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!”

Jose Ventilacion: Iglesia Ni Cristo Apologist Expert on Textual Criticism?

WHO IS DR. EUGENE ULRICH?
By Bro. Duane

Dr. Eugene Ulrich teaches and writes in the areas of the Hebrew Scriptures, the Dead Sea Scrolls, and the Septuagint. A member of the translation teams for both the New Revised Standard Version of the Bible and the New American Bible: Revised Edition, he also co-authored The Dead Sea Scrolls Bible. He is one of the three General Editors of the Scrolls International Publication Project and Chief Editor of the Biblical Scrolls.

He was twice elected as President of the International Organization for Septuagint and Cognate Studies and was invited as a Fellow of the Institute for Advanced Studies at the Hebrew University, Jerusalem. Recently, he was elected as President of the Catholic Biblical Association and as a Fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences.

Here is my question to Iglesia ni Cristo:

Why is it that up to now, the iglesia ni Cristo of felix manalo does not have its own bible translated by an Iglesia ni Cristo minister specially Mr. Joe Ventilacion who claim to be someone who studied textual criticism?

A Challenge of Bro. Duane to INC's Top Defender Mr. Jose Ventilacion!

My Message for Joe Ventilacion (INC™) Regarding His Education At Harvard University

Source: The Splendor of the Church Blog

When Kuya Adviser posted his article on his FB page, Ventilacion posted comments on his FB page about me. He said I was challenging him and asking questions about textual criticism and that I have to study more about this topic.

He is simply boasting that he studied at Harvard University. He posted this on his FB Page conspicuously.

I am just wondering who among bible and textual scholars from Harvard University favor the interpretation made by Jose Ventilacion.

I asked Dr. Eugene Ulrich, a former professor at Harvard University who among his colleagues do not agree with King Cyrus referring to “Bird of Prey” in Isaiah 46:11. It is clear that Ventilacion does not concur with this and instead, he makes it appear that Felix Manalo is the one just like what his Church is doing.

Here is the email response of Dr. Eugene Ulrich:

By the way, Dr. Eugene Ulrich is one of my mentors in Biblical Languages.

Now, you studied at Harvard but you did not follow your professors and mentors in textual criticism who said explicitly that Cyrus is really being referred to as the Bird of Prey in Isaiah 46:11 and yet, it is Manalo whom you are pointing at.

It is clear you studied at Harvard University not to learn from the experts and it is not for you to boast about it. So, you do not follow what you learned.

You attended the SBL Annual Meeting and you were given the go-signal by your Executive Minister, Eduardo V. Manalo.

If it was Dr. James Richard Saley who delivered the lecture and you attended that, participated and listened; is it not a slap on your face as a result of what is written in your Pasugo Magazine?

I asked Dr. Eugene Ulrich if he knows Dr. James Richard Saley. Dr. Eugene Ulrich told me they are good friends and he presumes Dr. Saley is a Protestant.

Does Dr. James Richard Saley know that you taught your listeners that Felix Manalo is the Bird of Prey in Isaiah 46:11? Can you ask him if he agrees with your interpretation? 🙂

So, Joe Ventilacion listened to a Protestant whom you addressed as Devil. And, you studied at Harvard University wherein some professors are Protestants.

I give you 2 weeks to answer my post at splendor that INC members can read. I pray that you will be enlightened as well as them someday or they will soon realize your false teachings.

Answer the following because you studied textual criticism at Harvard University:

1. Who are the Bible Professors and Textual Scholars from Harvard University favor your interpretation that Felix Manalo is the Bird of Prey in Isaiah 46:11?
2. Who are the textual scholars from Harvard University who taught you that you translated Mizrach in Isaiah 43:5 of Aleppo Codex as “Far East”? Give me the names of at least 3 textual scholars.
3. Who are the textual scholars from Harvard University whom you can prove translated the Greek word (Logos) in John 1:1 to “idea” as you did?
4. Who are the textual scholars (at least three) from Harvard University who can give testimonies that your LAMSA Translation is Accurate?

