Fr. Samir Khalil Samir on UK's Gagging Mr. Wilders

The producer of the controversial and now being banned movie "Fitna" (watch here) has been barred from entering the United Kingdom to avoid "displeasing Muslims" according to AsiaNews. Mr. Geert Wilders, a member of Parliament in Netherlands who wished to visit London perhaps to promote his movie to a more "tolerant" and "free" country to his dismay was disallowed by airport securities for political reasons.

Earlier, issues such as the cartoon depiction of Islam's prophet (read here)caused widespread casualties particularly targetting Westerners with violence. Some churches were vandalized with hate and some received death threats. Among those who were killed were Theo Van Gogh who was slit with a sharp knife on his neck and was left dead on the street by his assailant. Another case which was reported from Turkey was Fr. Andrea Santoro who was gunned down by a teenager, believed to be acted upon the said cartoon scandal.

In reaction to these violence done in the name of "Islam", none among any Muslims denounce the violence itself nor they condemned those "terrorists" doing such henious crimes in the name of "Islam". Fr. Samir Khalil Samir a Catholic priest, an Islamologist isn't happy with the gagging of Mr. Wilders. Here's what he has to say about the issue:

(AsiaNews) "One thing is clear: the decision of the British foreign office to block the visit of Dutch parliamentarian Geert Wilders is a political reaction, dictated by political motives. The question that can be asked is whether this is a good policy. It could be that this expedient on the part of Great Britain is the only way to avoid religious conflict, but it seems worthwhile to me to make an observation.

I saw the film "Fitna" a year ago, and recently I have viewed a few clips from it again. The film is rather violent and crude, on purpose: its intention is to demonstrate that Islam is a violent religion in itself.

I don't like the film. For one thing, it depicts a reality with many citations from the Qur'an, to demonstrate the violence of this religion. Without a doubt, the reality presented in "Fitna" is partial, and in no way an accurate depiction of Islam as a whole.

The film is certainly provocative, because it intends to assert that Islam is a religion of violence. But in effect, there is violence both in the Qur'an, and in the life of Mohammed. Still today, there are Muslims who carry out violence in the name of the Qur'an and of the prophet of Islam.

But it must be said that the response to a violent, partial film cannot be violence, and not even the decision to prevent someone from speaking. The minister's decision to block Wilders, and the threats against him, fall into this category.

I have seen that the European Arab League has responded to this film with another film, a sort of "anti-Fitna"; other Muslim filmmakers have done the same thing. Such a reaction is more admirable than the one displayed by the Foreign Office. Although I do not like "Fitna," I am against the decision of the British government. All the more so in that Wilders was supposed to present the film to the House of Lords, and not to a political group.

Wilders's speech is, without a doubt, violent and fanatical. This is clear from reading just a few of his statements. But in the West, freedom of speech is a right that cannot be denied without creating other problems.

I have read at least 60 reactions from Muslims to the film "Fitna," although few of them had seen it. Their reactions are mainly of rejection, a violent response. Only one commentary states: "It is true, this film is violent, it is not helpful, and it increases our perception of being besieged on every side; we see Islamophobia everywhere. But it is also true that our reactions make a great deal of room for this Islamophobia."

I wonder: how is it that the Muslim world - and also part of the West - is so sensitive that it must gag every critic and even raise so much (physical) violence against (verbal) violence?

The Muslim world has not yet assimilated certain values, like the right to speech and to criticism, even though this can sometimes be unjust, or partially unjust.

There is a beautiful verse in the Qur'an that says: "In debate, dispute with them in a superior manner, and not on their level." This verse should exclude this kind of violent reaction. And yet it must be said: there is violence in the name of Islam.

In some of the "anti-Fitna" films, there are images of Israelis fighting against the Palestinians; then there are images of crusaders, with cross and swords; then images of Americans in Vietnam. One film has been produced by the Islamic society al Furkan. In these "anti-Fitna" films as well, violence connected to religion is denounced. But the difference is that the Muslims who carry out violence do so in the name of their faith, constantly citing passages from the sacred book and the hadiths. The Israelis and Americans wage war not in the name of the Bible or the Gospel, but in the name of their politics. This is not a question of crusades, because it is foolish to compare contemporary events with those of a long gone past.

