was clarified and a denunciation of the Meletian heresy made, also various matters of discipline or law were dealt with and several decisions advanced. From this Council we have the Nicene Creed.

2.The First Council of Constantinople (A.D. 381) 
Again the true faith was maintained against the Arians. Answer was also given against the Apollinarian and Macedonian heresies. In answering the latter which denied the Godhead of the Holy Spirit, the dogma of the Church was again stated and the words inserted into the Nicene Creed declaring the truth that the Holy Spirit proceeded from both the Father and the Son.

3. The Council of Ephesus (A.D. 431) 
The third General Council of the Church defined the Catholic dogma that the Blessed Virgin is the Mother of God and presented the teaching of the truth of one divine person in Christ. The Council was convened against the heresy of Nestorius.

Thursday, April 3, 2014

Queen Elizabeth II visited Pope Francis at the Vatican

Seen by some as a visit by a state leader, but Catholics in the blogsphere is seeing this event as a sign of unity in the Christian world-- Anglicans and Catholics together again.  As one of the commentary by a certain Karen Wilkinson, she says "The Pope has already opened the door for the Anglicans in union with Rome. there are quite a few Churches that have already made the move. Welcome Home."

The Queen's visit is very significant for Christians because she has met met 6 Popes during her reign namely Pius XII, John XXIII, Paul VI, John Paul I, John Paul II and Benedict XVI. And the latest is Pope Francis making it seven Popes.

Here is the story from Catholic News Agency:

Pope, Queen enjoy casual tea during first meeting
Vatican City- Although short, the April 3 encounter between Pope Francis and Queen Elizabeth in the Vatican has been described as cordial and informal, during which the two exchanged gifts and casual conversation.

Taking place in the papal office of the Vatican’s Paul VI Hall, the official tea between the Bishop of Rome and the British Monarch came after the Queen’s lunch with Italian President Giorgio Napolitano, and lasted only 17 minutes.

During the visit, Queen Elizabeth was accompanied by her husband Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh. The two were in Rome only for the day, following an initial invitation extended to Her Majesty by President Napolitano last year, which she was not able to accept due to poor health.

Wednesday, April 2, 2014


Funny but here's is something that resembles the truth in the INC (Iglesia ni Cristo) 1914 with their FELIX Y. MANALO FOUNDATION INC /banner/logo:

Photo Source: Felix Y. Manalo Foundation, Inc website
And here is what  the UNIVERSAL TRUTH says:

Tuesday, April 1, 2014

Is CONFESSION Scriptural?

Much to the attention of the world, Filipinos in the Philippines once more display its antagonistic approach against the Catholic Church, on priests and on Pope Francis who was featured in international news having CONFESSION to an ordinary priest.  In this article Bold move: Pope Francis confesses sins to ordinary priest bad comments are trending.  Obviously comments from atheists, agnostics, anti-Catholics, unbelievers and anti-Christians (yet so coward to confront other religions such as Islam and the Moslems).
Pope Francis having confession to an ordinary priest at the Vatican (Photo source: DailyMail.co.uk)
Here are some few comments to start with:

    • why would anyone confess their sins to a man?

      I'm not worried about the Pope. I'm worried a lot about the ordinary priests taking confessions from their co-priests. Priest A (taking confessions from Priest B): You did? How many times? I thought I was the only one. Was it the acolyte or that girl choir membe
      • Avatar

        The local catholic hypocrite officials should take heed from none other than their POPE in Vatican,who is becoming a model in simplicity and humbleness.I would like to imagine how our Cardinals,Archbishops,Bishops,and some priests who are sinners ranging from being GAYS,PEDOPHILES,CORRUPT,HYPOCRITES,who,Interferes with purely state affairs.,will go CONFESSION with an ordinary priests.WILL THEY CONFESS THEIR SINS??,Will they tell the truth???
          • Avatar

            The Celebrity Pope is putting on a good show. TMZ reports that the Pope is also praying at night before going to bed.
            The actual transcript of the Pope's confessions has recently been released. It reveals some amazing insights:
            Pope: "Forgive me father for I have sinned... It has been ages since my last confession"
            Priest: "Pope Francis... are you sure this is a good idea?"
            Pope: "Sshhhh... just follow my lead"
            Priest: " Alright. Tell me your sins"
            Pope: "My biggest sin was that I moved a cup from point A to point B and I forgot to turn it over. I could not sleep"
            Priest: "Seriously, Pope..."

