Martyrs for their Christian Faith-- that's the real Witnessing!

Posted on the SOLEMNITY OF THE FEAST OF THE ANNUNCIATION!

No recorded Iglesia Ni Cristo® Minister had undergone such a real witnessing! Accurately the INC™ official magazine summarizes that awaiting reward for "faithful servants of God... who die in the Lord..."-CD2000

"... a life of eternal and incomparable bliss awaits a faithful servant of God... yet only the true servants who remained patient and faithful in obeying the commandments of God until the end are assured and given by God the exclusive right to dwell therein: 'Here is the patience of the saints; here are those who keep the commandments of God and the faith of Jesus. Then I heard a voice from heaven saying to me, 'Write: Blessed are the dead who die in the Lord from now on..'' (Rev. 24:12-13 King James Version, emphasis ours). Source: PASUGO God's Message, April 2014, p. 1-2 (by Isaias T. Samson Jr., Editor-in-Chief)

New Martyr Fr. Ragheed Ganni and his Three Sub-Deacons (†2007)

Source: Facing Islam

"The Chaldean Church immediately mourned for them as martyrs. Benedict XVI prayed for them from Rome. Father Ragheed was one of the most limpid and courageous witnesses of the Christian life in a country among the most afflicted."

My sincere thanks to Curt for sharing with me about Fr. Ragheed's witness for Christ. He was not merely martyred for his faith, but he was a profound struggler and a courageous confessor, battling despair and fear within himself, and strengthening the faith of his flock by choosing to suffer with them and encouraging them with true pastoral love. You can immediately sense his powerful faith in the Risen Christ and the Eucharist. His is a powerful example for us of Christ-like love and self-sacrifice.

See also

• Memorial Facebook Page for Fr. Ragheed Ganni
• The Chaldean Church mourns Fr. Ragheed Ganni and his martyrs
• The Martyr of Mosul, by Patrick J. Buchanan
• Why I begged for help from a Martyred Iraqi Priest

The Last Mass of Father Ragheed, a Martyr of the Chaldean Church

They killed him in Mosul, together with three of his subdeacons. In a tormented Iraq, he was a man and a Christian of limpid and courageous faith. Here is a portrait of him, written by someone who knew him well.

by Sandro Magister

Chiesa Express Online

ROMA, June 5, 2007 – They killed him on the Sunday after Pentecost, after he had celebrated Mass in his parish church, dedicated to the Holy Spirit, in Mosul.

They killed Father Ragheed Ganni, a Chaldean Catholic priest, together with three subdeacons who were with him – Basman Yousef Daud, Wahid Hanna Isho, and Gassan Isam Bidawed. The assailants led Bidawed’s wife away, and struck down the four men in cold blood. Then they placed vehicles loaded with explosives around their corpses, so that no one would dare to approach them. It was late in the evening before the police in Mosul were able to defuse the explosives and collect the bodies.

The Chaldean Church immediately mourned for them as martyrs. Benedict XVI prayed for them from Rome. Father Ragheed was one of the most limpid and courageous witnesses of the Christian life in a country among the most afflicted.

He was born in Mosul 35 years ago. After graduating from the local university with an engineering degree in 1993, from 1996 to 2003 he studied theology in Rome at the Angelicum, the Pontifical Saint Thomas Aquinas University, pursuing a license in ecumenical theology. Apart from Arabic, he spoke fluent Italian, French, and English. He was a correspondent for the international agency “Asia News,” of the Pontifical Institute for Foreign Missions.

The day after his martyrdom, “Asia News” published this portrait of him:

"Christ challenges evil with his infinite love, he keeps us united and through the Eucharist he gifts us life, which the terrorists are trying to take away".

"Without Sunday, without the Eucharist the Christians in Iraq cannot survive": that was how Fr Ragheed spoke of his community’s hope, a community that was used to facing death on a daily basis, that same death that yesterday afternoon faced him, on his way home from saying mass.

After having fed his faithful with the Body and Blood of Christ, he gave his own blood, his own life for Iraq, for the future of his Church.

This young priest had willingly, knowingly chosen to remain by the side of his parishioners from Holy Spirit parish in Mosul, judged the most dangerous city after Baghdad. His reasoning was simple: without him, without its pastor, his flock would have been lost. In the barbarity of suicide attacks and bombings, one thing at least was clear, and gave him the strength to resist: "Christ”, Ragheed would say, “challenges evil with his infinite love, he keeps us united and through the Eucharist he gifts us life, which the terrorists are trying to take away".

He died yesterday, massacred by blind violence. Killed on his way home from Church, where his people, despite their decreasing numbers, bowed by fear and desperation, continued to come.

"It is our duty not to give in to despair: God will listen to our prayers for peace in Iraq."

"The young people”, Ragheed told us just days ago, “organized surveillance after the recent attacks against the parish, the kidnappings, the threats to religious; priests celebrate mass amidst the bombed out ruins; mothers worry as they see their children face danger to attend catechism with enthusiasm; the elderly come to entrust their fleeing families to God’s protection, they alone remain in their country where they have their roots and built their homes, refusing to flee. Exile for them is unimaginable".

Ragheed was one of them, a strong father figure who wanted to protect his children: "It is our duty not to give in to despair: God will listen to our prayers for peace in Iraq."

In 2003, after finishing his studies in Rome, he decided to return to his country: "that is where I belong, that is my place". He also returned to help in the rebuilding of his nation, the rebuilding of a "free society". He spoke of an Iraq full of hope with a captivating smile: "Saddam has fallen, we have elected a government, we have voted for a Constitution!" He organized theology courses for the lay faithful of Mosul; he worked with the young; he consoled disadvantaged families; this month he was engrossed in helping a small child with serious eye problems undergo surgery in Rome.

His testimony is that of an enthusiastic faith. The target of a series of threats stretching back to 2004, he witnessed the pain of relatives and the loss of friends, and yet he carried on to the very end remembering that there was meaning to be found in that suffering, that carnage, that anarchy of violence: it was to be offered up.