If the West goes to war, it does so for political purposes, economic, etc. Unfortunately, in Islam there are many imams who preach a religious war against nonbelievers, not a moral war, but a physical war, always quoting the Qur'an. Violence in the name of God is to be rejected in every religion. John Paul II spoke out against it many times, and Benedict XVI is doing so today. It is therefore worthwhile not to block discussions, but to become engaged and demonstrate falsehood, the connections between religion and politics, correcting one another.

In conclusion, I do not believe that the film "Fitna"is helpful: it serves only to provoke Muslims to make a break with violence, and non-Muslims to react, and not remain silent. On the other hand, the British reaction is not valid either, it does not help Muslims to criticize themselves, nor to stop violence in the name of Islam.

It is increasingly urgent that there be a group of Muslims and non-Muslims fighting together for freedom of speech and conscience, and capable of dialogue; to advance self-criticism of persons and civilization; distinguishing precisely between religion and politics."

Having said that, one website Islam4UK Muslims are inviting non-Muslims for a conference, suggesting it's website's title:

:: CONFERENCE (1/3/09) :: THE ISLAMIC STATE - PAST, PRESENT & FUTURE

What is this conference about?

On the 3rd March 2009 C.E. it will have been 85 years since the destruction of the Islamic State, or in other words 85 years of tyranny, oppression and injustice. For over 1300 years this magnificent superpower dominated world affairs and introduced a law and order that lifted the masses from the darkness of man-made law and into the light of al-Islam. This special conference will be dedicated to providing an in depth overview of the Islamic State, its past, present and future as well as emphasise the need for all Muslims worldwide to struggle as much as they can for the sake of Allah (SWT) to implement the Shari'ah on the earth.

Who are the speakers and what are their topics?

1. The Reality of the Islamic State in the Past

2. How its destruction led to mankind's present sufferinng

3. How its inevitable establishment will illuminate human life in the future

[Speakers to be confirmed soon...]

When is it?

1st March 2009

3pm - 6pm

Where is it?

Vale Farm Sports Centre

76 Watford Road

North Wembley

Middlesex

HA0 3HQ

How much will it cost?

There is no admission fee.

Will there be any merchandise available?

DVD's (£2), Shahadah flags (£5), and other memorabilia will be sold inshaa'allah.

Is it for brothers and sisters?

Yes.

Please note however, strict segregation will be enforced.

I am a non-Muslim can I attend?

Yes. And you are welcome to embrace Islam as well.

Who can I contact for further information?

Media enquiries: 07956 600 569

General enquiries: 07547 032 668

Is UK soon to be the new Islamic State?

The views of Patriotic Australian Prime Minister

Today, a friend sent me this message. This message has been circulated since 2005. I am sorry if this would offend some.

The whole world needs a leader like this! "Muslims who want to live under Islamic Sharia law were told on Wednesday to get out of Australia , as the government targeted radicals in a bid to head off potential terror attacks.. Separately, Kevin angered some Australian Muslims on Wednesday by saying he supported spy agencies monitoring the nation's mosques. Quote: 'IMMIGRANTS, NOT AUSTRALIANS, MUST ADAPT. Take It Or Leave It. I am tired of this nation worrying about whether we are offending some individual or their culture. Since the terrorist attacks on Bali , we have experienced a surge in patriotism by the majority of Australians. ' 'This culture has been developed over two centuries of struggles, trials and victories by millions of men and women who have sought freedom' 'We speak mainly ENGLISH, not Spanish, Lebanese, Arabic, Chinese, Japanese, Russian, or any other language. Therefore, if you wish to become part of our society . Learn the language!' 'Most Australians believe in God. This is not some Christian, right wing, political push, but a fact, because Christian men and women, on Christian principles, founded this nation, and this is clearly documented. It is certainly appropriate to display it on the walls of our schools. If God offends you, then I suggest you consider another part of the world as your new home, because God is part of our culture.' 'We will accept your beliefs, and will not question why. All we ask is that you accept ours, and live in harmony and peaceful enjoyment with us.' 'This is OUR COUNTRY, OUR LAND, and OUR LIFESTYLE, and we will allow you every opportunity to enjoy all this. But once you are done complaining, whining, and griping about Our Flag, Our Pledge, Our Christian beliefs, or Our Way of Life, I highly encourage you take advantage of one other great Australian freedom, 'THE RIGHT TO LEAVE'.' 'If you aren't happy here then LEAVE. We didn't force you to come here. You asked to be here. So accept the country YOU accepted.' Maybe if we circulate this amongst ourselves, WE will find the courage to start speaking and voicing the same truths. If you agree please SEND THIS ON and ON to as many people as you know.