I will wait for your reply, Joe Ventilacion.

And, if you are boasting that we need to square off in a debate, do not give me any conditions that I should pay for the venue rental since there are many public venues which are free.

Just tell me when and I will submit my proposal to the nearest INC Local.

Prove that the LAMSA is accurate using Greek text and testimonies of Aramaic scholars if you are really intelligent in textual criticism and that I still need to study.

Sincerely,

Bro. Duane

INC™ Ministers, Deceivers!

PATUNAY NA SINUNGALING ANG MINISTRO NG INC™!

"Dakilang Pamamahayag" ng Iglesia Ni Cristo® Aalog-alog

The Iglesia Ni Cristo® was "founded by clan patriarch Felix Manalo in 1914" says Inquirer

Council of Nicea (Source: Shoebat)

Believe in the Bible? Whose Bible? Which version? What Translation? Not all Bibles are the same. Protestant Bibles are all incomplete and wrong while the origin of it, the Catholic Versions are the genuine one. And for most of the times, the INC™ of Felix Manalo carefully uses different Protestant Bible Versions to accommodate and justify their man-made doctrines.

And while the original Bible is always TRUE, those who corruptly translated it, and deceitfully interpreted it make it utterly BAD, really BAD, just like how Eduardo V. Manalo and his paid Ministers translated it as they pleased.

Believe the Bible, not detractors, Iglesia leader exhorts members

BOCAUE, Bulacan [Inquirer.net] —Iglesia ni Cristo executive minister Eduardo Manalo has urged church members not to believe allegations against the INC, saying that it is the Bible, not other people, that speaks the truth.

Addressing INC members in an evangelical mission at the church-owned Ciudad de Victoria complex on Saturday, Manalo said accusations putting the 101-year-old church in a bad light should be spurned by its followers.

“If what they say is true, you should not be seeing what is happening now. That is proof that this church has a God, (that) God is with us in this activity,” Manalo said.

Controversy has hounded the INC after some of its officials exposed alleged corruption in the church. The exposé linking some members of the church’s powerful governing council came after Manalo’s mother, Cristina “Tenny” Manalo, and brother, Felix Nathaniel “Angel” Manalo, were expelled.

The church was founded by clan patriarch Felix Manalo in 1914.

Expelled minister Isaias Samson Jr., an expelled minister and former editor of the INC publication Pasugo, sued eight church leaders after he and his family were allegedly held under house arrest. Samson said the INC leaders suspected him of publishing a blog criticizing the church.

Manalo, in his address that was broadcast to other INC venues, said: “If there’s a truth that you should believe in, it is what the Bible says, and not what people say.”

“The INC is the church which has hope … this church will inherit the Kingdom of Christ on the day of judgment because our church has a connection with God,” Manalo said.

“God has been fulfilling His promise to His messenger (‘sugo’) from the start… the Iglesia ni Cristo will be saved, God said it Himself. It came from the Bible, not from me,” Manalo said.

The venues—the 55,000-seat Philippine Arena and the 25,000-seat Philippine Sports Stadium—were filled before the event started at 7 p.m.

Read more: Iquirer.net

Follow us: @inquirerdotnet on Twitter | inquirerdotnet on Facebook

Did the Church burn the first printed copies of the Bible?

Full Question

A friend insists the Catholic Church burned the first printed Bibles and punished people who had them. Is there any truth to the story?

Answer

Nope. Printing with movable type was first used (say most historians, but not all) by Johann Gutenberg, a German Catholic. The first book he printed was the Mazarin Bible, so called because a copy was discovered in Cardinal Jules Mazarin’s library. More commonly known as the Gutenberg Bible, the book was printed more than 60 years before the Reformation began.