After an attack on his parish, on Palm Sunday last April 1st he said: "We empathise with Christ, who entered Jerusalem in full knowledge that the consequence of His love for mankind was the cross. Thus while bullets smashed our church windows, we offered up our suffering as a sign of love for Christ".

In the midst of the daily difficulties he himself marvelled at a growing awareness of "the great value of Sunday, the day we met the Risen Lord, the day of unity and of love between his community..."

"Each day we wait for the decisive attack”, he said just weeks ago, “but we will not stop celebrating mass; we will do it underground, where we are safer. I am encouraged in this decision by the strength of my parishioners. This is war, real war, but we hope to carry our cross to the very end with the help of Divine Grace".

And in the midst of the daily difficulties he himself marvelled at a growing awareness of "the great value of Sunday, the day we met the Risen Lord, the day of unity and of love between his community, of support and help".

Then the bombings multiplied; the kidnappings of priests in Baghdad and Mosul became more frequent; Sunnis began to demand taxes from Christians to remain in their homes, or face their requisition by militants. Water and electricity grew scarce, telephoning and communicating became difficult. Ragheed began to grow tired, his enthusiasm weakened, to the point where in his last e-mail to AsiaNews, May 28 last, he admitted: "We are on the verge of collapse." And he told of a bomb exploding in the Holy Spirit Church, on the feast of Pentecost May 27; of the "war" which broke out a week before, 7 car bombings, 10 explosions in swift succession, the three day curfew, "prisoners in our own home", of not being able to celebrate the feast of the Ascension, 20 May.

"I am certain about one thing, one single fact that is always true: that the Holy Spirit will enlighten people so that they may work for the good of humanity, in this world so full of evil".

He pondered the path his country had taken: "In a sectarian and confessional Iraq, will there be any space for Christians? We have no support, no group who fights for our cause; we are abandoned in the midst of this disaster. Iraq has already been divided; it will never be the same. What is the future of our Church?".

But then the strength of his faith endured, a tired but solid faith: "I may be wrong, but I am certain about one thing, one single fact that is always true: that the Holy Spirit will enlighten people so that they may work for the good of humanity, in this world so full of evil".

Dearest Ragheed, together with a heart which cries in pain, you leave us your hope and your certainty. By taking you, they aimed to wipe out the hope of Iraq’s Christians. Instead, your martyrdom nourishes and gives new life to your community, to the Iraqi Church and the Church throughout the world. Thank you, Ragheed!

Are we forbidden to pray from the Bible? Is the Holy Rosary a "pagan" prayer? -Iglesia Ni Cristo's Response

Here is another deception by a paid Minister of the Iglesia Ni Cristo® of Manalo taken from Pasugo Mailbox: (Pasugo God's Message, August 2004, Vol. 56, No. 8, ISSN 0116-1636, pp. 4-5)

LETTER TO PASUGO:

The Holy Rosary is a Gospel Prayer of contemplation with Mary on the life of Jesus Christ and Mary. 

How can the rosary be judged that it is of pagan origin?  I do believe that the rosary beads were very much in fashion then and even up to now, that's  why they are universally found and used in their own representations by Paganism; Buddhism; Hinduism; Islam; and Christianity.  Rosary beads are not the sole property of the pagans therefor the Holy Rosary can not be branded as such.

I have been praying the Holy Rosary since I was a child, even without thoroughly understanding the beauty and meaning of what it is.  Yet over the years praying the Holy Rosary played a big role in my family life as the source of the strength that held us together.  During my growing up years the rosary was just like all the other prayers that we must memorize so  that we can participate in the weekly rosary held at my grandparent's house on weekends.  As I grew older and well verse enough to lead the prayers I never thought that there is more to it than just words in sequence.  I started to reflect on the words that I was saying, even more so when our family must gather to pray the Holy Rosary for my father and grandmother who were in critical condition because of an accident.

It is also during our rosary prayer time that many secrets are revealed among us such as our hopes, dreams and aspirations as well as our faults and shortcomings.

As a family we pray as on for all our intentions as we also reflect, meditate and discern our mistakes and shortcomings asking for God's guidance and wisdom and always trusting in His mercy and His infinite love.

I cannot count the number of times when many unbearable [instances] became bearable and many things became possible.  The strength of our bond as a family and the Holy Rosary that we fervently prayerd in all sincerity and humility has a very powerful prayer force that we know will intercede so that my father and my grandmother can survive and surpass those most critical hours.

We never doubted the powerful prayer force of the Holy Rosary because the one who prays with us is no other than Mary, the mother of Jesus Christ.  For all our reason the Holy Rosary has been and will continue to be a part of our life time prayers.

No matter how I detest and disagree with your statements regarding the rosary, it is also true that I must consider the fact that your knowledge about the rosary comes from books and other references that unfortunately doesn't give justification to its definition or meaning.  There is more to the rosary than just the beads and its definitions and being a non-Catholic would make it complicated to grasp and understand.  I, for one took years to know and understand that the knowledge and understanding that I know now is only the beginning.

I am enclosing a Pastoral Letter which explains further the meaning of the Holy Rosary, what it is, the mysteries, meditations on biblical themes and other details from the point of view of a Catholic who prays the Holy Rosary fervently and regularly.  He is the best authority in terms of knowledge and experience.  Moreover, the always speaks from the heart.

I hope reading this can give you a better, clearer and broader  view and understanding of the Holy Rosary that we Catholics contemplate with Mary on the life of Jesus Christ.  It is also my fervent hope that somehow your despicable statement would be properly stated as befits its rightful descriptions and definitions. I hope you don't mind my sentiments but it is of utmost importance that the Holy Rosary be described or defined properly and rightfully, please.

"So I declare and testify in the Lord that you must no longer live as the Gentiles do, in the futility of their minds; darkened in understanding, alienated from the life of God because of their ignorance, because of their hardness of heart" Eph., 4:17-18 "and be renewed in the spirit of your minds", "and put on the new self, created in God's way in righteousness and holiness of truth." Eph., 4:23-24 (new American Bible)

Thank you and God bless.

