IHS - Simbulo ba ng Pagano?

Ang kamangmangan ay isang katangian ng kadiliman sa kaluluwa. Paano ba tinawag na "pastor" si Ginoong Jomarie Abellana kung mismong sa kasaysayan ng IHS ay hindi niya napagtanto ang tunay na kahulugan nito ayon sa kasaysayan?

Ayon sa 'Born-Again Christian' self proclaimed pastor na ito, ang IHS daw ay sumisimbulo sa

I- ISIS

H - HORUS

S - SETH

Sino si Isis?

Sa kaalaman ng mga sumusubaybay sa blog natin, si Isis (o Aset ot Eset) ay isa sa mga diyus-diyusan ng mga sinaunang mga Ehipsiyo (Egyptians).  Si Heliopolis ang, ang paganong pari ng mga Ehipsio ang BUMUO ng MITOLOHIYA ni Isis. Ibig sabihin, gawa-gawa o kathang isip lamang ang pag-iral ni Isis na pinaniwalaan naman nitong mangmang na self appointed pastor kuno. (Source: Wikipedia. Magbasa nang may kaalaman at hindi matulad sa mga pastor (kuno) na nangangaral ng kasinungalingan!)

Sino si Horus?

Si Horus (o kilala rin sa pangalang Hor, Har, Her o Heru) ay diyus-diyosan ng mga sinaunang mga Ehipsiyo (Egyptians). Mula sa kathang-isip na diyus-diyosang si Isis, nabuo si Horus na sinasabing anak nila ni Osiris. Si Osiris ay isang ALAMAT (myth) at pinaniniwalaang umiiral (existing) ng mga Ehipsio noong libong taon bago pa ipinanganak si Cristo (BCE). Katulad siya ng ALAMAT ni MALAKAS at ni MAGANDA na alam naman nating hindi totoo.  Kaya si Horus ay anak ng isang alamat (Osiris) at ng isang likha ng isip (Isis) kaya't hindi po siya totoong umiiral. Sa katulad nitong self-appointed pastor ay masyadong mapaniwala sa mga kasinungalingan ng mga sinaunang tao kahit sa panahon ngayon ay mas madaling saliksikin ang katotohanan sa pamamagitan ng search sa Google. Subukan kaya niyang magbasa mula sa Wikipedia at nang hindi habang buhay na mangmang!

At sino naman si Seth?

Ayon sa Alamat ni Osiris, si Seth ay tiyuhin ni Horus (kapatid ni Osiris).  Kilala rin si Seth sa pangalang Setekh, Seteh o Set.  Sa mundo ng mga sinaunang Ehipsio, si Seth ay mortal na kaaway ni Horus sapagkat siya (ayon sa alamat) ang pumatay kay Osiris na ama ni Horus na asawa ni Isis. Bagama't libong taon na itong nawala sa paniniwala ng mga Ehipsiyo, itong self-appointed pastor kuno ay naniniwala pa rin sa isang kasinungalingan ng isang alamat na gawa-gawa ng mga taong wala pang kinikilalang Diyos noong panahon.

At para hindi mananatiling mangmang, hinihikayat namin ang mga galit sa tunay na Iglesia katulad ni Ginoong Abellana na MAGSALIKSIK sa Google at nang magkaroon ng kaalaman. Sa isang katulad niyang "pastor" (kuno) may inaasahan sa kanya ang tao ~ ang MANUMPA sa KATOTOHANAN at hindi sa kasinungalinga para manlinlang ng tao! Paano na kaya iyong mga inaralan niya? Sila'y katulad din niyang maniwala sa isang kasinungalingan ng isang alamat. Kawawang mga nilalang.

Ayon sa Biblia, ang sabi ng Panginoon sa mga katulad nilang mga nagtuturo ng kabuktutan, kasinungalinga at paglilinlang ay ganito:

"Pabayaan ninyo sila: sila'y mga bulag na tagaakay. At kung ang bulag ay umakay sa bulag, ay kapuwa sila mangahuhulog sa hukay." -Mateo 15:14

Ano bang tunay na kahulugan ng IHS na nakikitang nakaukit sa mga Simbahan at mga kasuotan ng paring Katoliko?

Ito ay ayon sa Talasalitaan ng Collins:

[IHS] a contraction derived from the Greek word ΙΗΣΟΥΣ, Jesus, used as a symbol or monogram: later misunderstood as a Latin abbreviation I.H.S. and expanded variously as Iesus Hominum Salvator, Jesus, Savior of Men; In Hoc Signo (Vinces), in this sign ( thou shalt conquer); In Hac (Cruce) Salus, in this ( cross) salvation

Isalin natin sa Tagalog para maunawaan ito ng mga mangmang na pastor.

Ang IHS raw ay isang pinaikling salita mula sa salitang Griego ΙΗΣΟΥΣ, Hesus, ginamit bilang isang simbolo o monogram: kalaunan ay pinagkamalan bilang isang pagdadaglat sa Latin na I.H.S. at pinalawak na iba-ibang pakahulugan bilang Iesus Hominum Salvator, Jesus, Savior of Men; In Hoc Signo (Vinces), sa karatulang ito (ikaw ay magtagumpay); In Hac (Cruce) Salus, sa kaligtasang ito (krus)

At sa mapanlinlang na pastor katulad ng nasa itaas, ay binigyan niya ng IBANG KAHULUGAN (Isis, Horus, Seth) upang MASAMA ang tunay n KAHULUGAN nito ΙΗΣΟΥΣ para PALABASIN na ang mga KATOLIKO ay SUMASAMBA sa mga diyus-diyosan ng mga Ehipsio!

Kung sa kasabihang: 'we are not judged by the color of our skin but by the content of our character,'  ang aming mensahe kay Pastor Abellana Jomarie Christian ay ganito: WE ARE NOT JUDGED BY THE MERITS OF OUR OPINION BUT BY THE CONTENT OF OUR CHRISTIAN CHARACTER."

Ang sa Diyos PAGMAMAHAL ang namumutawi sa kanilang mga bibig, itong pastor na ito, ang namumutawi sa kanya ay GALIT sa KAPWA.  Kinasangkapan siya ng Diablo para MANLINLANG sa pamamagitan ng PAGSISINUNGALING at PAGTATANIM NG GALIT SA KAPWA! Ikaw iyon Ginoong Pastor!

Hinulaan na ni Cristo ang pagdating ng mga BULAANG PROPETA, ito na po ang isa sa kanila, patunay na ang tunay niyang Iglesia ay nagpapatotoo sa mga sinalita ni Cristo na narito na nga sila, mga manlilinlang na dapat itakwil.

Q&A: Priestly Vestments, Is it Biblical?

Question: My Friend Born Again ask me. Why it is Important to Wear your Priests a Vestment?? And Where are the Biblical Verse???