Read: CatholicSay

JEHOVAH’S WITNESSES ADMIT THAT YAHWEH IS THE MORE CORRECT WAY OF PRONOUNCING THE DIVINE NAME

JEHOVAH’S WITNESSES ADMIT THAT YAHWEH IS THE MORE CORRECT WAY OF PRONOUNCING THE DIVINE NAME

Charles Taze Russell, founder of Jehovah’s Witnesses:
“Cursed be any one who trusts in man” (Jer. 17:5).

While the whole Christian world commemorates the Savior’s birth on Christmas, JEHOVAH’S WITNESSES are busy as hell selling their publications on street corners. They would approach every Tom, Dick and Harry to entice them to buy their books, magazines and pamphlets. The Bible reminds us about these people: “through covetousness shall they with feigned words make merchandise of you” (2 Pt. 2:3).

Jehovah’s Witnesses believe that the proper name of God is JEHOVAH. But did you know that Jehovah’s Witnesses admit in 1950 that the more correct way of pronouncing the divine name is YAHWEH? They won’t tell you about it when they approach you. Thus, Jehovah’s Witnesses are hypocritical to claim that God’s proper name is JEHOVAH when at the back of their minds they know that there is a more correct way of pronouncing God’s name.

On February 9, 1950 the New World Translation Bible Committee of the Jehovah’s Witnesses wrote a Foreword to the official Jehovah’s Witnesses Bible, the New World Translation. In the foreword, the Committee categorically states:

“While inclining to the very pronunciation “Yahweh” as the more correct way, we have retained the form “Jehovah” because of people’s familiarity with it since the 14th century. Moreover, it preserves, equally with other forms, the letters of the tetragrammaton JHVH.”

The smoking gun: NWT Bible Committee admits “Yahweh” to be the more correct pronunciation of God’s name.

Straight from the horse’s mouth, the Committee that churned out the highly discredited New World Translation of the Jehovah’s Witnesses Bible unequivocally admits that is inclined to the pronunciation of “Yahweh” as the correct one. They explained their retention of “Jehovah” because of “people’s familiarity with it since the 14th century.” Did you get that?

Moreover, the Committee insists that “Jehovah” preserves the letters of the tetragrammaton JHVH. This is another error being brazenly passed around by the Jehovah’s Witnesses. Unlike German, the Hebrew language does not have a word for “J” (instead it has a letter for “Y.”).[1]

Judaism 101: The Hebrew Alphabeth (www.jewfaq.org)

The Jehovah’s Witnesses made a great cover-up. In the more recent editions (since 1984) of the New World Translation, the Jehovah’s Witnesses dropped the damning Foreword of the 1950 Committee. But the truth is already out! You simply cannot trust these “false witnesses.” Proverbs 14:5 (KJV) says, “A faithful witness will not lie; but a false witness utter lies.”

BEWARE!!! “In their greed they will make up clever lies to get hold of your money. But God condemned them long ago, and their destruction will not be delayed” (2 Pt. 2:3, NLT).

[1] http://www.jewfaq.org/alephbet.htm.

If the Church apostatized in the First Century, then why they're using the Bible that was ratified by the same Church in the Fourth Century?

"...if the Church did commit apostasy in the first centuries, then why does the Iglesia ni Cristo use the Holy Bible that was ratified by the same Church in the 4th century?"

A PRIMER ON THE BELIEFS OF THE IGLESIA NI KRISTO
PART TWO, Section I, Item No. 7

The Holy Bible ratified by the Catholic Church in the 4th Century during the time when the Church already "apostatized" (Source: CatholicSay)

Basic Apologetics for Everyone

By Aloysius Kayiwa-Staff Apologist 

(Source: The Splendor of the Church Blog)

What is Apologetics? Apologetics is a branch of Theology. It comes from an ancient Greek word (apologia) which literally means an apology. An apology (an ancient sense of the word) meaning to make a reasoned defense or justification of something. In the New Testament the word apologia is found at many places such as Act 22:1, 1 Peter 3:15 etc.