Barbara C. Lim

Makati City, Philippines

IGLESIA NI CRISTO'S RESPONSE:

We understand your reaction to our reply to another letter sender concerning the Rosary.  it is a but natural to react in this manner when one's religious practice done with great love and sincerity is being considered as against the God's will.

The reference we cited were written by recognized Catholic authorities to show that the rosary is indeed repetitious and thus contrary to the statement of Christ in Matthew 6:7. To defy  Christ's admonition against repetitious prayers is not only unbiblical--it is choosing to be an enemy of Christ.  Repetitious  reciting of prayers, says Christ in the same verse, is the way pagans pray.  Apostle Paul states in Ephesians 4:17-18 that Christians must "give up living as pagans do with their futile notions" (Revised English Bible).

Thus, any praying in the same way as what pagans are doing contradicts Christ's admonition on how to pray properly.

"...the old pagans or Rome... before the Roman Catholic Church came into existence, constantly used beads in reciting the many prayers..." (Roman Catholics in the Light of Scripture, p. 137)

"The practice of using beads, etc., as a help to memory in reciting a set number of prayers is not distinctively Christian.." (A Catholic Dictionary, p. 717)

You explain that rosary beads have been very much in fashion before and up to know that is why they are universally found.  You also claim that they are not the sole or exclusive property of the pagans and conclude that the Rosary "can not be branded as such."  The fact, however, that there is no mention of it being commanded by Christ and the Apostles or used by the early Christians, and not even by the people of God in the Old Testament indicates that the Rosary was adopted by the Catholic Church not from the Holy Scriptures.  As you yourself know, history proves that the Rosary had long been widespread among pagans even before the existence of he Roman Church.

You expound that aside from the recitation of the vocal prayers, the Rosary includes meditation on the "mysteries" and putting into practice what is meditated upon and expressed in vocal prayers.  You then conclude that "the Holy Rosary is biblically based."

Meditating on important events in teh life of Jesus and other virtuous servants of God and living it out in the daily life are indeed noble activities, but there activities can be done even witout ritually reciting memorized prayers while using beads which the pagans also use.  God's people in the Bible practiced meditation and were prayerful, but non of them used vain repetitions or rosary beads in his prayers.

Moreover, at least two of your so-called "mysteries" involved in praying the Rosary are obviously not warranted by the Holy Scriptures.  In announcing the "Fourth mystery-- the Assumption of our Lady" in your so-called "Glorious Mysteries," you proclaim:

"We recall how Jesus has taken His Mother to heaven with body and soul as a generous reward for her devoted love to Him while earth." (How to Say the Rosary, p. 22)

But nowhere in the Bible can we find that "Jesus has taken His Mother to heaven with body and soul."  What the Bible teaches is that the dead are in the grave (Ps. 88.5, New King James Version), including those who are holy (Ps. 86:2; Acts 2:29, 34), and that the "soul clings to the dust" when a person dies (Ps. 119:25, NKJV).   Those who are worthy of salvation will enter the kingdom of heaven on the Second Advent of Christ (Mt. 25:31-34) or Judgment Day (Jude 1:14-15).

In the "Fifth Mystery-- the Coronation of Our Lady in Heaven" of your so-called "Glorious Mysteries" you announce:

"We recall how Mary enter[ed] heaven and is greeted by the endless jubilation of angels and saints.  Jesus sets upon her head the crown as Heaven's Queen." (How to Say the Rosary, p. 23)

Regarding the "Glorious Mysteries," your Pope John Paull II himself in his Apostolic Letter "The Rosary of the Virgin Mary" (the "Pastoral Letter" you sent us) states:

"In the Ascension, Christ was raised in glory to the right hand of the Father, while Mary herself would be raised to that same glory in the Assumption, enjoying beforehand, by a unique privilege, the destiny reserved for all the just at the resurrection of the dead.  Crowned in glory-- as she appears in the last glorious mystery--Mary shines forth as Queen of the Angels and Saints..." (p.16)

Again, these teachings are without biblical basis.  Even your Pope can not read from the Scriptures that Mary was "crowned in glory"... as Queen of the Angels and Saints" and that "Jesus sets upon her head the crown as Heaven's Queen." As a matter of fact, no less than Catholic priests and authorities testify to the fact that Mary's Assumption" or being "taken... to heaven with body and soul" is not found in the Holy Scriptures:

"There is no statement of the Assumption in Holy Scripture.  Moreover, if we consult the historical writings of the first five centuries, we find them void of any historical data to certify the fat of the Assumption." (God the Redeemer by Charles G. Herzog, S.J., p. 98)

"There is no explicit reference to the assumption in the Bible, yet the Pope insist in the decree of promulgation that the Scriptures are the ultimate foundation of this truth."  (New Catholic Encyclopedia, Vol. I, 1967, p. 972)

No doubt, the Rosary can be prayed with the best of human intentions, but this doesn't change the biblical truth that it is against the will of God and it is of pagan origin.  Neither the prophesies nor Christ, nor the Apostles taught it and therefore, the Rosary is a prayer as a commandment of men, who have not been commissioned by God to teach His words.

As to prayer made to God by people who teach and obey the commandments of men, Christ quoted these words from God: 

"But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men." (Mt. 15:6, King James Version)

Therefore, while there's still time, put away the commandments of men, and learn to accept the truth no matter how painful it may be. The truth will set us free (Jn. 8:32)

-Bienvenido C. Santiago

CD2000: What do we expect from a paid worker of Manalo Mr. Bienvenido Santiago? He's trained to hate the Catholic Church and must continue to demonize every teaching and doctrine of the original and only true Church of Christ-- which is the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church (PASUGO, April 1966, p. 46; PASUGO, July-August, 1988, p. 6; PASUGO, March-April, 1992, p. 22) or what he called as the "Roman Church" so that by deceit, he could convert cafeteria Catholics to Manalo's INC™ Church.

