"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

Monday, December 25, 2017

MERRY CHRISTMAS TO ALL!

Was Christ really born on December 25th?
Source: Catholic Straight Answers

One would think that if anyone’s date of birth were remembered exactly, it would be that of our Savior, Jesus Christ. Unfortunately, the gospels do not pinpoint the date of Christ’s birth. The reason is probably that the focus of the gospels is on the kerygma or mystery of redemption– the passion, death, and resurrection of Christ. This focus is also probably why St. Mark’s Gospel does not even include the Christmas story but begins with the Baptism of the Lord at the River Jordan. Easter, on the other hand, can be better dated because of its linkage with Passover.

Prior to the legalization of Christianity by the Emperor Constantine in the year 313, no universal date or even formal celebration of Christmas is found. For instance, Origen (d. 255), St. Irenaeus (d. 202), and Tertullian (d. 220) do not include Christmas or its date on their lists of feasts and celebrations.

After legalization, the Church was better able to establish universal dates for feasts and to organize their public celebration. Moreover, we now see the Church addressing controversies concerning Jesus as true God and true man, and how He entered this world. Such concern about the mystery of the incarnation would focus more attention on the importance of celebrating Christmas, the birth of our Lord.

On the more “practical” side of this issue, Roman pagans used to gather at the hill where the Vatican is presently located to commemorate the “Birth of the Unconquered Sun.” This pagan feast was celebrated throughout the Empire either on December 25th (according to the Julian Calendar) or on January 6th (according to the Egyptian calendar). Although not proven with certainty, some historians credit Constantine, who declared Sunday as a day of rest in the Empire, with replacing the pagan festival with that of Christmas. Interestingly, since the 200s, Jesus was honored with the title, “Sun of Justice.”

Somehow all of these elements converged to the formal celebration of Christmas on December 25th. For instance, Christmas was celebrated in Rome by Pope Liberius (352-66) on December 25th. On December 25, 379, St. Gregory Nazianzus (d. 389) preached a Christmas sermon in Constantinople. In the Cathedral of Milan, St. Ambrose (d. 397) celebrated Christmas on December 25. Therefore, by the year 400, generally, the birth of Christ was set on December 25th with the exception of Palestine, where it was celebrated on January 6th until the mid-600s when it was then transferred to December 25th.

As an aside, the Feast of the Epiphany also emerged in Gaul (the Roman province of present day France) about the year 361. This feast was moved to January 6th which remains the official date.

While the concern for exact dating may preoccupy us at times, the most important point is celebrating the birth of our Lord and meditating on His incarnation. Remember that the title Christmas is derived from the Old English title Cristes Maesse which means “The Mass of Christ.” Each time we celebrate Mass and receive the Body and Blood of our Lord in the Holy Eucharist, we celebrate Christmas, when He, true God, was born as true man.

Monday, December 4, 2017

Is There an Official Catholic Position on Islam?

William Kilpatrick
TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 1, 2016

[Catholic Thing] Like most Americans, I didn’t know a great deal about Islam prior to 9/11. So, for a while anyway, I accepted the formula that “Islam” means “peace.”

That’s what President Bush and other world leaders assured us, and they also insisted that the 9/11 terrorists represented only a tiny minority of Muslims. The most compelling argument for me, however, was that the Catholic Church seemed to hold the same view – that Islam was a religion of peace.

The linchpin of that positive assessment of Islam was the Vatican II document Nostra Aetate. The section on the Church’s relationship with Muslims states that Muslims “adore the one God,” “revere Jesus,” “honor Mary,” and “value the moral life.” Their religion, in other words, was just like ours.

If that was the case, then it stood to reason that Islam, like Catholicism, was a peaceful religion and that terrorists, therefore, misunderstood their own faith.

Thursday, November 30, 2017

Pope Francis Apostolic Travel to Myanmar and Bangladesh






Catholic Herald:Victims’ group apologises to priest after abuse claims dropped

(Getty image)
Fr Joseph Jiang sued the Survivors Network of Those Abused by Priests after abuse claims against him were dismissed

[Catholic Herald] The Survivors Network of Those Abused by Priests (SNAP) has issued an apology to the Archdiocese of St Louis and two of its priests, Father Joseph Jiang and the late Mgr Joseph D. Pins, admitting allegations against them were false.

“The SNAP defendants never want to see anyone falsely accused of a crime. Admittedly, false reports of clergy sexual abuse do occur,” the group said.

“The SNAP defendants have no personal knowledge as to the complaints against Father Joseph Jiang and acknowledge that all matters and claims against Father Jiang have either been dismissed or adjudicated in favor of Father Jiang,” it said.

Friday, November 24, 2017

Engr. Rafael Riorito O. Estorque's Article on Panoncillo (INC™) vs Cartujano (Catholic) Debate

7 VERSUS 1 – 1 IS THE WINNER? 
By Engr. Rafael Riorito O. Estorque

If we watch the debate, Mr. Cartujano admitted he was not able to provide a magazine xerox or answer the question of Mr. Panoncillo about the pasugo issue. Mr. Panoncilo was referring to page 11 of the book, Answering Iglesia ni Cristo. What about the SEVEN QUESTIONS asked by Mr. Cartujano? Can Mr. Panoncillo admit that he was not able to answer these since he gave irrelevant answers? INC members will surely say their minister gave correct answers. Yet, if we analyze the questions, was Mr. Panoncillo able to answer them?

1. Did Mr. Panoncillo provide a 3rd century manuscript with the words “MONOGENES HUIOS”? Mr. Cartujano showed a 3rd century manuscript with the words, "MONOGENES THEOS" through the projector during his first cross examination. Did Mr. Panoncillo show any 3rd century manuscript with the words “MONOGENES HUIOS”? NONE. What did Mr. Panoncillo do? He read the Jerusalem Bible (English translation) and his only answer was,"HINDI KUMO LUMA ANG MANUSCRIPTS AY YUN NA TAMA". Mr. Panoncillo did not show any book during the debate which stated the statement of textual scholars that support, “HINDI KUMO LUMA ANG MANUSCRIPTS AY YUN NA TAMA,” particularly John 1:18.

Thursday, November 23, 2017

Catholic Herald: Houses of Parliament lit up in red for persecuted Christians

by Madeleine Teahan posted Thursday, 24 Nov 2016 for Catholic Herald

The Houses of Parliament lit up in red to commemorate persecuted Christians last year
Buildings across the country were lit up to mark 'Red Wednesday'

The Houses of Parliament, churches, cathedrals, synagogues and universities were lit up in red yesterday to highlight the plight of persecuted religious minorities abroad.

The event – Red Wednesday – was organised by Aid to the Church in Need. Westminster Cathedral, Westminster Abbey, London Routemaster buses and Bolton town hall were also lit up in red to commemorate the persecuted.

Monday, November 20, 2017

NCR: Kidnapped by the Vatican?

A Catholic Priest's Incredible Story of Life with the Pope
By Kathy Schiffer via National Catholic Register

Moritz Daniel Oppenheim, “The Kidnapping of Edgardo Mortara,” 1862. (via Wikimedia Commons)
I got my first taste of anti-Catholicism at an early age. I was perhaps 10 years old when two bullies in the neighborhood, their religious bigotry evident even at that young age, reported with a sneer how the Pope had kidnapped young Jewish boys, tearing them away from their frantic parents and imprisoning them in the Vatican.