“In your hearts reverence Christ as Lord. Always be prepared to make a defense to anyone who calls you to account for the hope that is in you, yet do it with gentleness and reverence. ” (1 Peter 3:15, RSV)

Apologetics is all about knowing why we do what we do and believe what we believe. It is building the case for our Faith, learning how to explain and defend our Faith with confidence and ease. Apologetics is an important part of the Church’s work. In Jude 3 we are told to "Contend for the faith, which was once for all delivered to the saints."

To my Catholic brothers and sisters,we should always remember these facts:

1. The Bible is a Catholic book!

2. The One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church gave it to the world!

3. There is nothing in the Bible that contradicts anything in the Catholic Faith.

4. There is nothing in the Catholic Faith that contradicts anything in the Bible.

These are important facts to keep in mind because a lot of time people will quote loads of passages from the Bible to “claim” that the Catholic Church is wrong. As a Catholic Christian, you should point to them that you believe everything the Bible says, however, you disagree with their private interpretation of those passages.

The reasons you do not agree with their personal interpretations are:

I. The Bible verse has been taken out of context.

II. They are reading into the Biblical text what isn’t there in order to force the interpretation of the text to conform to certain preconceived ideas or theories.

If you are ever asked a question about the Catholic Faith that you cannot answer, don’t worry. There is an answer, you just need to go and find it. Use that situation as an opportunity to learn about your faith. Ask a Catholic Priest, a Catechist, an Apologist or get some good Catholic books and CDs that explain the Faith. As Catholic Christians, we need to read the Bible, study it, and pray it daily. It is our book. We need to use it to bring our precious separated brothers and sisters back to the Church. Also learn to detect heretical doctrines(1 Timothy 4:16, 2 Timothy 4:3) promoted by cults like Jehovah’sWitnesses, Seventh Day Adventists, Ang Dating Daan, Iglesia Ni Cristo, Mormons etc who exploit people with fabricated fantasies disguised as “gospel”. The condemnation of these wolves like Eli Soriano has been long hovering above them and their destruction has not been sleeping( 1 Peter 2:1-3)

Some basic Apologetics rules and advice:

1. Pray to the Holy Spirit to give you wisdom to choose your words and courage to share your faith.

2. Learn a little bit more about your Faith each and every day by reading the Scripture,Church History and the Catechism of the Catholic Church.

3. Aim at winning souls (for Christ) not arguments.

4. Always remember that the conversion of hearts is the job of the Holy Spirit not you. Just plant the seeds and let the Holy Spirit take care of the rest.

If you keep these things in mind, then you are on the right path of becoming a very effective Apologist and Evangelist for the Catholic Faith. Thank you.

Yes! We OWN the Bible! The CHURCH own it!

A 'MUST-READ' quotation of all members of Manalo's Church, the INC^{® before it's too late.}
The Bible Centenary and the Catholic Church

Amid the general jubilation over the three hundredth anniversary of the appearance of King James’s version of the Bible, I think it would be a pity if we did not make mention of that great Church to which, under God, we owe our possession of the sacred Scriptures—I mean of course, the Roman Catholic Church. Without striking one single jarring note, I hope, in the universal chorus, yet I feel it would be rather ungenerous, and indeed historically unjust, did we not turn our eyes at least in passing to that venerable figure standing in the background surveying our celebrations, and, as it were, saying, “Rejoice over it, but remember it was from me you got it.” As a Scotsman, who cannot forget that it is the Bible that has made Scotland largely what she is today, I yield to no one in veneration of the inspired Scriptures and in admiration of the incomparably beautiful Authorized Version. Still, honor to whom honor. We shall only be awarding a just meed of praise and gratitude if we frankly and thankfully recognize that it is to a council (or councils) of the R.C. Church that we owe the collection of the separate books into our present Canon of the New Testament, and that to the loving care and devoted labor of the monks and scholars of that Church all through the ages we are indebted, not only for the multiplication and distribution of the sacred volume among the faithful when as yet no printing press existed, but even for the preservation of the Book from corruption and destruction. It is, then, undoubtedly true to say that, in the present order of Providence, it is owing to the Roman Catholic Church that we have a Bible at all. And no one will be a bit the worse Christian and Bible-lover if he remembers, this notable year, that it is to the Mother Church of Christendom he must look if he would behold the real preserver, defender, and transmitter of the “Word that endureth for ever.” - HENRY GREY GRAHAM

Whose Bible do the Iglesia ni Cristo® paid Ministers use?