In fact, it was the same "Roman Church" which the Apostle Paul told all the churches of Christ to "send their greetings" (Rm. 16:16), not the Iglesia Ni Cristo® founded in the Philippines by an apostate self-proclaimed "Last Messenger" or "Huling Sugo" who left Christ's fold and founded his own. Neither the prophets, nor Christ nor the Apostles made mention of a certain Felix Manalo to come and perfecting the salvific mission of Christ who died for our sins but he remained a complete failure as implied by Manalo's assertions of his "Last Messenger" doctrine.

In his letter to the Church in Rome, the Apostle Paul made mention of how he was spiritually joyful for knowing that the faith of the "Roman Church" is heralded throughout the world (Rm. 1:8 NAB).

The Apostle Paul even confirmed how special the "Roman Church" is for God--"called to belong to Jesus Christ" and "...called to be holy..." (Rm. 1:6-7 Knox Translation)

So that at the last chapter of his letter (chapter 16), St. Paul the Apostles fondly sends the greetings of "all the churches of Christ" to the "Roman Church" for having a faith known throughout the whole world; for being called to imitate Jesus Christ; and to exemplify holiness. Have we not done that?

In fact, no other churches christianized much of the world except the Catholic Church alone.  The Church transmitted the faith through words and deed (the Living Tradition) for the first 400 years until the list of Bible books (which the Iglesia Ni Cristo® and other Johnny-come-lately churches use)  was finally compiled in the year 382 A.D. and 419 A.D. at the Council of Rome, Hippo and  Carthage.

Thanks to the ingenuity of Catholics such as Sir Johannes Gutenburg, who invented the first printing machine that helped in the mass production of the Word of God or which we Catholics called the "Bible"!

The term BIBLE wasn't a termed given by the Iglesia Ni Cristo® and their anti-Catholic cronies.  It was obviously Catholic in origin. They have no contribution to the Bible whatsoever!

The word "bible" was derived from Middle English, from Old French, from Medieval Latin biblia, from Greek, plural of biblion book (Online Miriam-Webster).

The Septuagint Bible version called it "in tà biblía tà hagía (Septuagint) the holy books" (Dictionary.com)

And since the Bible is a Catholic Book, a commission of Cardinals in Rome was created to ensure that the Bible remains to be a Catholic Church property, protecting for the proper interpretation and defense of it. (read Biblical Commission)

Mr. Santiago made mentioned of Matthew 6:7 about Christ's comparison with pagan prayers babbling, but failed to quote the next verses 9-15 where He taught the 'Lord's Prayer"

Does Mr. Santiago mean that verses from the Bible being repeatedly prayed goes against Jesus Christ who was the source of that prayer? Does he mean praying is OK as long as it's not repetitive? Where is it mentioned in the Bible that we're not allowed to read and pray from the Bible repeatedly? And so doing, everyone who repeats again and again verses from the Bible makes us an "enemy of  Christ"?

Here are the prayers being recited in the Holy Rosary:

• The Summary of the Doctrine of the Christian Faith (the Apostle's Creed)
• The "Lord's Prayers" (Mt. 6:9-15; Lk. 11:1-4; 
• The Greetings of the Gabriel to Mary  (Lk. 1:28)
• The Greetings of Elizabeth to Mary (Lk. 1:42-45)

Are they from pagan sources? Was Christ, Gabriel, Mary and Elizabeth pagans?

Ephesians 4:17-17-18 does not talk about prohibition from praying the Holy Scriptures but prohibition from living like pagans, just as how the paid ministers of Manalo do.  Demonizing the Church is not coming from Christ but from the Devil, their father, the deceiver!

I wonder why Santiago selectively refused to accuse the Joyful, Luminous, Sorrowful Mysteries of the same Holy Rosary as unbiblical while earlier he said that the rosary is a pagan prayer?  Does it mean, he conceded to the fact that these mysteries are biblical? What made him skip those mysteries and jumped only to the Glorious Mysteries-- the Assumption and the Coronation of the Blessed Virgin Mary as Queen of Heaven is quite revealing!

In Saint Pope John Paul II's Pastoral Letter called "Rosarium Virginis Mariae" (No. 23), he perfectly summarized the whole mystery surrounding the Doctrine of the Assumption.

And who else could understand that extra-biblical doctrine except those who assent to the teachings of the Church-- the Pillar and Bulwark of Truth (1 Tim. 3:15).  Pope  Saint John Paul II was a Theology giant unmatched to Mr. Santiago, whose biblical credentials is not even scholarly unrecognized.

Who says the Assumption and the Crowning of Mary isn't biblical?

In addition to Genesis 3:15, there are several other Scripture passages that point to the Assumption of Our Lady. For example, there is Luke 1:28, since her bodily assumption is a natural consequence of her being “full of grace.” Other passages include Revelation 12:1, in which Mary’s coronation implies her bodily assumption, and 1 Corinthians 15:23 and Matthew 27:52-53, which support the possibility of a bodily assumption. And lastly there is Psalm 132:8, which provides: “Arise, O Lord, into your resting place: you and the ark which you have sanctified.” Mary is the new Ark of the Covenant, who physically bore the presence of God in her womb before bearing Christ to the world. (Source: Catholics United in Faith)

And how about the name of Felix Manalo? Him being the "Last Messenger"? And the Great Apostasy? And the emergence of the original Church of Jesus in the Philippines? Where was it written explicitly in the Bible?

But here is biblical. The coming of the Deceiver who will deny Jesus coming in the flesh! Felix Manalo fulfilled the prophesy:

"Many false teachers have appeared in the world, who will not acknowledge that Jesus Christ has come in human flesh; here is the deceiver you were warned against, here is Antichrist." (2 Jn. 1:7)

Therefore, if Felix Manalo is the deceiver and Antichrist for denying Jesus coming in the flesh, what's left for his paid ministers to teach except deception and lies?!