Although this message carries truthfulness to radical Islamists living in democratic countries such as Australia it is still divisive in its essence. According to hoax-slayer.com, this circulated email wasn't Mr. Rudd's comments. In fact it was Federal Treasurer Peter Costello's commentaries. Some parts of the message were that of Barry Loudermilk, a US Air Force veteran and columnist for a local newspaper in the American state of Georgia.

Further, hoax-slayer calmly suggests:

"[T]hus, while the more lengthy version of message that includes Loudermilk's article is still partially factual, it is nonetheless outdated, contains inaccurate information and may perpetrate a quite misleading understanding of Australia's policies on immigration in general and Muslims in particular. Taken out of context, and with the falsely attributed Loudermilk article thrown into the mix, this email may give the impression that Australia is intolerant of migrants, especially those of the Muslim faith. This is not the case. One of Australia's great strengths is its rich cultural diversity and it welcomes migrants from all parts of the world and with many and varied systems of belief.

Sending on factually dubious information such as this is unlikely to be helpful and may even add to the cultural divisions and misunderstandings that plague our strife-torn world."

Prophecies Fulfilled by Felix Manalo

PASUGO- the official magazine of the Iglesia ni Cristo founded by Felix Manalo who's the fulfillment of Biblical prophecies according to its apologetics has numerously printed teachings contradicting its own teachings. From its earliest publications, their Minister article writers were either confused or ignorant of the Holy Scripture. Lost most rounded debates with experts and scholars beginning from its own founder, they never acknowledge defeat. When unable to defend or sensing defeat, their members would run and hide or challenge their opponents to visit any of their chapels and debate with their minister in a one-sided territory.

As an example, one of PASUGO's writer wrote things damaging acknowledgement of the Catholc Church as Christ's TRUE CHURCH:
PASUGO Abril 1966, p. 46:
“Ang Iglesia Katolika na sa pasimula ay siyang Iglesia ni Cristo..."


One reader of their "The Messanger" by the name Christopher Dawson from Los Angeles, California, USA was questioning INC’s very confusing teachings about Jesus and its angel Felix Manalo and the many copied teachings from other Christian denominations he was once a member including the Catholic Church which the Iglesia ni Cristo substantiated to be the REAL CHURCH Christ founded!!!

"I read the history of your Church and I learned that Mr. Felix Y. Manalo had been a member of many different churches like the Roman Catholic, Methodist, Presbyterian, Christian Mission, and Seventh-Day-Adventist. Doesn’t this prove that he is not a true messenger since he took all of his teachings from these different churches and combined them to form the teachings of the Church of Christ.?”

Mr. Dawson was right in consulting history. In fact, Felix Manalo was baptized Catholic, later became an Aglipayan, a Methodist pastor, a Presbyterian Bible student, a Disciples’s evangelist, a Christian and Missionary Alliance evangelist after he was struck by how they baptized through immersion. He was convinced to convert to Seventh-Day-Adventists after he lost a debate with one of its ministers.

Mr. Manalo's disagreement with his personal interpretation of the Bible drifted him to be a wanderer; he became an atheist and agnostics; he even lost his faith in God according to Wikipedia. Before he founded his own church, he took all accumulated teachings he gathered from different denominations, with Lamsa translation of the Bible, he concluded that in order to legitimize his own church, he must declare the Catholic Church to have been apostatized which history and Biblical facts couldn't agree either.

And the most shameful part of his story is that, HE DIED WITHOUT BEING BAPTIZED IN HIS OWN CHURCH TO GAIN SALVATION…



For the sake of Mr. Dawson’s question, let’s see how their Ministers would answer him. Here was their most intelligent reply:

“The Bible testifies that the one sent by God speaks according to the law and to the testimony (Is. 8:20). To speak according to the law is to teach the will or doctrine of God, not one’s own will—no addition nor subtraction (Jn. 7:16-17; Dt. 12:32). A messenger of God must also possesses the testimony or the spirit of prophecy (Rev. 19:10).”