Answers:

There's nothing unscriptural about vestments. God commanded that they be used in the Old Testament. Look at Exodus 28:2:

For your brother Aaron you will make sacred vestments to give dignity and magnificence. You will instruct all the skilled men, whom I have endowed with skill, to make Aaron's vestments for his consecration to my priesthood. These are the vestments which they must make: a pectoral, an ephod, a robe, an embroidered tunic, a turban, and a belt. They must make sacred vestments for your brother Aaron and his sons, for them to be priests in my service. They will use gold and violet material, red-purple and crimson, and finely woven linen.

The rest of the chapter gives details on each garment.

Nothing in the New Testament requires abolition of priestly vestments. Our Lord attacked the Jewish leaders for a number of sins, but he never condemned their priestly garb. It's true the early Church didn't use the Old Testament vestments, but this is because Christians didn't want to identify their leaders with the Jewish priesthood.

Part of the problem for Fundamentalists is that vestments set priests apart from the laity. Fundamentalists object to a ministerial priesthood in the Church. They see vestments as a way of expressing a distinction between clergy and laity.

On this they're right, but there's nothing wrong with such hierarchical distinctions. The New Testament is full of them (Acts 20:28; Eph 2:20, 4:11; Phil 1:1; 1 Tm 3:1-13; Ti 1:5).

Within Fundamentalism there's also an unhealthy opposition set up between the spiritual and the material realms. There is an anti-incarnational attitude which views the use of anything material as superstitious. The distaste for vestments is but one example of this.

Fundamentalists who say Catholic priests adopted distinctive dress in the fifth century to put themselves above the laity have got it backwards. Actually, it was the laity who changed their attire, not to distinguish themselves from priests, but to keep up with fashions.

Catholic priests simply retained their manner of liturgical dress. Priestly vestments are no more than stylized secular Roman garments which have accrued symbolic, liturgical significance over the centuries.

Source: We are Catholic Sheep

A 'Born Again' Protestant's hatred against Sacred Images

Catholic Answers: Born Again - The Bible Way

Article Source: Catholic Answers by Tim Staples

October 4, 2013

“Have you been born again, my friend?” Thousands of Catholics have been asked this question by well-meaning Fundamentalists or Evangelicals. Of course, by “born again” the Protestant usually means: “Have you accepted Jesus Christ as your personal Lord and Savior through the recitation of ‘the sinner’s prayer?”” How is a Catholic to respond?

The simple Catholic response is: “Yes, I have been born again—when I was baptized.” In fact, Jesus’ famous “born again” discourse of John 3:3-5, which is where we find the words “born again” in Scripture, teaches us about the essential nature of baptism:

Jesus answered him, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born anew, he cannot see the kingdom of God." Nicode'mus said to him, "How can a man be born when he is old? Can he enter a second time into his mother's womb and be born?" Jesus answered, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God.”

At this point, a Fundamentalist or Evangelical will respond almost predictably: “Baptism does not save you, brother; John 3:5 says we must be born of water and the Spirit.” The Catholic will then be told the “water” of John 3:5 has nothing to do with baptism. Depending on the preference of the one to whom the Catholic is speaking, the “water” will either be interpreted as man’s natural birth (the “water” being amniotic fluid), and “the Spirit” would then represent the new birth, or the water would represent the word of God through which one is born again when he accepts Jesus as his personal Lord and Savior.

Amniotic Fluid vs. Baptismal Water

To claim the “water” of John 3:5 is amniotic fluid is to stretch the context just a smidgen! When we consider the actual words and surrounding context of John 3, the waters of baptism seem to be the more reasonable—and biblical—interpretation. Consider these surrounding texts:

John 1:31-34: Jesus was baptized. If you compare the parallel passage in St. Matthew’s gospel (3:16), you find that when Jesus was baptized, “the heavens were opened” and the Spirit descended upon him. Obviously, this was not because Jesus needed to be baptized. In fact, St. John the Baptist noted that he needed to be baptized by Jesus (see Matthew 3:14)! Jesus was baptized in order “fulfill all righteousness” and “to give knowledge of salvation to his people in the forgiveness of their sins,” according to Scripture (cf. Matt. 3:15; Luke 1:77). In other words, Jesus demonstrably showed us the way the heavens would be opened to us so that the Holy Spirit would descend upon us… through baptism.

John 2:1-11: Jesus performed his first miracle. He transformed water into wine. Notice, Jesus used water from “six stone jars … for the Jewish rites of purification.” According to the Septuagint as well as the New Testament these purification waters were called baptismoi (see LXX, Numbers 19:9-19; cf. Mark 7:4). We know that Old Testament rites, sacrifices, etc. were only “a shadow of the good things to come” (Hebrews 10:1). They could never take away sins. This may well be why “six” stone jars are specified by St. John—to denote imperfection, or “a human number” (cf. Rev. 13:18). It is interesting to note that Jesus transformed these Old Testament baptismal waters into wine—a symbol of New Covenant perfection (see Joel 3:18; Matthew 9:17).

John 3:22: Immediately after Jesus’ “born again” discourse to Nicodemus, what does He do? "... Jesus and his disciples went into the land of Judea; there he remained with them and baptized." It appears he baptized folks. This is the only time in Scripture we find Jesus apparently actually baptizing.

John 4:1-2: Jesus’ disciples then begin to baptize at Jesus’ command. It appears from the text, Jesus most likely only baptized his disciples and then they baptized everyone else.

In summary, Jesus was baptized, transformed the “baptismal” waters, and then gave his famous “born again” discourse. He then baptized before commissioning the apostles to go out and baptize. To deny Jesus was teaching us about baptism in John 3:3-5 is to ignore the clear biblical context.

Did the Emperor Constantine found the Catholic Church?

Attention Iglesia Ni Cristo®, Born-Again Protestants and all those who LIE in the name of their religion! FACE THE TRUTH and it will set you free from the lies of your deceitful Pastors!

SVMMA APOLOGIA: Did the Pope claim to be 'God'?

Excellent apologetics by SVMMA APOLOGIA against anti-Catholic rhetorics by 'Born Again' groups from some Evangelicals who, until now are very harsh against the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church of Jesus Christ and its doctrines, and the Pope the Successor of St. Peter! -CD2000

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

DID THE POPE CLAIM TO BE GOD?

In a more aggressive effort by the anti-Catholics to destroy the Holy Catholic Church, they accused the Pope Himself, the Successor to St. Peter, claiming to be God. Below are the quotations they used which are taken from an alledged Catholic sources:

1. “The Pope and God are the same, so he has all power in Heaven and earth.” Pope Pius V, quoted in Barclay, Chapter XXVII, p. 218, “Cities Petrus Bertanous”.