As for Mr. Santiago and members of Manalo's Church, while there is still time, put away the commandments of men--deceiver and antichrist-- and learn to accept the truth no matter how painful it may be.  The pillar and bulwark of truth--the Church-- will set us free. (Jn. 8:32)

Letter to Pasugo: Why "Church of Christ" is Accurate

Here is another letter sent by a reader of Pasugo, INC's official magazine.

PASUGO/May 1994 | Volume 46 | Number 5 | ISSN 0116-1636 | Page 3 Why “Church of Christ” is Accurate I AM AN avid reader of Pasugo. It is really interesting, convincing and I admire it so much. By the way, like your many readers, I also have questions in my mind. It is about the mention of “Church of God” in most versions of the Bible instead of “Church of Christ.” I have noticed that whenever you refer to Acts 20:28 you always cite George Lamsa’s version which mentions “Church of Christ instead of “Church of God.” Well, why did Mr.Lamsa change the original version? Is he authorized to change the original version? Elgee Guzman Nueva Ecija Philippines Editor’s Reply: Acts 20:28 in the George M. Lamsa version of the Bible reads: “Take heed therefore to yourselves and to all the flock over which the Holy Spirit has appointed you overseers to feed the church of Christ which he has purchased with his blood.” Lamsa’s version which mentions “church of Christ is accurate because the one who actually shed His blood for the Church of Christ. God, being a spirit (Jn. 4:24), has no flesh and bones (Lk. 24:36-39) and thus has no blood. Other versions of the Bible that render the same portion of Acts 20:28 as “church of God” are not accurate for God has no blood. The Bible lists several names for the one Church built by Christ. It is called “Church of God” (I Thess. 2:14), “Church of the living God” (I Tim. 3:15). This Church of God is also of Christ because whatever is of God is also of Christ (Jn. 16:15; 17:9-10). It is called the Church of the Lord (Acts 20:28, American Standard Version) but the Lord referred to here is the one who shed His own blood for this church and this is the Lord Jesus Christ (Acts 2:36) who washed the members of the Church with His own blood (Rev. 1:5). Many Bible versions are done by people with a set of beliefs already in mind and this influenced their versions, thus changing the words of God. God’s words must not be made to contradict one another for God is not the author of confusion (I Cor. 14:33).

The biblical "church of Christ" is accurate but the INC's interpretation of the "church of Christ" which they love to translate to Tagalog (para magkatunog) "Iglesia ni Cristo" is NOT!

1. "church of Christ" (Acts 20:28 Lamsa Translation)

2. "churches of Christ" (Romans 16:16)

3. "Church of Christ" (Pasugo magazine in reference to Acts 20:28 quoting Lamsa's)

4. "Church of Christ" (Pasugo magazine in reference to Romans 16:16)

See the BIIIIG difference?!

In the Philippines where there are more than 78% of Catholics we also have a lot of IGNORANT ones. These ignorant Catholics are the easiest prey!

Much to our own frustration as Catholics is that these ignorant Catholics are CONTENTED on what was told them by Manalo's Church paid ministers. And when they finally embraced Manalo and his church, they become the fiercest anti-Catholics in the Philippines!

However, if you listen INTELLIGENTLY it is extremely DECEIVING to believe that when we say "church of Christ" or "Church of Christ" we mean exactly the same with the "Iglesia ni Cristo" of Manalo?

READ: Iba pang mga "churches of Christ" Iglesia ni Cristo rin kaya sila?

Manalo's INC Church CLAIMS every word "church(es) of Christ" being mentioned in Bible. They also CLAIM every time Catholic acknowledges the "Church of Christ" in its official pronouncements as THEM. Simply they translate "Church of Christ" (in reference to the Catholic Church) to Tagalog "Iglesia ni Cristo" so they conclude that the Catholic Church believes in the "Iglesia ni Cristo"

BUT why they are not CLAIMING every "Church of Christ" being registered in the United States as THEIRS?

At this time, you should be asking intelligently WHY?

ON LAMSA's ACTS 20:28

First you should be asking, Why only Acts 20:28 in Lamsa?  Who is GEORGE LAMSA? Is he a member of the Iglesia ni Cristo of Manalo?

No!

George Lamsa is NOT a member of MANALO's Church.  During his lifetime, Mr. Lamsa never heard of the Iglesia ni Cristo or even met Felix Manalo or any of the Manalo's in that respect alone. Lamsa for sure never acknowledged the claims of Manalo as the "Last Messenger."

Just as what this Pasugo Editor said "Many Bible versions are done by people with a set of beliefs already in mind and this influenced their versions, thus changing the words of God," George Lamsa's person version was INFLUENCED by his SET OF BELIEFS already in his mind.

Thus Lamsa's changing of the word "God" to "Christ" made to contradict God's word.

True, as Pasugo Editor said "God’s words must not be made to contradict one another for God is not the author of confusion (I Cor. 14:33)" however Lamsa's OWN distorted Bible version REFLECTS a god of CONFUSION, now being COPIED by the INC of Manalo --COPY-CAT (walang originality) church!

Iglesia ni Cristo of Manalo is sowing MORE CONFUSION nowadays having CONTRADICTING teachings, one teaching against another!

Yes, George Lamsa belongs to the ASSYRIAN CHURCH of the EAST which is HISTORICALLY an offshoot of NESTORIANISM.

Netorius was the heretical Bishop of Constantinople. His theology clearly showed that he DID NOT BELIEVE in the DEITY of Christ.  A doctrine COPIED by the INC of Manalo!

His theology was CONDEMNED by the CHURCH at the First Council of Ephesus in the year 431 A.D., 1,581 years before Felix Manalo thought he founded his Church in 1914.

We should not be confused NESTORIANISM from ARIANISM.  Nestorius was the Bishop of the See of Constantinople (Turkey) while Arius was the Bishop of See of Alexandria (Egypt).  Both were considered HERETICS by the CHURCH.