True! The Bible testifies that “the one sent by God speaks according to the law and to the testimony” but again it’s true that when God calls his own messenger, he calls him by his name. Felix Manalo’s name was never mentioned in the Bible. Isaiah 8:20 which they quote is talking about something else, not about Felix Manalo as “God’s Last Messenger" was taken out of context .

John 7:16-17 which they also quoted was talking about Christ being God’s mouthpiece and it has nothing to do with Felix Manalo’s status as “God’s Last Messenger.”While they quoted Dt. 12:32, there’s not even a slightest clue about Felix Manalo being “God’s Last Messenger.”

Let’s continue their response to Mr. Dawson:

"Brother Felix Y. Manalo is the last messenger because he is the fulfillment of the various prophecies recorded in the Bible (Rev. 7:2-3; Is. 46:11; Is. 41-9-10). The fact that he became a member of other religions prior to his being called by God does not in any way prove that he was not sent by God.

They nailed it right in the middle! Yes, Felix Manalo has fulfilled many of biblical prophecies. This includes a prophesy about the imminent coming of the false teacher, or false prophet, a false angel (see Gal. 1:5-6).

Before Apostle Paul was called to become Christ’s apostle, he belonged to the religious group known as the Pharisees and he had been one of the ruthless persecutors of the Church (Act 22:1-4).

Paul's name was mentioned in the same way Moses and other great OT Prophets and sages however Felix Manalo's name was left out. His name was never mentioned just as Paul was (in the case of their analogy to Felix Manalo's case). This nullifies their teaching that Felix Manalo was called by God.

In the last portion of their response to Mr. Dawson, they said:

"The doctrines that Brother Felix Y. Manalo taught are the words of God written in the Bible--no additions nor subtractions--which is a character of the true messenger of God."

We are not certain if what Bible are they referring to. The Lamsa Translation was among their favorite which wasn't a translation of a scholar. Anyway, let's see if their claim is true.

In John 1-- the Bible says the "Word was God" and made his dwelling among us.
INC says, he was just a man.

Philippians 2 says though Jesus "is in the form of God..."
INC says, he's just a man.

In John 8, Jesus said "Before Abraham came to be, I AM" signifying his divinity.
INC says, he's just a man.

Roma 16:16 was written "iglesia"
INC wrote it "Iglesia" (making it into Proper Noun).
Catholic Answers says "Paul is referring to a collection of local churches, not giving an organizational name."

So is it true that there's "no addition nor subtractions" from the Bible in the teachings of Felix Manalo?

A huge NO!

And if that's the faultless character test to identify the true messenger of God,most certainly Felix Manalo WAS NOT!

Remember Fr. Andrea Santoro—Priest and Martyr

We can only recall how Father Andrea Santoro suffered martyrdom (in its truest sense) when he was shot from behind by a Muslim youth in modern day Turkey in February 5, 2006 while he’s kneeling in prayer. He was murdered inside Santa Maria Church in Trabzon, Turkey as a Catholic missionary priest of Fidei Donum. According to AsiaNews, the 15 years old young man who was convicted later shouted “Allahu Akhbar" (God is Great)before he shoots Father Andrea. As the issue spilled over to Europe and the world, his hearing was widely covered by local newspapers and some international media. According to Wikipedia, “neither the killer nor his mother showed any remorse during the trial.”

Today, we ask the Lord to look upon his servant Father Andrea Santoro for all Catholics and Christians who are facing persecution at the hands of “unbelievers” and fanatics. We pray to his intersession that through his prayers and the prayers of all the saints and angels, his blood would be the seed of evangelization in Turkey which was once a Christian country before it was conquered. Pope Benedict XVI during his address to Turkey’s Bishop, he specifically asked the Bishop to uphold Religious Freedom in Turkey, remembering Father Santoro’s brutal murder.

“[F]rom Saint John to Saint Ignatius of Loyola, from Saint Polycarp of Smyrna to “the many eminent Fathers of the Church, not to mention [the participants in] the Council of Ephesus which proclaimed the Virgin Mary to be Théotokos. More recently Benedict XV and the Blessed John XXIII marked the life of the nation and the Church in Turkey.”