The third little pope: Pope "Tatay" Eduaro of the Iglesia ni Cristo^®.  Photo courtesy of http://inc.kabayankokapatidko.org

The Iglesia ni Cristo^® brags it's "biblical" teachings yet HAVE NO CONTRIBUTION to any of the existing Bible versions they are using in their "pamamahayag" ministry.

For the record, the Iglesia ni Cristo^® rejects Catholics and Protestants for their Theological position in the Deity of Christ.  He further branded them even "apostates" or enemies of the truth.

But IRONICALLY the INC^® are HELPLESS.  It's paid ministers, including their little pope Eduardo relies heavily on "apostates" Bible Versions!

Notice the common Bible verses they use listed below. The Tagalog versions aren't included here but NOTHING had been contributed by any of its paid ministers. As a MATTER OF FACT, NO INC^® MINISTER has been conferred with the degree of "BIBLE SCHOLAR".

In other words, these paid ministers of the Iglesia ni Cristo^® are called "BIBLE THIEVES" and "WOLVES" for taking things they didn't even sweat out! We Catholics DO the MISSION works and converted people to be Christians-- and then these wolves will come and confuse them and convert them to Manalo's Church- the Iglesia ni Cristo^®! The Scripture says it's better for these kind of fake ministers who caused others to stumble to be tied with stone on their necks and to be thrown into the sea (Mt. 18:6; Mk 9:42; Lk 17:2)

Mr. INC^® DECEIVER! Whose "HOLY SCRIPTURES" must we turn its pages? INC^®, have you ever thought of QUESTIONING your paid ministers 'HOW DID WE GET THE HOLY SCRIPTURES?' so you will know for a fact that your paid ministers are just Bible readers-- NOT teachers! (Photo Source: incmedia.org)

Revised Standard Version

(Oxford University Press, 1962). This translation is based upon a revision of the standard King James Version and is still a wonderful, very literal translation. It has also been republished in some new attractive editions and remains a standard for good Bible study because of its fidelity to the original text. —Yet it retains some antiquated expressions in English and makes no attempt to be inclusive in its language. This standard translation is found in many different editions, including various study Bibles. There is a Catholic edition, from Ignatius Press.

New Revised Standard Version

(Oxford University Press, 1989). This is a wholly redone translation in line with the Revised Standard Version but with sensitivity to inclusive language for human beings. It retains traditional language for God. Although it is fairly literal in its translation, the English expressions have been updated to reflect current American cultural preferences. It comes in several different study editions, which include introductory essays, extensive footnotes and brief commentary. —There is a Catholic edition.

New International Version

(International Bible Society, 1984). This version is intended to be ecumenical and to appeal to a broad range of English-speaking people. The translation is considered somewhat more conservative than the New Revised Standard Version. Its language is suitable for private study and for public reading. There is no Catholic edition.

New American Bible with revised New Testament and Psalms

(Confraternity of Christian Doctrine, 1991). This has become the standard American Catholic edition of the Bible. It is the Bible Catholics hear during Sunday Mass readings, and thus a popular choice among Catholics. It is a revision of the New American Bible (1952-70) done with a sensitivity to accurate yet easily understood language that can be used in public worship. It is also sensitive to gender-inclusive language wherever references to human beings are concerned. The Old Testament section of this Bible underwent recent revision, and one can expect a new edition of the entire translation to be published soon.