Saturday, November 18, 2017

RAPPLER: Pope Francis on Lamborghini gift: Better to auction off

The Lamborghini Huracan sports car, which boasts a 610 metric horsepower, is blessed by the pontiff, who bent to scrawl his signature on its gleaming bonnet before sending it off to Sotheby's auction house

@afp
Published 11:06 PM, November 15, 2017
Updated 11:49 PM, November 15, 2017

SUPERCAR. This handout photo taken on November 15, 2017 at the Vatican and released by the Vatican press office, Osservatore Romano shows Pope Francis signing a Lamborghini Huracan received as a gift as Lamborghini CEO Stefano Domenicali looks on. Handout / OSSERVATORE ROMANO / AFP

VATICAN CITY, Holy See – Lamborghini gave Pope Francis a personalized white supercar on Wednesday, but he put it up for auction to raise money for charity rather than give up his trademark popemobile.

The Huracan sports car, which boasts a 610 metric horsepower, was blessed by the pontiff, who bent to scrawl his signature on its gleaming bonnet before it was sent off to Sotheby's auction house.

The supercar usually goes for around 200,000 euros ($237,000), but this model – featuring gold stripes and gold-rimmed wing mirrors in homage to the pope's gold-tipped stole – is expected to beat that.

Friday, November 17, 2017

Catholic Herald: Houses of Parliament to be lit up in red for persecuted Christians

The Parliament building will be lit up along with at least 10 cathedrals for #RedWednesday

The towers of the Houses of Parliament (AP)
Catholic Herald - The Houses of Parliament in Westminster will be lit up in red for #RedWednesday next week in honour of the world’s persecuted Christians and all those who suffer for peacefully held beliefs.

John Bercow MP, the Speaker of the House of Commons, and Lord Fowler, Speaker of the House of Lords, agreed to the initiative after being lobbied by parliamentarians, many of whom had been contacted by constituents.

Among those calling for Parliament to turn red was Trevor Harrison, from Sevenoaks, who wrote to his MP, Sir Michael Fallon.

He said he contacted his MP after attending an event in Parliament organised by the All-Party Parliamentary Group for International Freedom or Belief – itself a supporter of #RedWednesday.

Speaking to Catholic charity Aid to the Church in Need, which is organising #Red Wednesday together with Christian Solidarity Worldwide, Mr Harrison said: “Turning Parliament red is a wonderful way to get the message about religious freedom to as wide an audience as possible.”

“We all need to get behind #RedWednesday – we need to stand together against violence carried out in the name of religion – we need to speak up about regimes which persecute people of faith.”

This will be the second year running that Parliament will turn red for #RedWednesday.

So far this year, at least 10 cathedrals across the UK have pledged to go red including London’s Westminster Cathedral and others in Ayr, Edinburgh, Paisley, Birmingham, Norwich, Wrexham, Derry and Armagh.

In total, nearly 50 public buildings are expected to get behind #RedWednesday – schools, colleges and churches including London’s Anglican St Martin-in-the-Fields and All Souls, Langham Place.

There will be a week of vigils and other events across the country from November 19 to 26.

At 6pm on November 22 a solidarity service will take place outside Westminster Cathedral, with talks, witness testimonies, a video message by MP Jacob Rees-Mogg, music and speeches by Coptic Orthodox Bishop Angaelos, Neville Kyrke-Smith, national director of Aid to the Church in Need (UK), and Mervyn Thomas, chief executive of Christian Solidarity Worldwide.

Throughout the day, a traditional London red bus emblazoned with #RedWednesday slogans will be criss-crossing the capital, stopping at London landmarks.

Saturday, November 11, 2017

INC™-1914 has only 2.3 Million follower?

Bragging they have more than 10 million followers, the Iglesia Ni Cristo®-1914 couldn't hide the fact that they only have more than a million die-hard supporters who are ready to defend their disobedient Executive Minister who kicked-out his own mother and siblings from the INC™-1914 founded by their grandfather Felix Y. Manalo.
"The Catholic Church in the Philippines counts at least 80,304,061 followers or 80% of the entire Philippine population, according to data from the Philippine Statistics Authority. Also in the millions is the home-grown Iglesia ni Cristo (INC) which has about 2.3 Filipinos followers." [Source: Rappler]

When both religious institutions were criticized by Rappler, their journalists get two different reaction. From the Catholic Church, there were no vicious threats against their writers. In fact, their criticisms were all respected. Ironically, this “church” that boasts on its historic “return” (daw) to Rome (PASUGO God's Message February 2014, p. 7), the INC™-1914, its administration and their supporters did the unthinkable dipping their group to a cult-like religion.
"We weren't spared. We were attacked relentlessly and accused of being biased. We were targets of calls for a boycott. But we persisted."

Thursday, November 9, 2017

May bago nang 'Jesus' ang mga INC™-1914 sa katauhan ni Felix Y. Manalo

Hindi nakapagtataka kung bakit ang turing ng mga kaanib ng INC™-1914 kay Felix Manalo at kahalintulad ni Cristo Jesus ay sapagkat ito ang kanilang paulit-ulit na ikinakabit sa pangalan ng kanilang 'huling sugo' sa kanilang mga pangangaral, maging sa pananalita o sa imprenta.


PASUGO Hulyo 1965, p. 12:

“Parehong-pareho ang espiritu ni Cristo sa diwa ni Kapatid na Felix Manalo sa pamamaraan ng pagdadala ng tungkuling tinanggap sa Dios."

PASUGO Mayo 1964, p. 1:

“Inihandog ng Dios ang kanyang sarili sa kanyang huling sugo upang dumiyos sa kanya. Samakatuwid, ang tanging may Dios na huling araw na ito'y ang huling sugo -- si Kapatid na Felix Manalo."

JUAN 10:16 - SI FELIX MANALO ANG TINUTUKOY NA PASTOR

PASUGO Mayo 1961, p. 22:
“Papaano magiging kawan o Iglesia ni Cristo itong mga tupa ni Jesus na nagmumula sa Pilipinas, hindi naman naparito si Cristo noong 1914? Ang sabi ni Jesus, Juan 10:16, 'magkakaroon sila ng isang Pastor'. Sino itong isang Pastor ng Iglesia na lilitaw sa Pilipinas? Ang pinagsabihan ng Dios: 'Huwag kang matakot, sapagkat ako'y sumasaiyo: (Isaias 43:5).

“Sino itong pastor ng Iglesiang lilitaw sa Pilipinas? Ito ang huling tinatawag o sugo na kasama ng Dios. Ito ang Kapatid na Felix Manalo. Noong sabihin ni Cristo na siya'y mayroon pang ibang mga tupa na wala sa kulungan at sila'y gagawing isang kawan at magkakaroon ng isang pastor, noon pa'y mayroon na siyang karapatan."

VS.


JUAN 10:16 - SI CRISTO ANG TINUTUKOY NA PASTOR

SULO pahina 58:

“Itinuturo din ng Iglesia Katolika na ang Papa ang siyang "Kataas-taasang Pastor". (Question 169). Ito ay salungat din sa turo ni Jesus at ng mga Apostol, sapagkat sinabi ni Cristo: "Ako ang tanging Pastor" (Juan 10:16)".

REFUTING IGLESIA NI CRISTO®-1914: DID JESUS DENY HIS DEITY IN JOHN 14:28?


Jesus Christ took away his being God and became humble (Philippians 2:5-8).

"You must have the same attitude that Christ Jesus had. Though he was God, he did not think of equality with God as something to cling to. Instead, he gave up his divine privileges; he took the humble position of a slave and was born as a human being. When he appeared in human form, he humbled himself in obedience to God and died a criminal's death on a cross."(Philippians 2:5-8)

Jesus came here not to give glory to Himself but to the Father.

He is not like many people who give glory only to themselves.

"Jesus answered, “If I glorify myself, my glory is nothing. It is my Father who glorifies me, of whom you say, ‘He is our God."(John 8:54)

Another New Testament scholar used by INC ministers to twist the truth in John 10:30 is the Book of D.A. Carson on “The Gospel According to John.”

Now, will Parba, Ventilacion and other INC Ministers still accept the statement of D.A. Carson?