2. Pope Nicholas I declared: ” the appellation of God had been confirmed by Constantine on the Pope, who ,being God, cannot be judged by man.”(Labb IX Dist.: 96 Can 7 Satis Evidentur Decret Gratian Primer Para)

3. The Pope is not only the representative of Jesus Christ, He is Jesus Christ himself, hidden under the veil of flesh.” Catholic National July 1895

4. “We hold upon this earth the place of Almighty God” Pope Leo XIII Encyclical Letter of June 20,1894

5. ”All names which in the Scriptures are applied to Christ, by virtue of which is established that He is over the church, all the same names are applied to the Pope.” On the authority of the Councils, book 2, chapter 17

6. These words are written in the Roman Canon Law 1685: "To believethat our Lord God the Pope has not the power to decree as he is decreed, is tobe deemed heretical."Father A. Pereira says: "It is quite certain that Popes have neverapproved or rejected this title 'Lord God the Pope,' for the passage in thegloss referred to appears in the edition of the Canon Law published in Rome in1580 by Gregory XIII."

HOWEVER, are those claims really true? Well, to be presented below are the responses taken from authentic sources. It's time for the truth to be revealed:

⚫ACCUSATION 1:

"The Pope and God are the same, so he has all power in Heaven and earth."

-Barclay, Chapter XXVII, p. 218, "Cities Petrus Bertanous," attributed to Pope Pius V.

RESPONSE:

As for the identity of this mysterious 'Petrus Bertanous', this author personally tends to believe that this refers to a certain 16th-century Dominican named Petrus Bertanus Fanensis (aka Pietro Bertano; November 4, 1501, Nonantola-March 8, 1558, Rome), who once served as bishop (later cardinal) of Fano in Italy -- the present-day diocese of Fano-Fossombrone-Cagli-Pergola — and who, among with other Dominicans, was apparently one of the leading prelates at the council of Trent and was an orator and advocate at that same council.

However, Michele Ghislieri, O.P. only ascended to the Chair of Peter in January 7, 1566, about eight years after Pietro Bertano died. How could someone who is not then a pope make a statement about the papacy, much less someone who was dead at the time Ghislieri became pope?

BORN AGAIN GROUPS and the IGLESIA NI CRISTO®: On Private Interpretation of the Bible

Just because you can quote scripture, it doesn't mean you are interpreting it correctly. Even the devil quoted scripture and used it to promote evil.

Anyone can take words from scripture and justify just about anything today. Misinterpretation of Scripture can result in selective acceptance of the truths contained there. Without an authority (the Magisterium) to help us interpret scripture, scripture can easily be interpreted as having opposite meanings. God is a God of order, not disorder. Truth (God) does not contradict Himself.

Do you know where the Bible came from, or when it was put together? It didn't just fall out of the sky. Who decided what books belonged in the Bible in the first place? If the Bible alone is the source of all truth, didn't someone/some kind of authority "outside" the Bible determine which books belonged in the Bible in the first place? How can this be if the Bible alone is the source of all truth?

It was the authority of the Catholic Church, in the fourth century, who determined which books belonged in the Bible. The Bible does not have an inspired table of contents. This list of inspired books is an essential religious truth not contained in the Bible.

Therefore, at least one essential religious truth - the contents of the Bible - is found outside the Bible. Think about this.

The Church came BEFORE the Bible. How did people learn about Jesus after he was crucified, but before the Bible was put together by Catholics in the fourth century? Oral tradition. Study early church history. This is so important. We trust the Catholic Church, founded by Jesus Christ, to tell us what books belong in the Bible, and assure us that everything in it is inspired.

Today there are over 38,000 different protestant churches, each with their own interpretation of scripture. Many lines in scripture are often interpreted based on how someone wants to live their life at the moment. Or if there is a disagreement on a particular passage or moral question, a vote is taken. Truth is not determined by a majority vote. Many times, if a church did not agree with something in their church, they would leave and form their own church and make up their own interpretations of what scripture means. God's word can't possibly have so many different interpretations. Truth doesn't work this way.

The Catholic Church strongly encourages everyone to read the Bible every day for private devotion, to memorize it, love it, and to study it diligently. At every Sunday Mass the Holy Word of God is proclaimed, with readings from the Old Testament, New Testament and Holy Gospel.

To trust the Bible is to trust the authority of the Catholic Church. We are so blessed to have Holy Scripture, Holy Tradition and the Magisterium!

[Source: Unknown]

UNITED IN HATE: Iglesia Ni Cristo (INC), Born-Again (BA), Jehovah's Witnesses (JW), Jesus Is Lord (JIL), Seventh-Day Adventists (SDA), Sedevacantists (SSPX), Islam (ISIS, Boko Haram, Al Qaeda, Abu Sayyaf, etc)

Dito niyo makikita ang mga NAGKAKAISANG mga PROTESTANTE LABAN sa IGLESIA KATOLIKA na siyang TUNAY na IGLESIANG TATAG NI CRISTO.

Bagamat alam na alam nilang ang IGLESIA KATOLIKA ang TUNAY, kaya pilit nilang MINAMALI ang mga ARAL nito at PINAPALABAS na ang LAHAT ng mga KATURUAN at PAGSAMBA ng mga KATOLIKO ay LABAG sa BIBLIA.

Kailangan nilang MANLINLANG at MANDAYA para lamang MAKAAKIT ng kaanib. 

Wala po sila sa PANIG ng KATOTOHANAN. Nasa panig po sila ng KASINUNGALINGAN at PANDARAYA!

At dahil alam nilang TAYO ANG NAGBUO ng BANAL NA BIBLIA kaya't hindi nila ito INAARAL sa kanilang mga kaanib!

Magpuri po tayong mga Katoliko sapagkat KUNG PAANO INUSIG ang DIOS nating si CRISTO ay hindi po tayo makananaig. Ang ating PAGDURUSA natin dahil sa PAG-UUSIG ay isang PAGTATAGUMPAY ng KANYANG IGLESIA. 

Patunay lamang ito dahil ngayon po ay nasa 2,015 YEARS na po ang ATING IGLESIA! -CD2000

John Ferrer Kapatid akoy 40 taon na bilang Katoliko pero ni isang salita at talata tungkol sa PURGATORYO, ROSARYO, ITIM NA NAZARENO, STO NINO, AT ANG PAGSASAMBA SA MGA REBULTO NG MGA SANTO AT NI INANG MARIA NA GAWA NG TAO ay WALA SA BIBLYA! Kaya akoy nagkusang umalis ay tinahak , hinanap ang TOTOONG MGA SALITA AT UTOS NG DIYOS- BIBLYA!

John Ferrer Isiah 42:8 ! " I am the LORD: that is my name: and my glory will I NOT GIVE TO ANOTHER, NEITHER MY PRAISE TO GRAVEN IMAGES" . But why the Catholic church even the popes themselves wön't stop people giving praises , worshiping graven images statues , relics of dead people even allowing people kiss the ring in their hands! Honestly i'm 40 years as a Roman Catholic, 40 years of being decieved and mislead by false doctrines! Everyone has the RIGHT TO FIND THE TRUE TEACHINGS OF JESUS CHRIST TO DISCOVER THE TRUE WORDS AND COMMANDMENT OF GOD, SO IN THE END MAY SAVE YOUR SOUL AND EVEN OTHER SOULS: WAKE UP MY BROTHERS AND SISTERS! GOD BLESS US ALL! 