New Jerusalem Bible

(Doubleday, 1985). —A translation from the new French edition of this famous Bible, La Sainte Bible (1966), the text is the most poetic of the translations we are considering. Its poetic character lends itself to prayer. This Catholic Bible is also justifiably praised for its extensive footnotes, filled with informative background material.

Revised English Bible

(Oxford University Press, 1989). This translation contains British English that may seem unusual. Yet it is readable and reliable for study. There is no Catholic edition.

Good News translation

(American Bible Society, 2004). This is a totally new edition of The Good News Bible, published by the American Bible Society. A major goal of this translation is sensitivity to the hearers of God's Word. It employs popular contemporary English that is more colloquial in nature. It might appeal to young people. There is a Catholic edition. The earlier Contemporary English Version (1991) has a Catholic-edition New Testament.

ONE BIBLE, MANY INTERPRETATIONS from PerishableItems Wordpress Blog

Article that is a MUST to be read by anti-Catholics like the Iglesia ni  Cristo^® founded by Manalo in the Philipipnes.[Source: PerishableItems Wordpress Blog]

Mormons teach that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are three Gods, and that we too can become Gods in our own right someday.

You may reply to them, for instance, with James 2:19, “You believe that God is one. You do well. Even the demons believe that and tremble,” but Mormons will have some explanation for that New Testament passage which fits their theology.

Oneness Pentecostals teach that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are not three persons but three manifestations of one divine person, God.

You may ask them who Jesus is praying to in Matthew 26:39 when he says in the Garden of Gethsemane, “My Father, if it is possible, let this cup pass from me; yet, not as I will, but as you will,” yet Oneness Pentecostals will offer some answer for why Jesus is not praying to another person.

Jehovah’s Witnesses teach that Jesus is not God, not divine, but God’s first and greatest creature, and that the Holy Spirit is not a person but the active force of God the Father in the world.

You may answer with the beginning and end of the Gospel of John: with John’s prologue where we see “the Word was with God, and the Word was God. … And the Word became flesh,” and the gospel’s climax, John 20:28, “Thomas answered and said to [Jesus,] ‘My Lord and my God!’” However, Jehovah’s Witnesses will surely have some reply for these verses.

A diagram of the ancient, orthodox, Christian conception
of the Most Holy Trinity: One God, Three Divine Persons

In my personal experience, advocates of Mormon polytheism, Oneness Pentecostal modalism, or Jehovah’s Witnesses Arianism-esque theology have all been sincere, friendly, rational, and not unintelligent people. They were all well-versed in the Bible, regarded it as God’s infallible Word, and used it to support their beliefs. They all proudly claimed the name of “Christian.” However, the undeniable fact that their theologies contradict each other proves that these admirable personal traits are not enough to guarantee a true understanding of the Christian Faith. The problem is that there seems to be more than one possible internally-coherent interpretation of the Bible. Just as texts out of context can suggest several defensible, though incorrect, meanings; interpreting biblical texts outside the context of Christ’s one, holy, catholic, and apostolic Church leads to many errors.

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

Photo Source: STORIED THEOLOGY

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

PART 1

see bakit mo iniba? bakit naging KATHOLIKOS?? instead of Kath oleS

ok tanong ko sau yang sa greek EKKLESIA TOU THEOU o IGLESIA NG DIYOS? na BINILI NG KANYANG DUGO?? tatanggapin mo ba na DIYOS DUN AY MAY DUGO???

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

SAGOT; OPO DAHIL si Cristo PO ang nagbuhos ng mahalaga niyang DUGO.

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

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

TANONG; Ang Diyos po ba may DUGO?

SAGOT: wala pong laman at buto kaya po siya ay ESPIRITO

juan 4:24-Ang Diyos ay Espiritu kaya dapat siyang sambahin sa espiritu at sa katotohanan.