"At a popular level, this clause is often cited, out of context, by modern arians who renew the controversy from the early centuries that is connected with the name of Arius. In the clause before us, the father is greater that I cannot be taken to mean that Jesus is not God, or that he is a lesser God; the historical context of Jewish monotheism forbids the latter, and the immediate literary context renders the former irrelevant" (The Gospel According to John by D.A. Carson, Page 507)

I just want to quote the comment of a highly respected Christian Scholar, Norman Geisler.

"The Father is greater than the son by office, but not by nature, since both are God. Just as an earthly father is equally human with, but holds a higher office than, his son, even so the Father and the Son in the trinity are equal in essence, but different in function. "(The Big Book of Bible Difficulties, Page 420)

When INC Ministers defended their wrong interpretation of John 1:1, they gathered what the scholar Dr. Daniel Wallace said.

Now, will Parba, Ventilacion and other INC Ministers still accept the statement of Dr. Daniel Wallace?

"In this context, it is obvious that Jesus is speaking with reference to his office, not his person. That is, the Father has great rank, but the Son is no less deity than is the Father. "(Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics by Daniel Wallace, Page 111)


Thursday, October 12, 2017

LifeSite News: Massive turnout for rosary crusade in Poland. Liberals furious

WARSAW, Poland, October 9, 2017 (LifeSiteNews) — Hundreds of thousands of Polish Catholics encircled their country with prayer Saturday, imploring Our Lady’s intervention to save Poland and the world.

As Catholics lined the country’s 2,000-mile border for the “Rosary at the Borders,” progressives and compatible media deemed the national prayer gathering “controversial,” xenophobic, Islamophobic, or “not” representative of the Catholic Church.

“Poland Catholics hold controversial prayer day on borders,” the BBC’s headline said of the event.

Saturday, October 7, 2017

Catholic Herald: The Filipino bishops are standing up against Duterte. We should applaud them

This is what makes me prouder as a member of the TRUE CHURCH OF CHRIST!


The president's war on drugs is clearly illegal. The Church has to take a stand

The War on Drugs, presently being fought in the Philippines by President Duterte and his death squads, has now entered a new phase, as the New York Times reports. The Church has offered to give sanctuary and protection to those police officers who wish to act as whistle-blowers, and who have evidence of illegal actions by their colleagues.

As the chairman of the Bishops’ Conference, Archbishop Socrates Villegas, explains in a pastoral letter: “Law enforcers have come forward confidentially to us, their spiritual leaders, to seek sanctuary, succour and protection. They have expressed their desire to come out in the open about their participation in extrajudicial killings and summary executions. Their consciences are troubling them.”

Tuesday, October 3, 2017

Catholic Herald: Protestantism’s biggest problem: on whose authority do we interpret the scriptures?

Source: Catholic Herald

In the end, private interpretation isn't enough

On Saturday I joined a group of Anglican and Methodists in our village to walk around its familiar landmarks offering prayers. We started at the (pre-Reformation) Anglican church, moved on to the war memorial, then to the village school, thence to our popular local pub. A Methodist lady whom I know well told me sotto voce that she wasn’t going to join in praying for the pub to flourish. I remembered that Methodists forswear alcohol. Sotto voce I responded, “But what about Jesus’s first miracle at the marriage feast of Cana?” She replied, half-resigned, half-humorous: “Why do people always bring up Cana!”

Friday, September 1, 2017

Mga Kristianong Katoliko Pinili ang Kamatayan kaysa Yurakan si Jesus


Patheos: What I Wish I’d Known About Catholics (And Why I Became One Once I Did)

Source: Patheos
Posted in February 13, 2017 by K. Albert Little

Photo Credit: Karol Franks.

I‘m a Catholic, but I didn’t begin as one.

I began my faith journey at the age of fifteen when, with the help of a good friend, I decided to become a Christian; an Evangelical Protestant, although I didn’t know the particular brand name at the time. And I meant well. I found a local Pentecostal church populated by a group of devout young Christian who welcomed me unequivocally. We were a motley crew. I fit right in.

Then in university, at a time when so many Christians lose their faith and their identity, I plugged into an incredible campus ministry. There I met lifelong friends, grew a great deal both emotionally and spiritually, and met my beautiful wife. (It was evident, she’d say, that I still had a lot of maturing to do.)

But the trajectory of my faith life would take a subtle but noticeably fork in the road one day when an Evangelical pastor asked me what’s more important, the Bible or tradition.

I didn’t have an answer, and that stumped me.

And when I dug for answers, I was even more stumped, and unsatisfied. This began a long journey of searching, prayer, and unexpected discoveries.

A journey which culminated at Easter, two years ago, when I entered full communion with the Roman Catholic Church.

When that Evangelical pastor asked me about the Bible and tradition I knew very little about either, as it turns out, and my research eventually led me to look into Catholicism and its historical claims.

What I thought I knew about Catholics, as an Evangelical, was a lot.

Turns out I was wrong about almost everything.

I’m became Catholic because of what I’ve learned.

St. Francis de Sales is a favourite saint of mine. In the 16th century, as the Reformation split apart the Christian Church in Europe he wrote, preached, and worked tirelessly to explain the Catholic faith, and bring Protestants back into the fold.

He was incredibly successful and something in his mission of cordially explaining his faith resonates deeply with me.

To paraphrase St. Francis de Sales to the early Protestants: If you’d known what the Catholic Church really taught you’d never have left.

In my case, if I’d known what the Catholic Church really taught I’d have become Catholic a long, long time ago.


Catholics Don’t Worship Mary

The Catholic Church doesn’t teach the worship of Mary. Worship (and adoration) are for God alone.

As an Evangelical I thought that Catholics worshipped Mary alongside her son, Jesus. There are plenty of churches named in her honour, Catholics seemed obsessed with statues of the Virgin, and the Rosary, of all things, seemed to be nothing more than vain repetition and worship directed towards Jesus’s mother.

The reality, I’ve learned, is much different.

Catholics don’t worship Mary but, because of her special role in salvation history, she is venerated. How is that different? In Catholic theology, which, remember, was the theology of the whole Christian Church for 1,500 years, we ask Mary to pray for us.

Like Mary’s request to Jesus at the wedding at Cana, Catholics believe that Mary has the ear of Jesus in a special way. This is also reflected in biblical typology—the same kind of exegesis that Jesus used to explain His role in salvation to the apostles on the road to Emmaus. In the same way I can ask my best friend—a living, breathing Christian—to pray for my intentions, the Catholic Church teaches that Mary can be asked for prayer in the same way.

When Catholics say they pray, “to Mary,” they don’t mean that Mary will answer our prayers. This understanding of “pray” is more a difficulty of the English language.

When we “pray to” Mary, we ask for her to pray for us, to Christ.

Jesus answers all prayers. We ask Mary to pray on our behalf.


Catholics Don’t Worship the Saints

In the same way, the Catholic Church believes that holy men and women (more women than men, for the record) are, presently, in the presence of God.

We call these people saints and, like the Virgin Mary, we can ask for their prayers.

As pictured in Revelation, the prayers of the saints gathered around the altar float up like incense before God. That’s why, since the very beginning of the Christian Church, there has been a strong belief in ability of the dead to pray for us—and the practice of us asking them for their prayers.

This is why the earliest Christian Churches were built on sites where holy men and women were martyred like the churches honouring Saint Peter and Saint Paul in Rome.

The beautiful theology of the Catholic Church says that the Church, as a body of believers, is made up of all past, present, and future Christians. We’re all one and the same and just because I pass away doesn’t mean I cease to be a part of that active body. Jesus conquered death as so does His Church.

The saints, as Christians, continue their role in the body, only now in the presence of God.

Jesus is Present in the Eucharist

For all the different branches and denominations of Protestantism I’ve learned that no one takes Jesus’s words more seriously than the Catholic Church.