              • Avatar

                pero kailagan talaga e picture at ipalabas sa buong mundo? lumang tugtugin nato. Wala epek ito.
                • Avatar

                  CBCP confessions.. This is what I'm waiting for.

                • I wonder what the Pope's sins are. BTW, if Pope is Christ on earth, why would he confess to another priest who's not God but a human being? Why does the Pope not confess directly to God. This is ridiculous.
                  • Avatar

                    kala ko ba infallible? pinaglololoko lang kayo jan.. layasan nyo na. Francis, sa Dios ka mangumpisal pati sa pinagkasalaan mo.
                Here is what the CATHOLIC CHURCH proof that CONFESSION is BIBLICAL.  Thanks to Catholic.com for this article:

                The Lord declares inIsaiah 43:25:
                I, I am He who blots out your transgressions for my own sake, and I will not remember your sins.
                Psalm 103:2-3adds:
                Bless the Lord, O my soul, and forget not all his benefits, who forgives all your iniquity, who heals all your diseases…
                Many will use these verses against the idea of confession to a priest. God forgiving sins, they will claim, precludes the possibility of there being a priest who forgives sins. Further, Hebrews 3:1 and 7:22-27tell us Jesus is, “the… high priest of our confession” and that there are not “many priests,” but one in the New Testament—Jesus Christ.Moreover, if Jesus is the “one mediator between God and men” (I Tim. 2:5), how can Catholics reasonably claim priests act in the role of mediator in the Sacrament of Confession?
                BEGINNING WITH THE OLD
                The Catholic Church acknowledges what Scripture unequivocally declares: it is God who forgives our sins. But that is not the end of the story. Leviticus 19:20-22 is equally unequivocal:
                If a man lies carnally with a woman… they shall not be put to death… But he shall bring a guilt offering for himself to the Lord… And the priest shall make atonement for him with the ram of the guilt offering before the Lord for his sin which he has committed; and the sin which he has committed shall be forgiven him.
                Apparently, a priest being used as God’s instrument of forgiveness did not somehow take away from the fact that it was God who did the forgiving. God was the first cause of the forgiveness; the priest was the secondary, or instrumental cause. Thus, God being the forgiver of sins in Isaiah 43:25 and Psalm 103:3 in no way eliminates the possibility of there being a ministerial priesthood established by God to communicate his forgiveness.
                OUT WITH THE OLD
                Many Protestants will concede the point of priests acting as mediators of forgiveness in the Old Testament. “However,” they will claim, “The people of God had priests in the Old Testament. Jesus is our only priest in the New Testament.” The question is: could it be that “our great God and Savior Jesus Christ” (Titus 2:13) did something similar to that which he did, as God, in the Old Testament? Could he have established a priesthood to mediate his forgiveness in the New Testament?
                IN WITH THE NEW
                Just as God empowered his priests to be instruments of forgiveness in the Old Testament, the God/man Jesus Christ delegated authority to his New Testament ministers to act as mediators of reconciliation as well. Jesus made this remarkably clear in John 20:21-23:
                Jesus said to them again, “Peace be with you. As the Father has sent me, even so I send you.” And when he had said this, he breathed on them, and said to them, “Receive the Holy Spirit. If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven; if you retain the sins of any, they are retained.”
                Having been raised from the dead, our Lord was here commissioning his apostles to carry on with his work just before he was to ascend to heaven. “As the Father has sent me, even so I send you.” What did the Father send Jesus to do? All Christians agree he sent Christ to be the one true mediator between God and men. As such, Christ was to infallibly proclaim the Gospel (cf. Luke 4:16-21), reign supreme as King of kings and Lord of lords (cf. Rev. 19:16); and especially, he was to redeem the world through the forgiveness of sins (cf. I Peter 2:21-25, Mark 2:5-10).

                My Blog List

                My Calendar

                No to RH Bill

                No to RH Bill
                Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...