Here is something worth PONDERING:

(For Historical Records: Among the FIVE Ancient Apostolic Sees (Alexandria, Antioch, Constantinople, Jerusalem, and Rome -- ONLY ROME is still standing.  Rome is the SEE of PETER, LEADER of all the Churches. All other ancient See of Alexandria, Antioch, Constantinople and Jerusalem have lost their Sees eventually from invading Muslims and their cities nowadays are governed and controlled by Islam -- Rome indeed is the ETERNAL CITY chosen by God) for Christians!

During the time of INC's "Last Messenger" Felix Manalo, he was quoting ONLY Romans 16:16.  Lamsa's version was unknown to him.  Therefore, Lamsa's Acts 20:28 does not serve any benefit to Manalo's Church today since Lamsa NEVER acknowledged the Iglesia ni Cristo as historically the true Church.

For Lamsa, the true Church is the Assyrian Church of the East.

Today Christians in general DO NOT consider Lamsa's Version as scholarly accurate and faithful to the original Scriptures.  His Acts 20:28 which was originally written as "church of God" was deliberately changed to "church of Christ" for according to him, the Scripture should be in error since "God do not have blood", therefore it should be Christ's.-- "church of Christ."

But the Bible says "church of God" in Acts 20:28

Keep watch over yourselves and over the whole flock of which the holy Spirit has appointed you overseers,  in which you tend the church of God that he acquired with his own blood.

Because the same author, St. Paul believed too, that Jesus is God in the flesh (and blood)!

(Jesus) coming in human likeness; and found human in appearance..." Phil. 2:7

Jesus - in HUMAN LIKENESS, in HUMAN APPEARANCE, therefore Acts 20:28 is ACCURATELY written as "church of God"!

He was found to have abused the Scripture asserting his heretical theological stand according to "Nestorianism" which had been CONDEMNED 1,581 years as of this year 2012 AD.

ON ROMANS 16:16

Romans 16:16 has nothing to do with Manalo's founded Church-- the Iglesia ni Cristo.

READ: Alin ang Iglesiang binabati ng lahat ng mga iglesia ni Cristo?

"Greet one another with a holy kiss. All the churches of Christ greet YOU (emphasis mine)."

In Romans 16:16, the Bible confirms that "all the churches of Christ (ang lahat ng mga iglesia ni Cristo) were sending their greetings to YOU!

Who are these YOU being mentioned in Romans 16:16?

It's not the "Iglesia ni Cristo" in the Philippines rather, it's the CHURCH in ROME.

And that ALL THE CHURCHES OF CHRIST should be sending their greetings to "YOU"!

So if you think intelligently, you would be QUESTIONING the INC of Manalo why they are NOT SENDING its greetings to the (Church of ROME)?

ON INC's Biblical Reference about Christ being a Special Man and NOT God (Phil. 2: 9-11)

Manalo's INC Church usually finds CONVENIENTLY verses from the Bible which prove JESUS as a MAN only.

But then, from the same Bible, they cannot find any verse that DENIES His divinity as well.

So in order for them to justify their flawed logic and distorted theology, they said JESUS is not JUST an ORDINARY man but a very SPECIAL man.

To prove that, they claimed PHILIPPIANS 2:9-11.

READ: Iglesia ni Cristo's LIES and DECEIT

In VERSE 9, it begins with "... Because of this...."

Here is what they DON'T like you to read!

Verses 5-8

"...though he was in the form of God, did not regard equality with God something to be grasped. Rather, he emptied himself, taking the form of a slave, coming in human likeness; and found human  in appearance, he humbled himself..."

Philippians 2 CONFIRMS the DEITY of JESUS, saying JESUS is in the FORM of GOD, something we should GRASPED at. The Bible says JESUS CAME in HUMAN LIKENESS and JESUS God in HUMAN APPEARANCE!

Manalo's INC Church is a TOTAL absurdity and DEFECTIVE, HERETICAL and un-BIBLICAL.  The Iglesia ni Cristo is a FAKE church, founded by a man who PROCLAIMED himself as "God's Last Prophet".

Believe!

LEAVE the Iglesia ni Cristo at once and redeem yourself through his TRUE CHURCH-- the HISTORICAL CHURCH -- the APOSTOLICAL CHURCH -- the BIBLICAL CHURCH -- the UNIVERSAL CHURCH of JESUS CHRIST! -- it's the CATHOLIC CHURCH and no other!

Officially, that's CONFIRMED from the Iglesia ni Cristo:

PASUGO Abril 1966, p. 46: “Ang Iglesia Katolika na sa pasimula ay siyang Iglesia ni Cristo."

Letter to PASUGO: "Why not publish your own Bible?"

Letter to the Editor: PASUGO dated March 1996, p.2 YOUR PREACHERS USE different translations of the Bible in delivering a sermon. I was thinking that you do this to suit your own set of reasoning. But upon speaking to a member of your Church I was informed that it is necessary to use different translations of the Bible for there are Bible translations that contain mistranslated verses. If this is true, Why don't you publish your own Bible and put all the correct translation of the verses in it? And given the premise that there are translations that contain errors, how are we to know which one is right? Carlos Reyes Dagupan City, Philippines Editor's Reply: Your suggestion that the Iglesia ni Cristo publish her own Bible with all the correct translation of mistranslated verses is both well-meaning and appealing. It would be truly convenient and handy to have just one Bible with all the verses that we cite or quote from different translations gathered in one compendium. By publishing her own Bible, the Iglesia ni Cristo will in effect have a "sanitized" version of the Scriptures--tailor made for her teachings. This is the very thing that the Iglesia ni Cristo avoids, that is, to be accused of manipulating the Scriptures to suit her doctrines. How, then, are we to know which particular translation of the Bible to use, for example in delivering a sermon? Apostle Paul states the guiding principle to the doctrines of the Bible, thus: "This is what we speak, not in words taught by human wisdom but in words taught by the Spirit, expressing spiritual truths in spiritual words." (I Cor.2:13, New International version) Therefore, there must be no contradiction between the different version of the Bible because spiritual things are compared to spiritual truths. But one may ask, "Who is in a position to compare spiritual things to spiritual truths?" Are all preachers that we see and hear nowadays are qualified to compare spiritual things with spiritual truths, more so preach the gospel? Apostle Paul answers us, thus: "And how shall they preach unless they are sent? As it is written: 'How beautiful are the feet of those who preach the gospel of peace, who bring glad tidings of good things!" (Rom. 10:15, New King James Version) A preacher of the Gospel therefore must be sent by God. Why must he be sent by God? Apostle John states, thus: "The one whom God has send speaks God's words, because God gives him the fullness of his Spirit. (John 3:34, Today's English Version) Moreover, the messenger sent by God is entrusted with the ministry and message of reconciliation (cf. II Cor. 5:18-20) Therefore, even if there are translations of the Bible that contain mistranslated verses, the commissioned preachers of God can identify them because they have been given God's spirit for them to understand His will written in the Bible (cf. I Cor. 2:12)