When Jesus said, “This is my body; this is my blood,” the Catholic Church—and the whole of Christianity for 1,500 years—takes Him at His word.

Incredibly, the Catholic theology of transubstantiation says that when the priest consecrates the elements (the bread and the wine) they become the actual body and blood of Jesus through a mysterious, miraculous process. The fact that we can’t see, touch, or taste these elements are real flesh and blood is part of the miracle.

This bold claim is backed up not only by a thousand and a half years of Church history but by solid exegesis of the gospels.

Jesus, from Bethlehem (which means “the house of bread”), who was laid into a manger (which is a feeding trough) when He was born is the actual manna from Heaven.

If I had known that I can actually receive Jesus in the Eucharist I would’ve stormed the doors of my local Catholic Church a decade ago.


There’s Only One Mass

What strikes me as even more incredible is the Catholic theology of the act of the Eucharist itself: There’s only one.

Jesus’s sacrifice on the cross was once and for all, final, and this is something that all Protestants can get behind. The brilliant, beauty of the Mass and the Real Presence of Jesus in the Eucharistic elements, however, is that it links us up with all of Christian history—past, present, and future.

Jesus only died once.

When the priest prayers the Eucharistic Prayers and says, “This is my body; this is my blood,” we are, as a church community, reliving the Last Supper and Jesus’s death on the cross.

We are linking up, together, with all of the other Christians who have ever, and will ever, celebrate the Eucharist.

And we’re linking up with the saints, angels, the Virgin Mary, and God Himself in Heaven as we see this same celebration taking place in Revelation.

As a Catholic, then, when I go to Mass I am experiencing something universal: Jesus’s death re-presented before my eyes.

A genuine tearing of the veil which allows us modern Catholics to reach back into the very time of the very Last Supper itself.


The Priest Acts as Jesus

In a similar way, I never understood the importance of the priest in Catholic theology. As a young Evangelical the priest, like Mary and the saints, seemed to stand in the way of my personal relationship with Jesus.

But I had it all wrong.

The priest, as understood by Catholic theology, acts as Christ. The priest is a stand-in, if you will.

In the Mass, the priests acts in the place of Jesus, as he consecrates the bread and the wine. In the blessing of people, in Baptism, in prayer, and in the healing of the sick the priest, based on the authority that Jesus gives His apostles in the New Testament, is acting in His place.

Where Jesus is not tangibly, physically with us, the priest is here in His place.

In confession, the priest, based on the direct charge from Jesus, “whoever’s sins you forgive they are forgiven,” represents Christ in forgiving our sins for us.

We don’t have to imagine God among us: there He is.

And His presence is an incredible blessing and grace.


God Gave Us a Real, Tangible Church

Perhaps the greatest, most incredible thing I’ve learned, and wish that I knew a long, long time ago, is that Jesus left us with a real, tangible Church.

As an Evangelical, I thought of the Church as a non-physical, spiritual union of Christians all over the world. But this isn’t how Jesus meant it, I’m convinced.

Because this isn’t the Church as conceived by the apostles, the fathers of the Church (who were taught by the apostles), and all Christians for more than fifteen hundred years.

As I become Catholic perhaps the greatest gift I’m to receive is union with a real, tangible Church founded by Christ.

A Church with bishops and priests who can trace their authority, historically, all the way back to the apostles. Authority that we see manifest in the New Testament as the ability to forgive sins, drive out demons, and define an understanding of doctrine. These authoritative charges, according to the Catholic Church, remain with today’s bishops and priests through Apostolic Succession.

That’s why when the priest says, “You’re forgiven,” he means it. Because Christ said he’d have that power.

Rather than having to “feel” or “know” it on our own, God gave us the beauty and the blessing of a physical, tangible Church to be His hands and feet on earth.

I don’t need to pray and ask for God to give me a sense of His grace, although I certainly could, and do. But in the Eucharist, in confession, and in the knowledge that God gave us the Church, we can be certain of His grace. This, in my experience, has been the most powerful aspect of the Catholic Church—and something I wish I knew years ago.

The most beautiful gift that Jesus gave us, beyond His sacrificial offering, was the establishment of a Church to proclaim, celebrate, and safeguard truth.

There’s a lot—a lot!—I wish I’d known about the Catholic Church a long time ago.

And one that fateful day which set the course of my faith life in an entirely new direction I could’ve never anticipated that a question about the Bible and tradition would’ve led me here.

But here we are, and there’s nowhere I’d rather be.

In the Catholic Church I’ve found an incredible, unimaginable home. It’s miles from anything I’d ever known before and, once I learned about what Catholics really believed there’s nothing I could’ve done to avoid becoming one myself!

This article was originally published on my personal blog before the Easter Vigil, 2015.

Getting to Know the Only True Church of Christ



Monday, August 28, 2017

VERBO o LOGOS, Isang Diyos o Panukala Lamang?

Habang NIYUYURAKAN ng mga kaanib ng Iglesia Ni Cristo® na TATAG ni Felix Y. Manalo noong 1914 ang PANGINOONG JESUCRISTO, tayo namang mga TUNAY na kaanib sa TUNAY na IGLESIA ay NAGTATANGOL ukol sa katuruan ng mga Apostol sa PAGKA-DIYOS ni Cristo kahit na siya ay NASA ANYONG LAMAN.

Para sa mga INC™, ang LOGOS o VERBO raw ay ISANG PANUKALA o PLANO na nasa ISIP pa lamang daw ng DIYOS (Ama).


"Ang aral bang ito ng Biblia na magkakaroon ng cristo na sa pasimula'y balak, panukala o plano pa lamang ng Diyos ay sinasang-ayunan maging ng mga nagtuturong si cristo ay Diyos, gaya ng Iglesia Katolika? Ganito ang sinasabi ng isang Aklat Katoliko na pinamagatang: The teaching of Christ: A Catholic Catechism for adults, Page 74

: Si cristo ay sadyang inilalarawan mula pa sa kasaysayan ng pasimula ng tao.'...' Si Cristo na siyang magtitipon sa lahat ng anak ng Diyos sa pamamagitan ng pagkakaisa sa kaniyang mistikal na katawan, na ito ay ang Iglesia, ay Siyang " Panganay sa lahat ng nilalang" (Colosas 1:15).' '... Si Cristo ang tiyak na una sa banal na plano.!!

Tinatanggap maging ng mga awtoridad Katoliko na si Cristo ay una sa banal na plano o panukala ng Diyos upang maging panganay sa lahat ng nilalang tulad ng isinasaad sa Colosas 1:15. Samakatuwid, wala pang cristo sa pasimula pa lamang kundi plano, balak, o nasa isip pa lamang siya ng Diyos, Kaya sinasabi sa unang sugnay (clause) ng Juan 1:1 na , " Sa pasimula ay ang salita" (NPV)

' At ang salita ay sumasa Diyos.'

Paano ang wastong pag-unawa sa sinasabi ni Apostol Juan sa pangalawang sugnay ng Juan 1:1 na '' At ang salita ay sumasa Diyos''? Ihambing natin ito sa itinuturo ng Biblia na sa pasimula pa lamang o bago pa lalangin ang daigdig, ang Panginoong Jesucristo ay nasa isip na ng panginoong Diyos. Ito ang pinatutunayan ni Apostol Pedro sa kaniyang sulat sa 1 Pedro 1:20:

'Nasa isip na siya ng Diyos bago pa lalangin ang daigdig ngunit ipinakilala siya ngayong huling panahon dahil sa inyo.' (Salin ni Juan Trinidad)"

HINDI po ikinakaila ng Iglesia Katolika na TOTOONG TAO ang Panginoong Jesus. Ngunit ang kanyang KALAGAYAN sa anyong PAGKA-TAO ay HINDI po nangangahulugang HINDI SIYA DIYOS. HINDI po NAGTATAPOS ang pagka-DIYOS niya noong SIYA ay NAGKATAWANG-TAO. Bagkos, ayon sa BIBLIA ang CRISTO ay VERBO at ang VERBO ay DIYOS at angVERBO ay TUMAHAN sa GITNA natin bilang ISANG TAO. HINDI po isang PLANO lamang o PANUKALA ang PANGINOONG JESUS tulad ng BALUKTOT na UNAWA ng mga BULAANG mangangaral na SANAY MANDAYA at MAGSINUNGALING!