Lucas 24:39-Tingnan ninyo ang aking mga kamay at ang aking mga paa, ako rin nga: hipuin ninyo ako, at tingnan; sapagka't ang isang ESPIRITO WALANG LAMAN at mga BUTO, na gaya ng inyong nakikita na nasa akin.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

TANONG; Ang Diyos po ba may DUGO?

Natural wala.

Pero may dugo ba si Cristo? Natural meron.

Bakit?

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

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

“Have among yourselves the same attitude that is also yours in Christ Jesus, who, though HE WAS IN THE FORM OF GOD (emphasis mine), did not regard equality with God something to be grasped. Rather he emptied himself, taking the form of a slave, COMING IN HUMAN LIKENESS and FOUND HUMAN IN APPEARANCE, he humbled himself, becoming obedient to death, even death on a cross. 

Because of this, God greatly exalted him and bewtowed on him the name that is above every name, that at the name of Jesus every knee should bend, of those in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father. 

Mangagkaroon kayo sa inyo ng pagiisip, na ito'y na kay Cristo Jesus din naman: Na SIYA, BAGAMA'T NASA ANYONG DIOS, ay hindi niya inaring isang bagay na nararapat panangnan ang pagkapantay niya sa Dios, Kundi bagkus hinubad niya ito, at NAGANYONG ALIPIN, NA NAKITULAD SA MGA TAO: At palibhasa'y NASUMPUNGAN SA ANYONG TAO, siya'y nagpakababa sa kaniyang sarili, na nagmasunurin hanggang sa kamatayan, oo, sa kamatayan sa krus.

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

Nakita niyo?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

May paglabag ba sa Biblia kung sambahin si Jesus?

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

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

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

Wala!

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

Hindi rin po.

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

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

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

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

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

Para sa karagdagang kaalaman, mangyaring basahin ang mga sumusunod:

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

THE BIBLE: Our Debt to the Catholic Church!

Without the Catholic Church, there is no Bible -Tanbooks.com

Pope Benedict XVI - Successor of St. Peter holding the Bible with utmost respect and holiness.
(Source: Why Catholics Do That)

Article Source: CatholicTruth

Versions of the Bible are translations of the Bible into other languages. The following are the most important versions or translations of the Bible.

1. Septuagint. The oldest Greek translation of the Hebrew Old Testament is known as the Septuagint, and was made between 300 and 130 B.C. It derives its name from the seventy or seventy two translators to whom it is attributed. According to a legend, Ptolemy II (284-247 B.C.) wished to have a copy of the Law of Moses in his famous library in Alexandria. At his request the high priest sent seventy two scholars (six from each of the twelve tribes) from Jerusalem to Alexandria to translate the Law into Greek.

The Septuagint contains all the forty-five books of the Old Testament. It was used by the Apostles and early Christians and helped greatly in the spread of revealed truths among the Greek pagans. Many Jewish and pagan converts obtained their first knowledge of the Bible through the Septuagint.

Origin of the Bible: Honest Questions to Protestants and the Iglesia ni Cristo

1. What is the meaning of the word "Bible"? 
2. Was the Bible originally one book? When did the "volume" style come into vogue? 
3. What is the meaning of the word "Testament"? How were the Old and the New Testaments sealed? 
4. What was the original language of the Old Testament? Of the New Testament? 
5. What were the three styles of writing in antiquity? \
6. How were the books of the Old Testament grouped? of the New Testament? 
7. When was the Bible divided into chapters? into verses? by whom? 
8. What is a Biblical autograph? What materials were used in the composition of the original books of the bible? 
9. Name the four oldest Bibles. 
10. What is a version? 
11. Describe the origin of the Septuagint version; of the Old Latin version; of the Vulgate. 
12. Describe the origin of the Rheims-Douay Version; of the Confraternity edition of the New Testament. 
13. Name three Protestant versions.

Answers: Click HERE

1. Why was Luther opposed to St. James's Epistle? 
2. What change did the King James Bible introduce into I Corinthians 11:27? 
3. What changes introduced by the King James Bible were inspired by the Reformers' doctrine on original sin? 
4. Was the long ending, which Protestants today add to the Lord's Prayer, contained in the first and oldest Bibles? 
5. What is the correct division and interpretation of the Angelic Hymn, "Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace to men of good will"?