John Ferrer The question is: why do all the popes tolerate people t worship graven images including what he's holding, even letting people kiss their rings or hands, why did they not stop the false teachings of their churches like praying repeated prayers like the rosary. Deutoronomy 5:7-9, Mathew 6:7-13, Acts 17:29, Jerimiah 2:27, Habacuck 2:18-19, Galatians 4:8, and Mathew 23:9 ( "and call no man your father upon earth: for one is your FATHER, which is in heaven')

John Ferrer CHRISTIANITY ang itinatag ni CHRISTO - ibig sabihin taga sunod ni CHRISTO at hindi Katoliko. hindi paninira ang pumuna sa maling aral na magiging dahilan ng ikipapahamak ng iba, oo ngat mahigit 2000 taon na ang Katoliko, d ba kau nagtataka at maraming umaalis sa relihyong ito dahil marami ang namumulat sa KATOTOHANAN na naaayon sa BIBLYA na kasalungat ng mga TURO, ARAL AT MGA DOKTRINA NG SIMBAHANG KATOLIKO.

John Ferrer wala sa Biblya ang salitang KRISTYANISMO kundi taga sunod ni KRISTO, sa makatuwid KRISTYANO ANG TINAWAG SA MGA TAGA SUNOD NI KRISTO ALANGAN NAMANG KATOLIKO O MUSLIM! ang tawag sa mga taga sunod ni Satanas syempre mga Satanista alangan namang Kristyano , kapatid, isipin mo nga kapatid

John Ferrer since 33A.D . pa pala kayo naliko! kung ang BIBLYA ang paguusapan naniniwala akong totoo lahat ng nakasulat ngunit kung sa mga turo ng katoliko, maraming salungat sa nakasulat sa BIBLYA kapatid. saan nyo mababasa na dapat magvenerate sa mga taong patay na, rosaryo na paulit2 na dasal, pagukit at pagsamba ng mga imahe gawa ng kamay, ang pagbinyag sa mga kapa2nganak na bata baka mapunta sa LIMBO, ang PURGATORYO ? pasensya na kapatid at isang buwan palang ako nagbabasa ng BIBLYA

Evangelical Convert: Adam Crawford

Article from Why I'm Catholic:

A lifelong Protestant, Adam came home to the Catholic Church when he was 39 years old. He currently lives in the foothills of the Sierra Nevada Mountains in Northern California with his wife of 20 years Missy, and their three boys. Adam also blogs at his site, A Faith-Full Life.

Your Starting Point Doesn’t Always Determine Your Conclusion…

Part One - Context

A pastor friend who had heard of my conversion to Catholicism cautioned me that, “Your starting point always determines your conclusion.” Often this is a maxim that I would wholeheartedly agree with. I too have recognized that frequently a faulty conclusion is indeed the result of an erroneous starting point. This certainly seems to be a maxim that can be applied to many endeavors involving human reason and logic – endeavors such as science, mathematics, philosophy, and theology. And yet, while this maxim seems to generally hold true, there are exceptions to the rule. In science for instance, one starts with a hypothesis (starting point) which often must be abandoned during the course of research, since your research may lead you to a very different conclusion indeed. In theology and religion, these exceptions to the rule are most often referred to as conversions – i.e. people whose starting point (like Saul of Tarsus) very much does not determine their conclusion!

Having said that, I wanted to start by providing a bit of context for my conversion story. I was extremely fortunate to be raised in a Christian home by parents who did an excellent job of acquainting me with the Holy Scriptures. Our Christian faith was a very central part of our life and identity as a family. Within our faith, I was exposed to both ends of the spectrum so to speak, both to legalistic and fundamentalist churches that were very dogmatic and certain about everything, and also to more “regular” denominations that were very certain about some things (the necessity of speaking in tongues) but not so certain about others (predestination vs. free will). Over the years, we attended various denominational and non-denominational churches, but they were all characterized by the idea that the bible alone was our only basis for truth, faith, morals, and authority. Many of these churches also tended to interpret Scripture in very literal terms.

Nevertheless, I frequently found myself at odds with the accepted theological beliefs of our Christian friends, many of whom could probably be best described as Evangelical Fundamentalists. As a result, I frequently felt that my own views bordered on the “unorthodox”, leading me to feel that I struggled with issues of faith more than most. In particular, starting when I was about seventeen, I really began to struggle with the idea of the Bible alone. I couldn’t seem to get a good answer as to where this idea had come from or more importantly where the Bible asserted this doctrine. I found myself at odds with the doctrine of sola Scriptura for primarily logical reasons. If it is, “the Bible and the Bible alone” then where does the Bible make this claim? If anything when I studied the Bible I found that it seemed to argue against this idea as it was full of times when God spoke both through direct revelation, and also times when He spoke through others (prophets, priests, judges, kings, etc.) to His people. In Scripture I saw that God revealed Himself through His creation, through His incarnate Son who dwelt among us, through the disciples who, “handed on … what [they] had in turn received:1” (oral tradition), through His Church, etc. Obviously this revelation was inscripturated and preserved for those of us who came later, and Scripture is indeed God’s revelation to us, but this was never the primary means by which God choose to reveal Himself. In other words, He didn’t, with the notable exception of the Ten Commandments, choose to simply drop a written users manual from heaven in order to communicate with us – and even that didn’t end up working so well!

Sweden's Pentecostal Megapastor Converts to Catholicism

The founder of a 3,300-member megachurch in one of Sweden's largest cities announced yesterday [Sunday, March 9] his decision to leave his charismatic congregation and join the Roman Catholic Church.

Ulf Ekman, who introduced Sweden to the prosperity-emphasizing Word of Faith movement when he founded Word of Life Ministries and Word of Life Church, had stepped down from the pastorate at the Uppsala church last spring.

"I have come to realize that the movement I for the last 30 years have represented, despite successes and much good that has occurred on various mission fields, is part of the ongoing Protestant fragmentation of Christendom," Ekman wrote in an op-ed for Swedish newspaper Daegens Nyheter.

In joining the Catholic church, Ekman, founder of Scandinavia's largest Bible school, said he plans to pursue unity among Christian movements and denominations. Meanwhile, Word of Life Church announced that it would hold a special meeting for parishioners on Monday.

Charisma and Aletheia report more details of Ekman's conversion. His announcement can be watched here.

Ekman was ordained a minister in the Swedish Lutheran Church in 1979 before leaving the denomination to found Word of Faith Church in Uppsala in 1983, according to his website. More than 9,500 students have graduated from the ministry's affiliated Bible school.... Continue Reading here...