Ano ba ang isang PLANO o PANUKALA?

Ayon sa mga INC™ ang plano ay NASA ISIPAN pa lamang. Ibig sabihinm, ang plano ay HINDI PA UMIIRAL at WALA itong kakayahang o kapangyarihan sapagkat ito ay nasa ISIPAN pa lamang ng NAG-IISIP o nang NAGPA-PLANO.

In other words, ang PLANO o PANUKALA ay NON-EXISTENT being. sapagkat HINDI PA ITO NAHAHAYAG labas sa isipan ng nag-iisip o sa wikang Ingles ay it cannot independently exist outside the thoughts of a conscious being.

Kaya't kung susundin lamang natin ang argumento ng mga mangangaral ng INC™, eh malamang mapapaniwala nila tayo PLANO o PANUKALA nga lang naman ang Verbo, Logos o ang Salitang tinutukoy ni Apostol San Juan.

BIBLIA vs BIBLIA (Salin vs Salin)

Sakit na ito ng mga mgangaral na INC™.  Mahilig silang GUMAMIT ng mga TALATA ng BILIA LABAN sa isa pang talata ng Biblia. (Dito niyo makikita ang classical argument ng mga mangangaral na INC™, Biblia laban sa Biblia. Binababoy nila ang Salita ng Diyos.)

Minsan pa nga, ginagamit nila ang iba pang mga heretical versions kapag makita nila roong PABOR sa kanila ang salin (kahit alam nilang ang pagsasalin nito ay hindi na tapat sa orihinal na pakahulugan nito.)

Halimbawa, ang kanilang DOKTRINA na DALAWA ANG PANGINOON. Kapag tinanong sila kung saan sa Biblia NAHAHAYAG na may 'dalawang Panginoon' na DAPAT SAMBAHIN, ang ituturo sa iyong talata ay ang FILIPOS 2:9 na nagsasaad ng PAGDADAKILA sa PANGALAN ni JESUS. 

Saan doon sa Filipos 2:9 ang salitang 'DALAWA ANG PANGINOON"? Wala po tayong mababasa sa Biblia mula sa Lumang Tipan hanggang sa Bagong Tipan na 'Dalawa' ang Panginoon at PAREHONG SINASAMBA.

Ang hindi napapansin ng mga NAG-SUSURI ay mayroon silang PILIT IKINUBLI sa talatang ito. Ang TALATA 6-8 ng Filipos 2.

Kahit taglay niya ang kalikasan ng Diyos,
hindi niya ipinagpilitang manatiling kapantay ng Diyos.

Sa halip, kusa niyang binitawan ang pagiging kapantay ng Diyos,
at namuhay na isang alipin.
Ipinanganak siya bilang tao.
At nang siya'y maging tao,

nagpakumbaba siya at naging masunurin hanggang kamatayan,
maging ito man ay kamatayan sa krus.
Ayon sa FILIPOS 2, si CRISTO AY MAY KATANGIAN NG DIYOS ngunit HINDI niya pinagpilitan ito, bagkos PINILI niya (kanyang sariling desisyon) na IPAPANGANAK BILANG TAO..

Kaya siya DINADAKILA ng DIYOS (Ama).. iyan po ang nasa Talata 9 ng Filipos 2.

 So kung Diyos ang Ama at Diyos din ang VERBO, ibig sabihin eh dalawa ang Diyos sa lagay na 'yan? Sa isang INC™ na halos 1914 lang umiral ang katuruan, mauunawaan natin kung bakit ganito ang kanilang aral.

Ngunit alam natin na TWISTED ang kanilang Theology dahil ALAM nating IISA ANG DIYOS at IISA rin ang PANGINOON.  Sa totoo lang, ang talatang iyan ay NAGPAPATUNAY lamang na ang pagiging-PANGINOON ni Cristo at ng DIYOS AMA ay IISA (Juan 10:30)

"Ako at ang Ama ay IISA."
Di tulad ng mga INC™, hindi ito sinalungat sa anumang aral ninuman sa mga apostol. Bagkus ito ay SINANG-AYUNAN pa ni APOSTOL SAN PABLO sa kanyang sulat sa mga taga-EFESO (4:5-6) noong sinabi niyang may IISANG-DIYOS at IISANG PANGINOON.

"Mayroong IISANG PANGINOON, isang pananampalataya, isang bawtismo. Mayroong IISANG DIYOS at Ama ng lahat..."
Malinaw po. HINDI po sinasang-ayunan ng Bibla ang pagkakaroon ng DALAWANG-PINAPANGINOON. Maliban na kung ang pagka-unawa ng mga mangangaral na INC™ ay IBINIGAY ng Ama ang kaniyang pagka-Panginoon sa Anak (Jesus) para lalabas na wala na sa Ama ang pagka-Panginoon at inilipat na lamang sa Panginoong Jesus para may IISANG PANGINOON. Lalabas kasi na dalawa nga naman ang Panginoon kung isa sa kanila ay hindi nagparaya.

Ganito rin naman ang ITINURO ni MOISES sa BAYAN ng Diyos (Deuteronomio 6:4)

“Pakinggan mo, O Israel: Si Yahweh na ating Diyos ang tanging Yahweh. (Sa ibang salin ay ganito: Si Yahweh…tanging Yahweh: o kaya'y Si Yahweh ang ating Diyos, si Yahweh ay iisa, o Si Yahweh na ating Diyos, si Yahweh ay iisa lang) .
CONSISTENT ang BIBLIA pagdating sa aral ng IISANG DIYOS at IISANG PANGINOON. Nakita niyo? Hindi nagsasalungatan ang mga pahayag ni Moises at ang itinuturo ng mga Apostol sa Bagong Tipan. Ang BUONG BIBLIA ay UMAAYON sa BAWAT TALATA, hindi SUMASALUNGAT laban sa isa pang talata tulad ng ginagawa ng mga kaanib ng INC™.

Ang VERBO ay isang UMIIRAL na CONSCIOUS BEING

HINDI PO TOTOO na ang LOGOS o VERBO ay isang PLANO lamang o isang PANUKALA. Sa katunayan, MISMONG si CRISTO ang NAGPATUNAY na SIYA ay UMIIRAL (EXISTING) na bago pa mang SIYA ay NAGKATAWANG-TAO.


TANDANG-TANDA pa ni CRISTO kung ANONG KALIKASAN MERON SIYA BAGO pa man SIYA NAGKATAWANG-TAO. Mababasa natin ito sa JOHN 8:58

"...Jesus said to them, “Amen, amen, I say to you, before Abraham came to be, I AM."
Sa wikang Tagalog ay ganito naman...

"Sinabi ni Jesus sa kanila: Katotohanan, katotohanang sinasabi ko sa inyo: Bago pa si Abraham ay AKO na."
Ang "AKO" ay nagpapahayag ng CONSCIOUSNESS ng isang naghahayag. Ang NANGUNGUSAP rito ay ang PANGINOONG JESUS sa laman. PINATOTOHANAN niya sa mga Judyo ang KANYANG KALIKASAN (eternal existence) BAGO o BEFORE pa man ISINILANG o UMIRAL (exist) si ABRAHAM na malaking TANDA sa kanyang kapanahunan bilang tao (mahigit 2,000 taon o 55 na henerasyon ang pagitan nila).