CD2000 ANSWER:

The Bible did not fall from heaven as a book.  And this  Bible we have today DID NOT COME from other churches, not even the Iglesia ni Cristo. Whether they  like it or not, the BIBLE was made possible through the AUTHORITY of the CHURCH.  And this CHURCH is NOT the Iglesia ni Cristo of Manalo but the CHURCH founded by CHRIST-- the ONLY-- ONE, HOLY, CATHOLIC APOSTOLIC CHURCH of CHRIST.

In 382 AD, the CHURCH (not the Iglesia ni Cristo) through the leadership of Pope Damasus, a saintly pope.

Catholic BIBLE SCHOLARS convened and DECIDED which BOOKS should be part of the present Bible we have today. But the FINAL CANON of the SCRIPTURES was FINALIZED only during the COUNCIL of TRENT in the 16th Century (Read also SCRIPTURE TRANSLATIONS!)

Ang kapal naman ng mga mukha nila kung bababuyin lang nila ang Aklat na HINDI SA KANILA!

Therefore, there is NO WAY that the INC of Felix Manalo could publish it's own "Bible" just like the Jehovah's Witnesses founded by Charles T. Russel who deliberately CORRUPTED the SCRIPTURES!

If they do, they would CHANGE words such as "church of GOD" to "church of Christ" to suit their teachings.

Biblically speaking their paid MINISTERS are intellectually INCOMPETENT and so they've GOT NO RIGHT to do so. Whether they like it or not, history of the BIBLE PRODUCTION, the CHURCH has played an active role ever since.

The Bible Societies DO NOT even recognize their own paid ministers to have that SINCERITY, HONESTY and COMPETENCY to be called "Scholars" in that respect.  They do not have that LOVE of the SCRIPTURES but rather, they look at the Bible as their SERVANT!

In truth, the INC of Manalo are HELPLESS.  They are STILL HEAVILY RELYING on CATHOLIC and PROTESTANT versions of the Bible whom Manalo and his successors CONSIDER apostates!

YES, they LITERALLY RELY on BIBLES from APOSTATES!!!! That is one among the many HYPOCRISIES in the Iglesia ni Cristo of Manalo.

So, now that you know why they can't publish their own Bibles, you better have to think twice why believe it's the 'true" church when they've got nothing in history to prove that!

Read First the Church, then the New Testament!

A Letter to Pasugo and the Iglesia ni Cristo's response

As a cult, we all know that the the Iglesia ni Cristo® hates anything Catholic. In its Pasugo publication Vol. 62, Issue No. 1, January 2010, something is so odd to see.

The title of this year’s first publication was: Brother Eraño G. Manalo IN MEMORIAM. Highlighted words/phrase and added numbers in each paragraph are mine for an easier reference.

Take note of the following:

The date: January 2010 Anno Domini (A.D.--Year of the Lord) – our present Calendar is called the GREGORIAN CALENDAR, named after Pope Gregory XIII which is used as the International Standard Calendar to measure a month and a year.

The words “IN MEMORIAM” are LATIN words which literally means “In Memory of” in English. Latin is the ancient language of Rome and the Roman Empire but it's now considered a dead language. Only the Catholic Church uses it in all official pronouncements of the Church.

But that’s not what I am mostly interested. I am interested on how an Iglesia ni Cristo Minister answer a question by a certain reader from India (if it was true). Let me copy verbatim the question and how the editor answered.

THE LETTER:

Not in the New Testament

1. I’ve been reading Bible commentaries and other related literature since last year. I find it odd that what many Christians know about Jesus Christ mostly come from the New Testament, when in fact Christ himself said that things were written about Him in the Law of Moses and the Prophets (Luke 24:44). Does your church take account of the Old Testament passages about Christ? Are there such passages saying that Jesus is tasked to establish a church – your church for that matter?

Salman Singh
Maharashtra, India

Let me assume that Mr. Salman Singh is a real person from India. If that's the case, Mr. Singh (by his name) should be a decent from the state of Punjab where Singh is a not just a family name but it has some religious resemblance (Sikhism). I would like to believe that this Mr. Singh is not a Christian and so the response of the Iglesia ni Cristo should be particularly sensitive to who Mr. Singh is. Anyway, let's read the Editor's response:

Editor’s reply:

2. The books that have become what is now known as the New Testament were written by contemporaries of our Lord Jesus Christ or those who lived to witness His mission on earth and its continuance to the time of the apostles. Hence, while we do acknowledge that there are also things written about Christ “in the Law of Moses and the Prophets,” or in the Old Testament, this does not in any way preclude the importance of the New Testament, especially in so far as the chronicling of Christ’s life and ministry is concerned.

3. Quite surely, the things written about Christ in the Old Testament are never contradictory to what is recorded in the New Testament. In fact, the New Testament gives testimonies to the prophecies written about Christ in the Old Testament as having been fulfilled in Him—and these include pronouncements presaging Christ’s establishment of the Church He would build and will save.