The Difference Between A Born Again And A Christian

Post in Facebook Page


A Born Again Belongs to man made churches.

A Christian belongs to the Church founded by Jesus Christ, the Catholic Church. (Mt.16:17-19)

A Born Again hates the mother of Jesus Christ, accusing her of being worshiped, had other children, sinful and an idol.

A Christian honors her like how Jesus Christ honored and respected her. (Lk.1:28, 48)

A Born Again sees Mary as a competition against Christ

A Christian sees Mary as his loving mother and a sure guide to Jesus Christ. (John 2:1-12, John 19:26-27)

A Born Again Sunday worship is aimed to be emotionally touching and entertaining.

A Christian Sunday worship is solemn and sacred. It is not entertaining because the center of the Holy Eucharist is Jesus Christ not ourselves. (Matthew 26:26-28)

A Born Again sees no importance in good works.

A Christian puts his faith into practice by living a life filled with good works (Mt. 25:31-45, Rom.2:7, James 2:24)

A Born Again arrogantly boast that they are already saved and they can no longer lose their salvation.

A Christian before God accepts his weakness and failures and by God’s grace hopes to be saved like that of St. Paul. (Titus 1:1-2, Titus 3:7, 2 Corinthians 4:16-18)

A Born Again forgets about their dead

A Christian believes that baptized individual (living or dead) are members of the body of Christ (unless by their own wrong doing severed their unity with Christ). (Heb.12:22, Rev.4:8)

A Born Again Believes that sufferings are punishment for sins

A Christian believes that suffering is a virtue wherein uniting our sufferings with that of Christ makes us a better disciple. (Col.1:24)

A Born Again proclaims himself to be forgiven from all his sins

A Christian confesses his sins to the priest as mandated by Jesus Christ. For it is not the priest per se who forgives us but it is Christ through the priest. (John 20:22-23)

A Born Again believes in the Bible alone and his personal interpretation of Scriptures.

A Christian submits himself to the authority of Jesus Christ through the Church. (Mt.16:17-19, Mt.18:18)

A Born Again has no assurance of receiving God’s grace

A Christian through the Sacraments is assured of receiving sanctifying grace. (John 19:34)

The list can go on and on it is up to you if you want to be a Born Again with their unbiblical beliefs and traditions. Or become a Catholic a true Christian a follower of Jesus Christ.

Idol Worship || Spoken Word

"Ang Katolikong si KAT" - Katryn M. Leonor's Story

Read this beautiful story how KAT was able to defend the Catholic Church against Born-Against and those who hated the Catholic Church. I am sure you can relate to her in her story. Iglesia ni Manalo members, please pay attention to bold phrases(emphasis mine). My apologies, photos were deleted to shorten the page but you are always welcome to visit Ang Katolikong si KAT

Ako si Katryn M. Leonor, 19 na taong gulang at naging Kristiyano noong ika-30 ng Enero taong 1994.

Marami ang nagtatanong kung bakit ako naging interesado sa pag-aaral ng Apologetics at sa pagtatanggol ng ating Simbahan. Hayaan niyong ilahad ko sa inyo ang aking istorya.

Sampung taong gulang pa lamang ako ay naglilingkod na ako sa simbahan bilang choir. Tuwing 3pm ay kumakanta kami sa Children's mass. Di naglaon ay sumali rin ako sa Legion of Mary at ako ay naging Junior Legionary.

Nang tumuntong ako sa highschool ay pumasok ako sa kaisa-isahang Katolikong paaralan sa aming bayan, at yun ay ang Saint Peter's School. Dito ay masasabing kong lumalim din ang aking pananampalataya at naging interesado din ako sa mga bagay tungkol sa ating relihiyon. Naging miyembro ako ng Theresian, SCA, naging student Catechist, naging lector, once naging commentator at siyempre sumali rin ako sa choir. Sumasali rin ako sa mga religion quizbees.

Sa loob ng apat ng taon ko sa paaralang ito ay masasabi kong nakatulong ito sa pagpapatibay ng pundasyon ng aking pananamplataya kaya noong ako ay makagraduate dito ay hindi ko pa rin itinigil ang pagsimba ko linggu-linggo. Hindi na nga lang ako nakakaattend ng novena para sa Mother of Perpetual Help dahil pumapasok na ko nun sa kolehiyo.

Hanggang sa nagkaroon ako ng boyfriend at siya ay isang Born Again. Sa una ay hindi ako sumasama sa kanya dahil ayaw ko talaga kasi parang pangit sa katulad ko na graduate ng Catholic school ang sumimba sa ganun.

Hanggang sa inakit niya ko sa Christmas party ng kanilang simbahan. Hindi ko naman siya matanggihan kaya um-oo na lang ako, gitarista nga pala siya ng music ministry nila. Yun pala, bago magparty ay may worship service muna sila. So ayun na nga po, natouch yung puso ko sa worship songs nila, una po na napakinggan ko ay yung "At the Cross". Naramdaman ko nun na parang anlayu-layo ko kay God that time. I felt guilty cause of my sins that I've done. Hindi naman po kasi ako sobrang religious nung mga panahong yun. Oo, nagsisimba ako pero I know just a little about our Catholic Faith.

That time,  hindi naman po ako nakakaisip lumipat sa kanila. May pinapanghawakan kasi akong pangako na binitiwan namin ng aking bestfriend noong 3rd year highschool kami. Oras yun ng Christian Living and Values namin. Nangako kami na "Ipinanganak kaming Katoliko, mamamatay din kaming Katoliko" (kabilang din sa pangako namin na walang magpaparebond samin ng buhok, pero hindi ko na sana ilalagay kasi wala namang koneksyon ito sa blogpost ko hehe)

Nung first time kong sumama sa kanya ay na-guilty din ako bilang Katoliko dahil pagkatapos kong sumimba sa Catholic ay dumiretso ako sa simbahan nila.

Pagkatapos po nun, kapag inaakit niya ko na sumimba sa kanila ay nagdadahilan na lang ako ng kung anu-ano para hindi ako makasama sa kanya.

One time, habang kami'y namamasyal ay nag-open siya ng topic kumbakit daw tayo nagpapahid ng panyo sa mga rebulto at bakit daw tayo lumuluhod sa harap nun. Sumagot naman ako based on my logic at salamat sa Diyos tama pala ang naisagot ko sa kanya. Sabi ko, "Hindi naman dun sa rebulto kami nananalangin kundi sa nirerepresenta nito"

Halos magsigawan na kami nun sa tabing kalsada kasi idinedepensa namin parehas ang aming panig. At the end naman ay naging okay rin kami, Sinabi ko "Hindi ako titigil sa pagtatanggol sa relihiyon ko. Sabi naman niya, "Ako rin"

Napaisip ako nun na magresearch pero nawala sa isip ko na magresearch kaya pagkalipas ng ilang araw ay party na naman sa simbahan nila. (Christmas party ng church nila doon sa sinabi ko kanina, ngayon ay Christmas party naman ng mga Youth people)

Nung nag-speech na yun pastora ay may sinabi siya na dati raw siyang Katoliko, sinabi niya na kung may nag-aakit daw na magsimbang gabi ay wag sumama. Nung Katoliko pa kasi siya ay inaantok daw siya pag simbang gabi at naiinis sa mga matatandang nagdadaldalan habang may misa.