Pagkasabi ni Jesus nito, mahalagang PUNTUHIN natin kung ano ang naging REAKSIYON ng mga HUDYO kay JESUS?

Nagsidampot sila ng bato upang siya'y batuhin, ngunit nagtago si Jesus at lumabas ng Templo
Bakit gusto nilang patayin si Jesus sa kanyang mga pahayag?

Sumagot ang mga Judio, “Hindi dahil sa mabubuting gawa kaya ka namin babatuhin, kundi dahil sa paglapastangan mo sa Diyos! Sapagkat ipinapantay mo ang iyong sarili sa Diyos, gayong tao ka lamang.” (Juan 10:33)
Sa madaling-salita, TALOS o NAUUNAWAAN ng mga HUDYO ang IBIG SABIHIN ni Cristo sa kanila: na SIYA AY DIYOS.

Ngayon, kung si CRISTO ay isang MABUTI at KATOTOHANAN lamang ang nasa kanya, BAKIT DIYA NIYA SINUWAY ang mga Hudyo sa PAG-IISIP na "SIYA AY DIYOS"?

Madali langang sagot riyan: SAPAGKAT ALAM NI JESUS KUNG SINO SIYA! SIYA ANG DIYOS ANAK!

Sabi nga ng isang dalubhasang PILOSOPO na si Rene Descartes eh "I THINK THEREFORE I AM."

Si Cristo ay ETERNALLY EXISTING with the FATHER ("Sa pasimula" o "in the beginning" signifies ETERNAL EXISTENCE) sapagkat ito ang kanyang PATOTOO sa mga Hudyo: "Before Abraham came to be, I AM!"

ANG VERBO AY DIYOS

Katulad ng nasabi natin, ang BIBLIA ay HINDI salungat sa Biblia tulad ng ginagawa ng mga bulaang mangagnaral ng INC™.

Nang pasimula ay naroon na ang Salita; ang Salita ay kasama ng Diyos, at ang Salita ay Diyos. 2 Sa pasimula ay kasama na ng Diyos ang Salita. Nilikha ang lahat ng bagay sa pamamagitan niya, at walang anumang nalikha nang hindi sa pamamagitan niya.... Naging tao ang Salita at nanirahan sa piling namin. Nakita namin ang kaluwalhatiang tunay na kanya bilang kaisa-isang Anak ng Ama. Siya ay puspos ng kagandahang-loob at ng katotohanan. -Juan 1:1-3;14

Sino ba namang matinong mangangaral ang PILIT MAMALIIN ang isang talata na KASING-LIWANAG ng ARAW sa LINAW?

Sinasabi na ng Biblia na ang VERBO ay NARON NA sa PASIMULA (eternal). Diyos (almighty), Diyos na nasa Diyos (Trinitarian Community), VERBO nagkatawang-tao (Jesus).

At walang DUDA na ang VERBO ay ang DIYOS ANAK na si JESUS sapagkat may patunay.

Sinong NAGPATOTOO na ang VERBO ay ang MANUNUBOS na IPINANGAKO pa noong panayon pa ni Moises?

Si San JUAN BAUTISTA!

Nagpatotoo si Juan tungkol sa kanya, na isinisigaw, “Siya ang tinutukoy ko nang aking sabihin, ‘Ang dumarating na kasunod ko'y higit kaysa sa akin, sapagkat siya ay naroon na bago pa man ako ipanganak.’”

"Nagpatotoo si Juan tungkol sa kanya, na isinisigaw, “Siya ang tinutukoy ko nang aking sabihin, ‘Ang dumarating na kasunod ko'y higit kaysa sa akin, sapagkat siya ay naroon na bago pa man ako ipanganak.’”

Mula sa kapuspusan ng kanyang kagandahang-loob, tumanggap tayong lahat ng abut-abot na kagandahang-loob. Ibinigay ang Kautusan sa pamamagitan ni Moises; ngunit dumating ang kagandahang-loob at katotohanan sa pamamagitan ni Jesu-Cristo.."
-Juan 1:15-18

Totoo ito sapagkat ito ang mga pahayag ni Cristo ukol sa kanyang PAG-IRAL (eternal existence) na KAPILING ang DIYOS AMA.

Ako'y bumabâ mula sa langit, hindi upang gawin ang sarili kong kalooban, kundi ang kalooban niya na nagsugo sa akin. -Juan 6:38
At sa talatang ito ay isang SAMPAL sa mga mangangaral ng INC™. Mababasa natin na GUSTONG MAKITA ni SAN FELIPE ang DIYOS AMA. Ngunit ang sagot ni Jesus ay NAG-AARING SIYA NGA AY ANG AMA "HANGGANG NGAYO'Y HINDI MO PA AKO KILALA, FELIPE?"

Sinabi sa kanya ni Felipe, “Panginoon, ipakita po ninyo sa amin ang Ama at masisiyahan na kami.”

Sumagot si Jesus, “Kay tagal na ninyo akong kasama, hanggang ngayo'y hindi mo pa ako kilala, Felipe? Ang nakakita sa akin ay nakakita na sa Ama. Bakit mo sinasabing ‘Ipakita mo sa amin ang Ama’? 10 Hindi ka ba naniniwalang ako'y nasa Ama at ang Ama ay nasa akin? Hindi sa akin galing ang sinasabi ko sa inyo. Ngunit ang Ama na nananatili sa akin ang siyang gumaganap ng kanyang gawain. 11 Maniwala kayo sa akin; ako'y nasa Ama at ang Ama ay nasa akin. -Juan 14:8-11
Kaya't sa mga NAGSUSURI, huwag po tayong mapaniwala sa mga 'JOHNNY COME LATELY' na mga relihiyon sapagkat HINDI KATOTOHANAN ang kanilang dala kundi KASINUNGALINGAN upang MANDAYA at MANLILANG.


Sa mga HINDI raw SUMASAMPALATAYA kay JESUS (na Diyos) na NAPARITO SA LAMAN, SILA raw ay mga ANTI-CRISTO o mga KAAWAY NI CRISTO ayon kay Apostol San Juan (2 Juan 1:7-8)

Sapagkat nagkalat sa sanlibutan ang mga mandaraya! Ayaw nilang kilalanin na si Jesu-Cristo'y dumating bilang tao. Ang ganoong tao ay mandaraya at kaaway ni Cristo. Mag-ingat nga kayo upang huwag mawalang saysay ang aming pinagpaguran,[b] sa halip ay lubusan ninyong makamtan ang gantimpala.
At kung ang mga mangangaral na ANTI-CRISTO ay mga MANLILINLANG, MANDARAYA at SINUNGALING, HINDI si Cristo ang kanilang Panginoon kundi si Satanas!

"Ang diyablo ang inyong ama! At ang gusto ninyong gawin ay kung ano ang gusto niya. Sa simula pa lang ay mamamatay-tao na siya. Hindi siya pumanig sa katotohanan kailanman, sapagkat walang puwang sa kanya ang katotohanan. Kapag nagsasalita siya ng kasinungalingan, nagsasalita siya ayon sa kanyang kalikasan sapagkat siya'y sinungaling, at siya ang ama ng kasinungalingan." -Juan 8:44

Kaya't sa mga nagsusuri at NAGMAMAHAL sa KATOTOHANANG NAKASULAT sa BIBLIA, LISANIN niyo na ang mga mangangaral na mandaraya at magbalik-loob na kayo sa Iglesiang TUNAY na TATAG ni CRISTO - ang NAG-IISA, BANAL, KATOLIKO, at APOSTOLIKONG IGLESIA ni CRISTO!


Friday, August 25, 2017

2 John 1:7 Prophesy was Fulfilled in 1914


Coming Home Network International: "I needed to get my faith life in order for the sake of my family." - Jenna Wilber


After she had her second child, Jenna felt like she and her family should make finding a church home a priority. Another young mother in her life encouraged her to seek out spiritual direction, and that was a major factor in her decision to become Catholic.