“I also want to mention that every Christian, priests and laity, who bore witness to the charity of Christ, have sometimes made the ultimate sacrifice of their life, like Fr Andrea Santoro. May this impressive history be for your communities—the vigour of whose faith and abnegation under trial I am well aware—not only be a reminder of a glorious past, but also an incentive to continue with generosity along the journey you have begun, bearing witness among your brothers and sisters to God's love for all human beings.” [Read more…]

I ask all Catholics and our separated brethren to remember all those who suffered persecution just because they’re Christians. If our enemies’ weapon is bullet, let’s armor ourselves with love and respect. As the Lord said, “Father, forgive them, they know not what they do."[Luke 23:34].

As a consolation, let’s listen to Christ when he said, “And do not be afraid of those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul; rather, be afraid of the one who can destroy both soul and body in Gehenna.” [Matthew 10:28]

To Jesus Christ be praised!

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

Picture Credit: summagallicana.it and la-croix.com

Behold, Felix Manalo, the Angel...

Hardliner INC Ministers and its blind followers are quick to defend Felix Manalo’s angelic status while they can easily dishonor and ignore the more obvious Biblical facts about Jesus' Dinivity revealed by prophets of old.

Carefully choosing chopped verses of the Bible, their endless argument-- John 8:40; I Tim. 2:5; Is. 53:3; Ps. 80:17; Col. 3:1; Jn. 10:36 [check the verses in the Holy Bible].

Come to think of how they cheat people. Choosing only verses that suits their argument and connects it to other verses is very unprofessional practice for its ignorant ministers. They’re liars and cheaters and deceivers.

"By its fruit, you will know them," says Christ Jesus (Mat. 7:20). But I say, but its founder you can judge them.

And the “Last Messenger” they so revere deified to an angelic state was just the best liar and deceiver. Using Biblical standards for a divinely envoy would deride their assertions: Zoom this .jpeg file but for now, here’s what’s in the letter:

Philippine Mission Churches of Christ Leslie Wolfe Carrie A. Wolfe P.O. Box 8774 Manila, P.I. Oct. 14, 1933 Mr. Salvador Laspinas, 1535 Felix Huertas, Int. C., Manila Dear Bro. Laspinas: I have your letter of Oct. 7th. You know I am sick. I am not able to give you all the information about Felix Manalo that you desire. He was a student in our mission and I was one of his teachers. We had him employed as an evangelist, paying him a salary. He was minister for the church at Singalong for some time. His wife accused him of cruelty and of adultery. She came to my house and showed the wounds which Felix had made by blows on her back. I called the doctor who is now in Manila to examine her wounds. The church at Singalong had an investigation of Felix. The wife of Felix came andmade complaints, but Felix did not come. The church at Singalong voted that Felix was guilty of the charges of his wife. As a consequence we took away the salary that we were giving to Felix. Then Felix left us. I do not have further personal knowledge of the life of Felix. There was, however, a Teresa who studied with us. It was proven in court that Felix was the father of her child. Bro. Baronia has much typewritten information about Felix Manalo and especially about the Teresa case, which he says he will be glad to furnish to any one desiring the information. I hope you will be able to continue your work and that you will be very successful. I am Cordially your, Leslie Wolfe

[source: http://www.pipeline.com/]

You must have heard ROSITA TRILLANES. She's a member of the newly founded Iglesia ni Cristo during its early years but later accused Felix of immorality. ExamineIglesiniCristo has its archive copy.

From these extracted facts, for me, the only reason why an INC sticks its nose to Manalo's church is pride and unwillingness to submit himself to Christ's founded church' Authority, although overwhelmingly, historical facts alone can prove that the church which Christ founded is still alive and vibrant. Wikipedia says about the Catholic Church

"[T]he Catholic Church,[note 1] is the world's largest Christian Church representing over half of all Christians and one-sixth of the world's population.[6][7] It comprises 2,782 dioceses grouped into 23 particular rites—the Latin Rite and 22 smaller Eastern rites. The pope, currently Benedict XVI, is the Church's highest earthly authority in matters of faith, morality and Church governance.[8] The community is made up of an ordained ministry and the laity; members of either group may belong to organized religious communities[...]