Gustung-gusto ko sumagot nun pero siyempre, nagkontrol muna ko ng sarili, hindi naman kasi ako eskandalosa.

December 2010 yan nangyari. Sa loob ng isang taon ay nabibilang sa daliri ang pagsama ko sa ex ko sa simbahan nila. Tuwing may okasyon lang ako sumasama kasi I'm afraid na baka hindi ako makatupad sa promise namin ng bestfriend ko.

Ang nakakatuwa nito, ay sumasama sakin dati yung ex ko sa pagsimba. Nakakatuwa nga e, lumuluhod din siya pag may luhod (kahit medyo labag sa kanyang kalooban) Hindi ko na nga pinapaluhod pero lumuhod pa rin siya (ako ay lumuhod just like this)
                        
Ang isa pa sa nakakatuwa ay nakihawak kamay siya sa Ama Namin.

Meron akong lola. Actually hindi ko talaga siya lola, ninang siya nina papa sa kasal. Isa rin siya sa nakatulong kumbakit ako ganito ngayon. She's really a 'deboto' at isinasama niya ko sa Dawn penitential procession. Marami akong natutunan sa kanya. Isa rin siya sa mga nagpabago ng ugali ko. Siya rin ang naging dahilan kumbakit ako nagkaroon ng debosyon sa Divine Mercy. Marami rin siyang ibinahagi sa aking prayer booklets and pamplets. Sa kanya ako humihingi ng advice pag may problema ako, sabi niya magdasal ka lang lagi..

Eto siya oh.. please pray for her.. Sister Crispina Agawin..

Side view yan, lagi siyang nagbabasa ng prayer booklets kasi nga napakarelihiyoso niya ^_^

So now let's proceed, First Saturday of the month ay isinama namin ni lola yung ex ko sa dawn procession - nang nakayapak.

Sa loob ng isang taon ay wala namang gaanong nangyari, basta ang alam ko, mas lalong tumatag yung faith ko as a Catholic. Hindi pa ko nag-aapologetics that time. Pero dumating sa point na medyo nanghina ang faith nung sumasama ulit ako sa kanya. Napakabait kasi nung churchmates niya maging yung pastor. Nahihilig na rin ako sa worship songs nila. May isa nga dun na nagsabi, "Uy *pangalan ni ex*, dapat sa susunod naipatanggap mo na siya ha?". Hindi ko pa nagegets kong ano yun nung time na yun.

Minsan, tinanong ako ni ex kung "Tinanggap mo na ba si Hesus bilang Panginoon at personal mong Tagapagligtas?". Sumagot ako, "Oo". Tinanong niya ko kung kelan. "Sabi ko, "Nung ako ay binyagan." at tumahimik na siya. Ngayon ko lang nagets na  yun pala yung unang process para maging born again, na para raw 'saved' na ko. Sorry na lang sa kanya kung hindi niya ineexpect yung sagot ko =)
Yun pala yung sinasabi nung babae na "pagpapatanggap".

I'm already born again on January 30, 1994


..nung biniyagan ako. =)


Noong November 10 ay napadaan ako sa simbahan. Isa kasi sa paring nagmimisa ay kilala ko kaya nagsimba ako. Napaisip din ako, siguro ito na yung time para magtanong ako tungkol sa pananampalataya ko, para mawala na rin ang pagkabagabag sa dibdib ko. After the mass ay nag-approach ako sa bagong pari sa aming parokya, at yun ay si Father Topher Parraba.
                 
At yun na nga, yun ang kauna-unahang counseling ko sa isang pari. Sinabi ko lahat ng pagdududa at pag-aagam-agam ko sa ating pananampalataya na nagsimula nung sumama ako sa pagsimba sa Born Again. Isa na riyan ang tunugkol sa mga santo. Natutunan ko sa kanya yung 3 levels of reverence. Ang Latria, Hyperdulia at Dulia. Sinabi niya rin na magkaiba ang adoration sa veneration. Marami pa akong natutunan sa kanya at talagang naliwanagan ako. Dalawang oras din kaming nag-usap at pagkatapos nun ay nangumpisal ako sa kanya. Napakasarap sa pakiramdam. =)

Dun din ako nakapagdecide na simula ngayon ay magiging tagapagtanggol ako ng Simbahan. Dun ko rin narealize na ang Catholic faith pala ay higit pa sa linggu-linggong pagsimba, pagrorosaryo at pagsama sa prusisyon. Napakalawak pala at napakaganda ng sakop nito.

Simula nun ay mas naappreciate ko na ang pag-attend sa misa. Nagte-take note rin ako sa mga sinasabi ng mga pari sa homily at pinagninilayan ko pag-uwi sa bahay. Naging kumpleto rin ang pakiramdam ko lalo na nung nakakatanggap na ko ng Banal na Komunyon.  Kung dati ay naiinip ako sa misa, ngayon ay hindi na. Kung dati sumisilip-silip ako nang konti sa cellphone ko habang may misa, ngayon ay hindi na.

Umaattend na rin ako ng daily mass, yun ang debosyon ko although minsan ay hindi ko ito natutupad dahil late na kong gumising.

December 05, 2012 - isinama ako ng ex ko sa simbahan nila sa kabilang bayan, meeting lang daw so sumama ako. Di ko naman inexpect na may konting kantahan at Bible sharing  ulit. Pinagdala niya ko ng Bible. So dinala ko yung Catholic Bible ko. Kumpleto yan =)

Nung nagkaroon ng sharing, nagpreach na naman yung pastora at nakaramdam ako ng pailalim na pag-atake sa mga Katoliko. Na kesyo yung nanay daw niya ay deboto noon, araw-araw nagrorosaryo. Tinuturuan nga daw siya magrosaryo tapos may pinapamemorya raw na pagkahaba-habang dasal kaya inaantok siya. Nagpapasalamat nga daw siya dahil two years bago  namatay yung nanay niya ay 'naliwanagan' daw ito (naging born again). Binasa niya ang Bible from cover to cover. Wag din daw maniwala sa santo, hindi daw sila dapat sambahin kasi ang Diyos lang ang dapat sambahin). (sino bang may sabing sambahin ang mga santo? Gumagawa ka ng sariling kwento). Wag din daw maniwala sa Purgatoryo, wala naman daw ito sa Bibliya. Alam ko naman na ako yung pinapatamaan niya, she is trying to persuade me to convert. But sad to say, mas lalong lumakas yugn desire kong maging defender ng Simbahan.