Answers: Click HERE!

As Catholics were responsible for writing the New Testament (under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit), the Catholic Church doesn't "interpret" the Bible. We explain it. Protestants can only "interpret", because they are not the author (guided by the Holy Spirit), and therefore, can only guess at the possible meaning of a chapter, passage or phrase, just as anyone can only guess at any author's intentions in any other book. As the author, the Catholic Church is the only proper authority to consult in matters pertaining to the Bible.

The Catholic Bible

"As Catholics were responsible for writing the New Testament (under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit), the Catholic Church doesn't "interpret" the Bible. We explain it. Protestants can only "interpret", because they are not the author (guided by the Holy Spirit), and therefore, can only guess at the possible meaning of a chapter, passage or phrase, just as anyone can only guess at any author's intentions in any other book. As the author, the Catholic Church is the only proper authority to consult in matters pertaining to the Bible."

-Catholic Truth

Jehovah or Yahweh?

"Whereas the name Jehovah appears in the King James Version and other Bible translations, some prefer to use the name Yahweh instead of Jehovah. Which name is correct?

"The most ancient Bible manuscripts were written in the Hebrew language. In the Hebrew Scriptures, the divine name occurs almost 7,000 times and is spelled with four consonants—YHWH or JHVH. These four-consonant words are commonly called the Tetragrammaton, or Tetragram, derived from two Greek words meaning "four letters." Now the question of accurate pronunciation arises because early Hebrew writing consisted of consonants with no vowels to guide the reader. So whether the pronunciation of the Tetragrammaton becomes Yahweh or Jehovah depends on which vowels the reader supplies to the four consonants. Today many Hebrew scholars prefer Yahweh as the true pronunciation."

-from Watch Tower, Jehovah's Witnesses official website "Identifying the Only True God"

Sola Scriptura: Whose Scriptures?

Photo Source: Scriptures Speak

Article Source: Catholic Apologetics.info

The KJV vs. NKJV

The reason this is so intriguing should be obvious, one of the two pillars of Protestantism is "scripture alone" yet these two bibles do not agree. If two bibles disagree, which one is wrong, are both wrong? Both claim that you cannot add to or take from the word of the Lord, yet they differ. Why? Which one is right? How much do they differ? Does it affect doctrine? Who changed it? Some of the verses are total opposites, other verses are simply not saying the same thing. 

For example in the NKJV compared with the (old) KJV there are 66 omissions of the word "Lord", 51 omissions of "God", 44 omissions of "repent", 50 omissions of "heaven", 23 omissions of "blood", and the terms "devils", "damnation", "Jehovah", and "new testament" are completely omitted.

How about that  "hell". The NKJV removes the word "hell" 23 times. By replacing "hell" with "Hades" and "Sheol"! The Jehovahs Witness "Bible" does this as well and  the New International Version is guilty of the same stratagem. Webster's New Collegiate Dictionary defines Hades: "the underground abode of the dead in Greek MYTHOLOGY". By making it "much clearer" - Do they turn Hell into MYTHOLOGY? But the should be nothing new to the readers of the KJV with nine refeances to unicorns and over 30 to dragons mythology is standerd reading . It must be noted, Hades is not always a place of torment or terror! The Assyrian Hades is an abode of blessedness with silver skies called "Happy Fields". In the satanic New Age Movement, Hades is an intermediate state of purification!

Who in their right mind would think "Hades" or "Sheol" is "up-to-date" and "much clearer" than "hell"? The NKJV makes over 100,000 word changes from the old 1611 KJV. There are 2,922 fewer words in the New Testament of the NKJV. Thus, the NKJV is shorter (In The New Testament) than that of the King James Bible by about the total number of words contained in I and II Peter combined!