"With a history spanning almost two thousand years, the Church is one of the world's oldest institutions,[20] and has played a prominent role in the history of Western civilization since at least the 4th century[...]

"The Catholic Church traces its foundation to Jesus and the twelve Apostles.[25] It sees the bishops of the Church as the successors of the apostles and the pope in particular as the successor of Peter, the leader of the apostles[...],

The final proof is its own admission printed in their PASUGO that "the Catholic Church is the true Church of Christ...

PASUGO Nobyembre 1940, p. 23:

Iisa lamang ang tanging makapagtatayo ng Iglesiang magiging dapat sa Dios. Kung sino-- ang ating Panginoong Jesu-Cristo lamang! Sino mang tao-- maging marunong o mangmang, maging dakila o hamak-- ay walang karapatang magtayo ng Iglesia"

PASUGO Mayo 1968, p. 7:

Ang tunay na INK ay iisa lamang. Ito ang Iglesiyang itinayo ni Cristo. Kung mayroon mang nagsisibangon ngayong mga Iglesia at sasabihing sila man ay Iglesia ni Cristo rin, ang mga ito ay hindi tunay na Iglesia ni Cristo kundi huwad lamang."

PASUGO Mayo 1954, p. 9:

Alin ang tunay na Iglesia? Ang Iglesiang itinayo ni Cristo sa Jerusalem."

PASUGO Abril 1966, p. 46:

Ang Iglesia Katolika na sa pasimula ay siyang Iglesia ni Cristo."

I don't need to prove it further...

A Dangerous Symbol

This is only a symbol Catholics use. It represents their faith in Christ who was crucified and died to bring life to all. While others hate it, Catholics and other Christians love it and displays it with honor, reverence and pride.

To some, it attracts violence. Windshields are smashed by those who oppose it's truthfulness. Others within Christianity sees it as "Catholic symbol" than Christ's salvific suffering to "free" all men and women from the bondage of sin.

It is a symbol of contradiction-- it means peace for some and conflict for some. No matter how other people see this sacred symbol, this cross will always represent the whole truth about salvation. This symbol will always stands high amidst persecution, death threats, bullets, bombs, and insults. If they have insulted and persecuted the Master, we are not even greater than him. So rejoice, have the courage to make this simple yet so powerful symbol to say the least of your true faith in the Lord Jesus.

Controversial Magazine Insults Catholics!

It is not the first time that the Catholic Church was attacked by ads. The controversy that surrounded the “Da Vinci Code” was published to create an uproar in the Catholic Church’s faithful that made a lot of curious readers to have a look what’s being talked about in that book. Its author, Dan Brown was adamant and unbending in its assertions that his book was based on “facts” and that what he has written was true. As a result, the Catholic Church hierarchy was demonized.

Opus Dei a Catholic Congregation that was founded by the pious Catholic priest, Saint Jose Maria Escriva was badly treated in the story as “conspirators” in the desire of the Church to “keep secret of the Holy Grail.”

“The Vatican prelature known as Opus Dei is a deeply devout Catholic group that has been the topic of recent controversy due to reports of brain-washing, coercion, and a practice known as "corporal mortification." Opus Dei has just completed construction of a $47 million National Headquarters at 243 Lexington Avenue in New York City…” [Dan Brown’s Official Website or read
Criticism of the 'Da Vinci Code']

Since the book was no more than a fiction than factual, Catholic.com exposed its author’s dishonesty in presenting his supposedly “factual” data. [Read the Cracking the Da Vinci Code].

Ads love controversy. It’s double purpose. It could help in its publicity (whether bad or good) and when it’s talked about, it would mean money. And in the world of corrupt business, controversy is a good marketing strategy.

Take for example and adult magazine called “Playboy.” In its recent Mexican Issue, it created a controversy after its cover model depicter herself as the Blessed Virgin Mary of Guadalupe, wearing nothing but a piece of cloth from head to down exposing partly her breast. Inside the magazine, she was wearing a crown similar that of Our Lady of Guadalupe.”