Medyo nagalit ako nun, kasi bakit ganun, antaas ng paggalang ko sa kanila dahil napakalapit nila kay God pero ganun pala ang tingin nila sa mga Katoliko? Ang pagtingin kong iyon ay biglang bumugso. Sa tingin ba nila, gusto yun ni God? Na manghusga sila at mantuligsa? Kaya pala ganun mag-isip yung ex ko e na-brainwash na ng ganung kaisipan.

Simula noon ay nagsimula na kong magresearch.  Itinype ko sa search tab ng FB yung salitang Katoliko at lumabas ito:


Ang 100% Katolikong Pinoy ang kauna-unahang Catholic page na tinambayan ko. Napakarami ko ritong natutunan. Nagtanong na rin ako dito at naipost nga sa page nila ito at ang kasagutan.. Halimbawa:


Makikita ang link sa :
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10150624332853643&set=a.10150527294783643.392908.96426468642&type=3&src=https%3A%2F%2Ffbcdn-sphotos-e-a.akamaihd.net%2Fhphotos-ak-ash4%2F425073_10150624332853643_1713261161_n.jpg&size=633%2C500

Isa ako sa naging certified tambayer ng kanilang page. Nag-oobserve din ako ng mga debate sa page at minsan ay nakikisabat ako pag alam ko ang isasagot. Binasa ko rin ang notes ng page na ito mula sa simula hanggang sa pinaka-latest na note.

Isang araw, nakita ko ang post ni Kuya Andrew Cagampang Calopez, inilagay niya yung link ng group na Ang Tunay na Kawan. Sumali ako roon at marami akong nakilala roon na apologist. In-add nila ako at ang isa nga sa mga unang naka-close ko dun ay si Kuya Carlo Rapay. Sumunod ay sina Bro. Elias Arzadon Jr at ang aking mentor na si Nolette Evangelista, formerly known as Teewee Diego.

Isa nga rin pala sa mga paborito kong dalawing blog ay yung blog ni Father Abe, ang The Splendor of the Church. Marami akong natutunang istratehiya kung paano sagutin ang mga heretiko na tumutuligsa sa ating Simbahan.

Hanggang sa ngayon ay patuloy pa rin ako sa pagreresearch hindi lang tungkol sa Apologetics kundi pati tungkol sa Catholic Faith. Marami na rin akong kilala at ka-close na apologist. I love what I'm doing. Siya nga po pala, wala na kami nung ex kong born again. I also have a calling to enter religious life. Ipag-pray niyo naman po ako. Thank you!

Gloria in Excelsis Deo!

"I was born a Catholic and I wil die as a Catholic."

Special thanks to:
God
Mama Mary
Saints
Guardian Angel
ANd to my co-apologists at Catholic friends, Ryan Michael, Randale, Mark Gelo, Kuya Carlo, Bro. Elias, Bro. Igi, Father Abe, Sir Nolette, Noah, Lay Person Scripturist, Kuya Mark Louie, Atty. Llasos, Jack Saliba at marami pang iba.


- Katryn M. Leonor

Kung bakit natalo si Manny Pacquiao (?)

Mula sa post ni Berto sa blog na Pilipinong Katoliko

Kung born again pa rin ako hanggang ngayon, matutuwa ako kay Manny Pacquiao.

Kasi iniwan na niya ang pagiging Katoliko.

Nakalaya na siya sa kabulaanan ng Roma.

Iniwan na niya ang biskwit na Hesus.

Hindi na siya nagsisimba sa simbahan ni “Boy Negro” sa Quiapo.

Hindi na rin siya nagsu-suot ng prayer beads ng mga pagano.

At higit sa lahat nakilala na niya si LORD (sa point of view ng mga born again).

PERO kung born again pa rin ako ngayon magtataka rin ako…

…kasi sabi sa Biblia.

“Walang sinumang sumasampalataya sa kanya ang mapapahiya.” (Roma 10:11)

“No one whose hope is in you will ever be put to shame” (Psalm 25:3 NIV)

Kelan ba niya nakilala si LORD (sa point of view ng mga born again)?

Sa pagkakatanda ko e bago yung laban niya kay Timothy Bradley eh si Lord na ang lagi niyang bukambibig. Lagi niyang sinasabi na “sabi sa akin ni Lord…” dahil napasama siya sa mga born again.

KAYA LANG…

Bakit naman kung kelan niya nakilala si Lord e saka naman siya natalo sa huling dalawang laban niya?

Yung unang pagkatalo niya pwede pa nating isipin na nagkamali lang ang mga hurado sa pagdedesisyon.

Pero itong laban niya kanina, malinaw na malinaw na natalo siya.

At ang nakakalungkot at masklap e para siyang humalik sa lupa nung huling bagsak niya.

Bakit? Bakit kung kelan niya nakilala si LORD (sa point of view ng mga born again) e saka siya natalo sa mga laban? sa nakakahiyang paraan ng pagkatalo?

Ibig sabihin ba yung buong panahon na lumaban siya na siya ay Katoliko, hindi niya kasama si Lord e madalas panalo siya. Matalo man siya hindi siya napapatumba.

Ngayong nakilala niya si Lord…walang sign of the cross, walang rosary….HILAHOD?!?!

Ganun ba yun? Di ba…

“Walang sinumang sumasampalataya sa kanya ang mapapahiya.” (Roma 10:11)

“No one whose hope is in you will ever be put to shame” (Psalm 25:3 NIV)

On Protestant Worship Places

"...the theater form, a fear of sacred images, asymmetrical layouts, vacuous sanctuaries, minimalist liturgical elements, prominently placed Jacuzzis for baptism, and the banishment of the Blessed Sacrament to the baptistry. The altar area becomes a stage with a focus on entertainment alongside praise bands that perform upbeat music..."

-The Institute of Sacred Architecture

EXPOSING THE BORN AGAIN MOVEMENT

Anti-Catholic posters in the USA
Photo Source: Keith Major;

Thanks to Catholic Eternal Truth Blog
History of Born Again:

The Born Again Movement traces its origin early in the 19th century. In reaction to Protestant Liberalism a group of Protestant theologians from various denominations (Baptist, Methodist, Episcopalian, Presbyterian, and Evangelicals etc.) wrote a 12 volume book entitled The Fundamentals.

The book contains a compilation of essays of Protestant doctrines and the Born Again Movement adapted their doctrines from this 12 volume books that is why some of their doctrines are similar to those of mainline Protestants. In the strictest sense Born Again Christians is an offshoot of mainline Protestantism, no wonder they claimed to be a non-denominational Church.

Being Christian is Exclusively Born-Again, Is that So?