Thursday, August 24, 2017

MAHINA NGA BA ANG DIYOS NG MGA KATOLIKO?

ILAN ANG DIYOS?

Ayon sa Katekismo ng Iglesia Katolika, IISA LAMANG ang DIYOS ('Munting Katekismo Mga Unang Bagay na Dapat Malaman ng Isang Katoliko', Daughters of St. Paul, Pasay City, p. 2), HINDI TATLO.

Ang IISANG DIYOS na ito ay isang Komunidad ng TATLONG PERSONA - ang Diyos Ama, Diyos Anak at Diyos Espiritu Santo. Ito ang tinatawag ng mga Kristiano na "HOLY TRINITY" o Santisima Trinidad.

At ayon pa rin sa Katekismo ng tunay na Iglesia, ang Panginong Jesus ay DIYOS ANAK na nagkatawang-TAO. Tunay siyang DIYOS at tunay rin siyang TAO.  Diyos sa kalikasan pero Tao sa kalagayan.

Dito umaapoy sa galit ang mga kaanib ng INC™ 1914 dahil sa hindi nila lubos na munawaan ang misteryo ng Santisima Trinidad.



DI MATANGGAP ng mga INC™ 1914 na tatag ni G. Felix Y. Manalo, ang aral na ito kaya't SUKDULAN ang PANG-IINSULTO nila sa pagka-DIYOS ng ating Panginoong Jesus.

HINDI lang nila BATID na ang isang MAS MALAKING INSULTONG ginawa nila sa Panginoong Jesucristo ay ang SABIHIN NILANG NATALIKOD ang TUNAY na iglesiang TATAG ni CRISTO.

Mas MAHINA ang kanilang Manunubos na 'Cristo'

Ang INSULTO ay narito sa kanilang aral na KINAKAILANGAN pa ni CRISTO ang ISANG FELIX MANALO para lamang MAGING GANAP ang kanyang PAGLILIGTAS. Hindi ba't INSULTO ito sa Panginoong Jesus? Ginawa nilang INUTIL at WALANG SAYSAY ang PAGKAMATAY niya sa KRUS para sa KALIGTASAN ng lahat.

Ibig sabihin, MAHINA ang kanilang MANUNUBOS sapagkat NAGHINTAY pa ang kanilang 'Cristo' ng ONE THOUSAND NINE HUNDRED FOURTEEN YEARS (1,914 taon) bago niya NA-REALIZE na WALA palang NALIGTAS sa kaniyang KAMATAYAN. Kinailangan pa niyang MAGHINTAY ng PAGSILANG ng isang FELIX MANALO para ITATAG (daw) muli ang kaniyang TUMALIKOD na Iglesia?!

Hindi ba't NAPAKALAKING pang-INSULTO sa kanilang "CRISTO"!?

Hindi lang siya mahinang TAONG-TAO sa kalagayan, NAPAKAHINA pa niyang MANUNUBOS sapagkat LIBONG-TAON bago niya nalaman na WALANG NALIGTAS sa kanyang pagsasakripisyo sa KRUS.

Ano ba yun, NAKATULOG ang kanilang 'Cristo' at DI NIYA NAMALAYAN na lumipas na ang panahon sa IKA-DALAWAMPUNG SIGLO bago na NAPANSIN na INEFFECTIVE pala ang kanyang pagliligtas? 

Kaya pala gayon na lamang ang PAGSINTA nila kay G. Felix Manalo.  Tumatanaw lamang sila ng MALAKING UTANG NA LOOB kay Felix Manalo sapagkat KUNG WALA SIYA, WALANG KALIGTASAN o USELESS ang pagkamatay ni Cristo sa Krus. NATUPAD lamang ang KALIGTASAN ng Diyos (kuno) kay G. Felix Manalo.

Pero tayong nasa TUNAY NA IGLESIA ay hindi naniniwala sa ganitong kwento. Alam natin na ang mga SALITA NI CRISTO ay MAKATOTOHANAN at HINDI LILIPAS ng hindi natutupad.

Kaya't kung sabihin ni Cristo na HINDING-HINDI MANANAIG ang kapangyarihan ng HADES sa KANIYANG TATAG na IGLESIA, hindi ito mananaig. Pero ang aral ni Felix Manalo ay NATALIKOD kuno.

At alam din nating mga TUNAY na KAANIB sa TUNAY na IGLESIA na HINDI SINUNGALING si Cristo, lalabas na si FELIX MANALO ang SINUNGALING at HINDI SI CRISTO!

Pambansang Palatandaang Pangkasaysayan na nagpapatibay na ang INC™ - 1914 ay TATAG ni G. Felix Y. Manalo
TUNGKOL SA PAGKA-DIYOS NI CRISTO

Ayon sa mga kaanib ng INC™, malabong DIYOS si Cristo sapagkat may mga katangian daw siyang HINDI akma sa katangian ng pagka-Diyos, halimbawa:
  1. Namatay
  2. Nagutom
  3. Nasaktan
  4. Tinuli (Circumcised)
  5. Umiyak
Tama rin naman ang kanilang obserbasyon.  Hndi rin natin ikinakaila na TAO nga si Cristo ngunit HINDI LANG SIYA TAO.  Take note, SINASAMBA rin nila si CRISTO sa kabila ng kanyang PAGIGING 'TAO LAMANG'.  Sa BATAS ng Diyos, TANGING ang NAG-IISANG DIYOS lamang ang DAPAT SAMBAHIN at wala nang iba.  Hindi ba't sa kanilang PAGSAMBA kay CRISTO ay patunay lamang (IMPLIED) na tinatanggap nila ang pagka-DIYOS niya? Halimbawa na lamang sa mga sumusunod na mga KATANGIAN hindi pang-tao:
  1. Gumawa ng Himala
  2. Nagpagaling ng may-sakit
  3. Nagpatawad ng mga makasalanan
  4. Lumakad sa Tubig
  5. Lumusot sa Dingding
  6. Nagpakita sa maraming tao iba't ibang lugar sa parehong panahon
  7. Inangkin ang PAG-IRAL niya BAGO pa man si Abraham
  8. Nabuhay na mag-uli
  9. Tao sa Kalagayan ngunit Diyos ang Kalikasan ayon sa Biblia
  10. Inaming siya ang ALPHA at OMEGA
Bagamat PINATUTUNAYAN ng Biblia na si Cristo ay TOTOONG TAO, WALA namang nababasa sa Biblia na nagsasabing HINDI DIYOS si Cristo. Katulad na lamang ng mga sumusunod na talata.

John 1:1, 14 (RSV) In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. . . . [14] And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, full of grace and truth; we have beheld his glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father.

Ito ang tinatawag ng mga dalubhasa sa Biblia na 'PROOF TEXT" na malinaw na NAGSASAAD na si CRISTO ay 'ETERNAL' o WALANG HANGGAN sa paggamit ng salitang "SA PASIMULA". Hindi lamang 'yan, ang LOGOS o VERBO ay tumutukoy sa 'ANAK' na siyang NAGKATAWANG-TAO sa versikulo 14. HINDI lamang siya isang PANUKALA o PLANO ayon sa mga mangangaral ng INC™ sapagkat ang isang panukala o plano ay UMIIRAL lamang siya sa ISIPAN ng nag-iisip. Taliwas sa mga pahayag ni Cristo na SIYA ay NARON NA, hindi lang isang panukala o plano kundi siya ay UMIIRAL na, HINDI sa LAMAN kundi sa ESPIRITU: "BEFORE ABRAHAM came to be, I AM' (Jn 8:58 emphasis mine). 