One to hurt the sensitivity of the readersreputation was badly attacked in the book accusing it as conspirator in the desire of the Church to “silenceThe “Land of the Free” has published recently their Mexican Edition Playboy depicting a model with the looks like the Blessed Virgin Mary of Guadalupe.

Because they have already targeted their intention and have successfully created a controversy by hurting Catholics’ sensitivities, and marketing wise, its publicity through that insult would generate money especially now that US Economy is dwindling.

“While Playboy Mexico never meant for the cover or images to offend anyone, we recognize that it has created offense, and we as well as Playboy Mexico offer our sincerest apologies[...]

Raul Sayrols, its Mexico’s Publisher also apologized, “The image is not and never was intended to portray the Virgin of Guadalupe or any other religious figure. The intent was to reflect a Renaissance-like mood on the cover.” [Read Fox Forum Blogs Playboy Apologized Over Its Mexico Edition].

I have nothing against those who wanted money being pumped to their greed, but I hope they should consider other belief’s sensitivities. If Playboy would dare to depict other religions, its negative effect would be felt even to those who want to live in peace.

Still Many Muslims are Up Against Rome, the Vatican and the West! Is Obama Aware of It?

Watching Obama’s inauguration, I was struck with awe with the multitude of people who wanted, not only to be witness of this historic events but to be part of it. Americans are once united under its new promised “savior”—saving Americans from past shames with Bush’s “War on Terror” after 9/11 and at present their weakening economy.

Many of his concerns are at the interest of the American people’s egoistic sense of “happiness” according to Obama’s own words “…[T]he God-given promise that all are equal, all are free, and all deserve a chance to pursue their full measure of happiness.”

How free is America? Not free as we do in the East. This is what we outsiders should be watching closely. Most of America’s sense of “freedom” conflicts that of their own self preservation. With its sense of ‘freedom’ it’s divided to partisanship, the sense of religion and morality was left to everyone’s own conscience but again conscience is too vague to be taken as a collective measure of what Americans really wanted as a whole. Religion plays a very important role in its policy making. Although majority of its wealthy businessmen (and women) are Jewish and Christians, most of them are the spectacle of a “rebellious Israel” in the OT that seeks nothing of God’s righteousness but self righteousness.

In particular, Obama bring up a group of believers. “To the Muslim world, we seek a new way forward, based on mutual interest and mutual respect. To those leaders around the globe who seek to sow conflict, or blame their society's ills on the West - know that your people will judge you on what you can build, not what you destroy.”

Watch first this video:

“Very soon, Allah willing, Rome will be conquered, just like Constantinople was… Today, Rome is the capital of the Catholics, or the Crusader Capital, which has declared hostility with to Islam, in order to prevent the reawakening of Islam… This capital of theirs will be an advanced post for the Islamic conquests which will spread in Europe and its entirety and then will turn to the two Americas and even Eastern Europe.” Yunis Al-Astal (Hamas MP and Cleric) Al-Aqsa TV

This video sends a chilling message to Christians and Catholics in particular. And these pictures would confirm what could be the collective intention of many Muslims to conquer Rome, and the world and make Islam supreme.

There are two kinds of Muslims: Muslims under the Democratic form of Government and Muslims under Sharia whether that government is considered to be secular, monarchial or dictatorial.

Not all Muslims are like that. In my own view, there are two types of Muslims. The first type of Muslims are more peaceful if convenience would allow them to do so. They live in peace with their host but maintain their identity such as women covering their heads (husbands could be its strict implementer or by one’s own choice that she desired to wear a hijab). In America, Islam becomes a “commodity” with ads alongside with mainline beauty products. In buses, and in public, Islam is advertised to be the “religion of peace” as a counter action against those Islamists accused of “derailing” their religion.

But during Gaza conflict when America was silent, Hamas and Hesbollah which were considered “terrotist” groups by the USA and EU were praised as heroes and martyrs by Muslims. Does this mean that all those who blew up the Twin Towers were real Muslims? Robert Spencer and Raymond Ibrahim must be right with all their raw reports from around the world.

In as much as they want non-Muslims to believe, they failed to address the main problem we are encountering on Islam as a "Religion of Peace". Robert Spencer summarized them in five.