4. For instance, in Deuteronomy 18: 18-19, Moses recorded God’s prophecy, thus:

5. “I will send them a prophet like you from among their own people; I will tell him what to say, and he will tell the people everything I command. He will speak in my name, and I will punish anyone who refuse to obey him.” (Deut. 18: 18-19, Today’s English Version)

6. This is pronouncement would later be interpreted in the New Testament as a prophecy concerning our Lord Jesus Christ, as given in Acts 3:20-23:

7. “And that He may send Jesus Christ, who was preached to you before, whom heaven must receive until the times of restoration of all things, which God has spoken by the mouth of all His holy prophets since the world began. For Moses truly said to the fathers, ‘The LORD YOUR God will raise up for you a Prophet like me from your brethren. Him you shall hear in all things, whatever He says to you. And it shall be that every soul who will not hear that Prophet shall be utterly destroyed from among the people.” (NKJV)

8. Note that one of the messages spoken by Christ concerns His Church and its significance for man’s salvation. In Matthew 16:18, He pronounced that He would build His Church so that the power of death shall not prevail against it. In John 10:9, He specifies that anyone who wants to be saved must enter “into the fold through [Him]” (John 10:9 , Revised English Bible). The fold He refers to is the Church of Christ (Acts 20:28, Lamsa Translation). Clearly, these teachings of Christ as chronicled in the gospels affirm that He is the Prophet being referred to in Deuteronomy, whose teaching people should hear, lest they be utterly destroyed or unsaved on the day of Judgement (1 Cor. 5:12-13; Rev. 21:8).

9. A prophecy recorded in the book of the prophet Isaiah also foretold about the election of Christ and the members of His Church. In Isaiah 60:1, God declared:

10. “Also your people shall all be righteous They shall inherit the land forever, The branch of My planting, The work of My hands, That I may be glorified.” (NKJV)

11. Take note that God here prophesied about His “planting and the “branch of [His] planting” who would have the right and privilege to glorify Him and would be appointed to become His heirs. The New Testament informs us that Christ identified Himself as “God’s planting” by pronouncing, “I am the Real Vine and my Father is the Farmer” (John 15:1, The Message). He further clarified that “His branches” are the people who belong to Him:

12. “I am the vine, you are the branches. He who abides in Me, and I in him bears much fruit; for without Me you can do nothing.

13. “You did not choose Me,, but I chose you and appointed you that you should go and bear fruit, and that your fruit should remain, that whatever you ask the Father in My name He may give you.” (John 15:5, 16, NKJV)

15. Christ being “the vine” and those who belong to Him being “the branches” were equated by Apostle Paul to Christ being “the head” and His Church being “the body”, thereby ascertaining that the people who belong to Christ—those mentioned in Isaiah 60:21 as “the branch of [God’s] planting”—are the members of the Church that Christ established:

16. “And He is the head of the body, the church…” (Col. 1:18, NKJV)

17. “For as we have many members in one body, but all the members do not have the same function, so we, being many, are one body in Christ, and individually members of one another.” (Rom 12:4-5, NKJV)

18. What we have presented here are just a few of the many things written about Christ in the Old Testament that are attested to by pronouncements recorded in the New Testament, particularly those concerning His establishing of His Church—the true Church of Christ.

There is a lot of confusion in the part of Mr. Richard J. Rodas' as its Editor-In-Chief. Paragraph 8, quoted Mt. 16:18 which he wrote "the power of death" shall not prevail.

New American Bible: ".. the gates of the netherworld shall not prevail against it"

Douay-Rheims Bible: "..and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it."

Jerusalem Bible: "...the gates of the underworld can never overpower it."

New King James Version: "...the gates of Hades shall not prevail against it."

New International Version: "... the gates of Hades will not overcome it.

In all five different versions of the Bible, they preclude that Christ's Church WILL not be overcome by the powers of death, hades, hell, netherworld. It is always in the future tense "WILL" because His Church would NEVER apostatized yesterday, today and forever for this is the promise of Christ to Simon Peter, the first Pope.

Now, let's compare paragraphs 7 to the rest of the paragraphs.

In Paragraph 7, the pronoun He refers to God who spoke to the prophets about Jesus Christ. Irrespective of its position in the sentence, the editor kept the pronoun He in big letter "H" and "e" in reference to God (not god).

Now, open your eyes and read the rest of the editor's response in the other paragraphs, the He (God) and He (Christ) has no distinction. God (He) and Jesus Christ (He) are given the same emphassis irrespective of its position in the sentence. And as a reader, I would interpret this according to Christian understanding of the Holy Trinity. And as a Catholic, those same emphasis given to He (for God) and He (for Christ) mean one and the same. That God and Jesus are One and that there is really ONE GOD-- in three divine person.

The confusion of PASUGO's Editor-In-Chief only highlights that of the truth in the Catholic Church that God and Jesus are ONE.

I hope Mr. Singh has opened his eyes and see the confusion of the Iglesia ni Cristo Minister as a guiding truth to his quest toward the right path to Jesus Christ, through His True One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church affirmed by the same PASUGO in its publication dated April l 1966, p. 46: "Ang Iglesia Katolika na sa pasimula ay siyang Iglesia ni Cristo. [The Catholic Church in the beginning was the true Church of Christ.]"

But wait. Have you notice something else? How many different versions of the Bible did they used Those highlighted in blue shows how they shifted from one translation to the other but never they quoted any Catholic version Bible.

Specifically, Iglesia ni Cristo loves the Lamsa Translation when they quote Acts 20:28.

Why?

It's because only in Lamsa Translation, Acts 20:28 was interpreted as "Church of Christ "instead of "Church of God" which originally written in Greek, "the church of God" (tan ekklasian tou Theou) not "the church of Christ" (tan ekklasian tou Christou)" [read more HERE and in YouTube]

Who is George Lamsa? Why the Iglesia ni Cristo loves his translation very much? Read LetUsReason. However, let's understand that George Lamsa belongs to the Nestorian church which his theological position on Christology was condemned by the Council of Chalsedon in 8 October to 1 November 451 A.D. Iglesia ni Cristo found an ally.

Thanks to Pasugo's Editor, it reveals the truth we all wanted. Praise God no one can hide the blinding light of truth in Jesus Christ and God.

To HIM, be the glory forever!