I’ve met an Indian national recently at our jobsite. I noticed he was reading through a website with a big caption in it “Prayer Request”. I suspected him as “Catholic” after I notice a picture of Mama Mary and the child Jesus stuck on his side wall right website He was If you are Catholics reading this blog, I have a question for you: Have you ever asked yourselves why you called yourselves “Catholics” as a substitute of “Christians”?

Or which is more appropriate, to call yourselves “Christians” or “Catholics”? Or you doubt you’re an indisputable Christian?

Would you believe both represent the same? (Read Are Catholics Christian?)

In fact, when you say, “I’m a Catholic” you imply you’re originally Christian and it doesn’t reduce you as “pagans” or “idol worshippers” or Mary fanatics. Catholics should be humbled with such a mockery for even Jesus was mocked and died for our sakes. The truth is that we Catholics are the bona fide Christians in its truest sense. We have history to back us up.

Ok so let’s go back to the pages of history.

This is what I know. The early Christians never like St. Paul and other Apostles of Jesus Christ never called themselves “Christians” as their official name. In fact, it was the nonbelievers and the pagans in Antioch who came to call them as such (Acts 11:26). That’s according to the Holy Scripture. Possibly early believers were deliberately named “Christians” to distinguish them from others who followed great philosophers and thinkers in Greece. Or perhaps it’s used as a mockery in opposition to the new circulated teachings about monotheism against their pagan beliefs.

From the time of the apostles who preached in Antioch, there was only ONE Church, not two or more. It was ONE! (Read Here)Soon, there came dissenting ideas and teachings which were not according to the apostolic teachings handed down through mouth or by deed for there wasn’t a Bible yet during those time. And the name of that only Church was “Church” with a capital “C” in it. There’s no need of registering it because everybody knows Jesus founded the true ONE Church upon the rock of Simon who was named Cephas, Petrus, Rock (or rock if you prefer it that way, if you mean “Rock” with a capital letter “R” solely for Christ.)(Read Four Marks of the Church).

That’s why when early dissenters in the Church led by Arius and Nestorius, immediately, the only true ONE Church condemned their teachings so as to protect the genuine teachings from the fake.

As a means to safeguard the authentic Church’ identity from the fake ones, early Church Fathers liek St. Ignatius of Antiochissued a letter addressed to the Smyrnaens to the only ONE true Church and called it “Catholic” meaning “Universal” not local, not global, not national, not international, but it’s UNIVERSAL as against those dissenting local churches claiming to be true (but not historically rooted to the time of the Apostles).

In the year 1054 during the East-West Schism the Eastern churches (Greek Rite) had doctrinal dispute over the Filioque Clause in the Nicene Creed and so it dissented from the Western churches (Latin Rite) from Rome. And because of this huge breaking up of the two great and apostolic churches, the Latin Church (Western) upheld its unique role as the absolute authority from solving any doctrinal disputes. Such authority was exercised by the See of Rome because of Papal authority (conferred by St. Peter as the first Pope) given to the Church of Rome, acknowledge by Church Fathers even before the split. (see the Primacy of Simon Peter).

The Church which was named Catholic—Universal, not local) as oppose to those local dissenting Protestant churches which were founded by men and women in the early 18th-19th century, some claimed to be prophets (like Joseph Smith, some angels (like Felix Manalo and some as “son” of god (like Apollo C. Quiboloy), whose faithful were identified as “Christians” by pagan Antiochians in Greece whose roots directly from Apostolic Tradition.

Such was the authority of this ONE, Holy, Universal—Catholic and Apostolic Church that it conferred in 393 at the Synod of Hyppo and put an end to the disputed New Testament books, and was repeated at the Councils at Carthage in 397AD and 419AD. The full articulation of the canon was confered on 1546AD at the Council of Trent 46 OT Books and 27 NT Books.

This same ONE true Universal—Catholic, Holy and Apostolic Christian Church which set the final canon of the Bible, made official the long been belief that Jesus was true God and true Man, which formulated the Apostole's Creed according to the writings of early Christians and members of the ONE true Universal Church which is Holy and Apostolic; that Mary, Christ’s mother was immaculately conceived and that during her last breath, she was assumed taken body and soul to heaven as the new ark of the new covenant.

In October 31, 1517, another dissenter Martin Luther broke from the ONE, true Holy, Universal Apostolic Church because of scandals he himself witnessed and made himself Lord over his newly founded protesting church. He was excommunicated by the Vicar of Christ (the Pope). By his own authority, he translated Lutheran Bible and removed 12 books from the original canon of the Bible and named it “Apocryphal” or “hidden” (Deuterocanonical). He wanted to hide the truth from his lies like the Church’ teachings on Purgatory (which is found in one of the books he took away -- 2 Mac. 12.43–46). He almost does away with Catholic Epistles like James, Jude, Letter of Peter, and Revelation because according to him, he found it to be less important and therefore should be removed. But God was protecting his Holy Word; he didn’t allow this dissenter to decide by his own authority that one of his words would be labeled “lesser”.

Because of him and other schisms, today there are more than 3,000 churches popping rapidly like mushrooms Christian Denominations and still continues to divide constantly and called themselves as “Born-Again” and tried to patent the word Christian as solely to them! All of them profess being Christians. Everyone use the Bible (the incomplete Protestant canon)! Everyone quoted the Bible as their sole authority!

But historical facts remain; that the present Catholic Church traces its root from the time of the Apostles to this present age; that the present Pope Benedict XVI is the legitimate successor of St. Peter, the first Pope of the Universal Church; that the Bible was a collection of books by Catholic Church Fathers sealed its canon and named it “Biblia”.

That the Catholic Church labored so hard to divide the Holy Book by Chapters by the then Archbishop of Canterbury Stephen Langton and Verses by a dominican biblical scholar Santi Pagnini.

That the Protestant Church simply took the freedom to copy and translate them without proper authority of the ONE, Universal, Holy, and Apostolic Church established by Christ through St. Peter, which have caused division among its own members and churches.

As I’ve mentioned earlier about the Indian national I’ve met, he was quick to answer that he’s a Christian and not a Catholic which only shows his immense historical ignorance about Christianity and Catholicism (are one and the same). Apparently he fell short in his understanding about the faith. When I asked him if he’s a Catholic, what I actually suggest is that “Is he a genuine Christian whose roots is Apostolic?” In fact, St. Thomas brought the faith in India so he must have known that Catholics are originally Christians.

Most of “Born-Again” groups sprouting from Protestant circles exclude Catholics from being called “Christians”. In my thoughts, I should be smiling and bless God for giving me this Church Christ built on a solid rock, which is genuinely ONE, HOLY, CATHOLIC and APOSTOLIC!

Whatever angle you may want to start, from History of Christianity to Timeline of Christianity, the Catholic Church is present! Therefore we are historical!

So with firmness, I say 'yes'! I am Catholic and I trace my roots to the times of the Apostles!

And Yes! I am 100% Christian!