Siya (ang VERBO) ay NAGKAROON lamang ng LAMAN noong SIYA'Y MAGKATAWANG-TAO sa sinapupunan ng mahal na Birheng Maria. Kaya't ang Verbo = Cristo = Diyos = Nagkatawang-Tao!

John 10:30 I and the Father are one.
Sa pahayag na ito ni Cristo, maraming Hudyo ang NAGALIT sa kanya. 

Bakit?

Sapagkat NAUUNAWAAN nila ang ibig sabihin ni Cristo. Kaya't sa verse 33 NAIS siyang PATAYIN ng mga Hudyo: "...ikaw na TAO, ay NAGPAPAKUNWARI kang Diyos."

Si Cristo bilang isang UPRIGHT MAN, bakit HINDI niya ITINAMA ang mga Hudyo kung MALI man ang kanilang PAGKAUNAWA?  HINDI sila itinama ni Cristo sapagkat TAMA nga ang kanilang pagka-unawa.

John 20:28 Thomas answered him, “My Lord and my God!”
"Panginoong ko at DIYOS ko!" 

NAGULAT daw si Tomas ayon sa mga mangangaral ng INC™. Katulad raw ito kung tayo ay nagugulat, nakaksambit raw tayo ng "DIYOS KO PO". Bakit "Diyos" ba ang kidlat o kulog kung masambit man natin ito? 

Ganyan ang pagrarason ng mga bulaang mangangaral.

Sa katunayan, si Santo Tomas ay isa sa mga disipulo na WALA sa pinagtitipunan ng mga apostol noong nagpakita sa kanila ang muling nabuhay na si Jesus. Para kay Tomas, HINDI SIYA MANINIWALA hangga't makikita niya MISMO ng kanyang mga mata si Cristo. Eh NAGPAKITA nga sa kaniya si Cristo! Kaya't sambit ni Tomas ay 'PANGINOON KO AT DIYOS KO!"

Mali ba si Tomas? 

Kung MALI man ang pagsambit ni Tomas na DIYOS SI CRISTO, bilang isang UPRIGHT MAN, dapat sana ay ITINAMA siya ni Cristo para hindi na darami pa ang naniniwalang siya ay Diyos. Ngunit TAMA SI TOMAS sa kanyang profession of faith kaya't nasabi ni Cristo "MAPALAD ang mga DI NANGAKAKITA ay gayon ma'y NAGSISAMPALATAYA.

Colossians 1:19 For in him all the fulness of God was pleased to dwell,

Ano mang pagnanais ng mga mangangaral ng INC™ na maliin ang talatang ito sa pamamagitan ng PAGSIPI ng ibang mga SALIN ng Biblia, mananatili ang katotohanan na ang ANAK  (Jesus) ang tinutukoy rito (versikulo 13); ang ANAK at tinutukoy na WALANG-HANGGAN o eternal (versikulo 15, 17-18); ang ANAK ang tinutukoy na TAGAPAGLALANG (versikulo 16); at ang ANAK ang siyang NAG-UUGNAY NA PAGKAISAHIN LAHAT ng PRINSIPYO sa KALAWAKAN (versikulo 17, pakitingnan rin ang Heb 1:3): LAHAT ng KATANGIANG TUNAY lamang sa DIYOS. Hindi maaaring MAGKAMALI ang Apostol San Pablo rito sa versikulong nakasulat sa ibaba:

Colossians 2:9 For in him the whole fulness of deity dwells bodily,
[Sapagka't sa kaniya'y nananahan ang BUONG KAPUSPUSAN NG PAGKA-DIYOS sa KAHAYAGAN ayon sa LAMAN (tao)...]
At ang isa sa pinaka-paboritong talata ng mga mangangaral na INC™ ukol sa pagka-PANGINOON ni Cristo...

IISANG DIYOS - DALAWANG PANGINOONG SINASAMBA?

TWO-LORDS DOCTRINE ng INC™ AY HINDI SINASANG-AYUNAN NG BIBLIA.
May aral ang INC™ na hindi matatagpuan sa Biblia: ang DALAWANG PANGINOONG SINASAMBA.

Mula sa panahon ni Amang si Abraham hanggang sa panahon ni Cristo, HINDI NAGBAGO ang ARAL na kanilang ITINUTURO: ang KAISAHAN ng DIYOS o ang IISANG DIYOS.

At ayon sa mga PROPETA noong una hanggang sa panahon sa KASALUKUYAN hindi nagbabago ang katuruan: IISA ANG DIYOS.

At kung IISA ang DIYOS, dapat lamang na IISA rin ang SAMBAHIN! Ngunit bakit DALAWA ang SINASAMBA ng mga INC™?

Ang sagot nila rito ay FILIPOS 2:9-11 na ganito ang nakasulat:

"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."
[Because of this, God greatly exalted him and bestowed 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.]
GINAWA raw ng DIYOS AMA si Cristong PANGINOON...

Napansin niyo ba ang umpisa ng pangungusap?  KAYA SIYA NAMAN... o sa wikang Ingles ay BECAUSE OF THIS...

Ibig sabihin MAY DAHILAN kung bakit DINAKILA ng DIYOS AMA ang PANGALAN ni JESUS na SIYA ay PANGINOON din.

Mayroon silang PINUTOL na verse! Ito ay ang VERSE 6-8.

BAKIT kaya HINDI SINAMA ang VERSES 6-8 ng FILIPOS 2? Suriin natin...

"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."

[Who, though he was in the form of God, 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."]
AYON PALA! Iniiwasang banggitin ng mga mangangaral na INC™ ang mga talata ng 6-8 sapagkat MALINAW na SINASABI ni Apostol San Pablo na "BAGAMAT SI CRISTO AY NASA ANYONG DIYOS!"

Nasa ANYONG DIYOS, ay HINDI inaring kapantay niya ang Diyos kundi NAGPAKABABA --- naging TAO.

Naging MASUNURIN sa nais ng Diyos Ama!

Hindi lang basta masunurin, HANGGANG KAMATAYAN siya'y naging masunurin!

Hindi lang sa kamatayan siya naging masunurin kundi KAHIYA-HIYANG URI ng kamatayan -- ang IPAKO siya sa KRUS na kahalintulad ng mga KRIMINAL o mga MAMAMATAY-TAO!

VERSE 9 naman tayo...

KAYA NGA NAMAN SIYA PINADAKILA NG DIYOS...

BECAUSE OF THIS, GOD HIGHLY EXULTED HIM...

KABUUAN ng talatang ito: Dinakila ng DIYOS AMA si JESUS sapagkat SIYA, na DIYOS NANG UMIIRAL MAGPASAWALANG-HANGGAN ay nagpakababa, NAGING TAO - nagkatawang-tao katulad natin at NAGING MASUNURIN hanggang sa kamatayan sa Krus... DAHIL DITO SIYA ay DINAKILA ng DIYOS AMA...

Kaya po huwag tayong quote-quote lamang nga mga CHOP-CHOP verses para LINLANGIN ang ating mga mambabasa. Sapagkat MALAKING KASALANAN sa Diyos ang GAMITIN ang KANYANG SALITA upang MANDAYA at MAGSINUNGALING.

Tandaan, ang PANDARAYA at PAGSISINUNGALING ay HINDI katangian ng IISANG DIYOS. Ito ay KATANGIAN ng DIABLO na ama ng PANDARAYA! (Jn 8:44)

Magsuri po tayo sa KATOTOHANAN. Dito po tayo sa TUNAY NA IGLESIANG TATAG NI CRISTO at hindi tatag ng makasalanang tao lamang mula sa Tipaz. Manalangin, mag-nilay, at gumawa ng hakbang upang masumpungan ang KATOTOHANAN.

Pagpalain nawa tayo ng Diyos Ama, Diyos Anak at Diyos Espiritu Santo, ngayon at magpasawalang-hanggan.

My Blog List

My Calendar