1. Focus on violent Muslims


2. Renounce efforts to install sharia in non Muslim countries


3. Teach Muslims about peaceful co existence


4. Teach against jihad and Islamic supremacism


5. Help identify jihadists in the West

While some Muslims pray for the downfall of non-Muslim religions in Rome, the Vatican and the West...

O Allah, take care of the sources of injustice and oppression,
Oh Allah, direct your forces against America, the centre of kufr and fasad
Oh Allah, direct your forces against America, the centre of kufr and fasad
Oh Allah, direct your forces against America, the centre of kufr and fasad
Oh Allah,of them you are all Aware, They spread fasaad in Your lands,
And they killed Your slaves and they insulted Your religion
O Allah, of them You are all Aware, And over them All powerful,
O Allah direct Your forces against them O Allah direct Your forces against them
O Allah send upon them the storms of 'Aad, And the cry of Thamud, and the Typhoon of the people of Noah, O Allah send upon them that which descends from the skies, And that which exudes from the lands,

O Allah disintegrate their country O Allah make them into divided countries and scattered parties, O Allah Ever-living and Omnipotent, Contain them within a fist's grip of Your slaves Contain them within a fist's grip of Your slaves

O Allah, make hurricanes a constant for them
O Allah, make hurricanes a constant for them
O Allah release our captured brothers
O Allah release them, O Allah strengthen them
O Allah make them steady on their faith
O Allah make possible a means for them
O Allah handle those who torture them
O Allah handle those who torture them
O Allah handle those who torture them
O Allah eradicate them with Your power and Omnipotence
O Allah make their plots against us a cause for their destruction,
And their slyness a slyness against them
O Lord of the Worlds, O Ever-Living, Omnipotent,
O Most High and Most Gracious,
Hearer of all prayer, ever so close, accepting to
all prayers...

[kufr = non-Muslims, Christians and Jews included]

...the city (Vatican) they want to conquer instead prays for peace in the world.

In Obama’s Presidential Inauguration, the Pope congratulates him, with the hope for peace in the world:

"At a time when so many of our brothers and sisters throughout the world yearn
for liberation from the scourge of poverty, hunger and violence, I pray that you
will be confirmed in your resolve to promote understanding, cooperation and
peace among the nations, so that all may share in the banquet of life which God
wills to set for the whole human family,"

What a contrast!

[Muslims Hope the Pope go to Hell]

As a Catholic, our Catechism says that

“The Moslems, �professing to hold the faith of Abraham, along with us adore the one and merciful God, who at the last day wiill judge mankind� (Lumen Gentium 16). Though the Islamic faith does not acknowledge Jesus as God, it does revere Him as prophet, and also honors His virgin mother. Moslems prize the moral life, and give worship to God especially through prayer, almsgiving and fasting (Nostra Aetate 3). Noting that there had been many quarrels and hostilies between Christians and Muslims, the Second Vatican Council urged that all forget the past and strive sincerely for mutual understanding, and, on the behalf of all mankind, make common cause of safeguarding and fostering social justice, moral values, peace, and freedom� (Nostra Aetate 3).”

And we are bound to abide by this teaching, submitting our will to the Magisterium of the Church. May we all pray that violence against Rome and the Catholic Church by Muslims would be appeased by the God of peace we so adored.

God will not leave his Church desolate. As he has kept it alive for more than 2,000 years, so he will keep his promise to be with his Church until the end of times.

Our enemies’ weapons are bombs and threats of death. Our weapons are prayers and sacrifices and we’re not afraid of death for it’s our path to rebirth.

Here's a sample of how a Catholic martyr response to violence directed to them. Father Ragheed death deeply affected his Muslim friend:

[Read A Friend's Goodbye Letter to a Priest Murdered in Iraq]

In the name of the compassionate and merciful God,

Ragheed, my brother,

I ask your forgiveness for not being with you when those criminals opened fire against you and your brothers. The bullets that have gone through your pure and innocent body have also gone through my heart and soul.

You were one of the first people I met when I arrived to Rome. We met in the halls of the Angelicum and we would drink our cappuccino in the university's cafeteria. You impressed me with your innocence, joy, your pure and tender smile that never left you.
I always picture you smiling, joyful and full of zest for life. Ragheed is to me innocence personified; a wise innocence that carries in its heart the sorrows of his unhappy people. I remember the time, in the university's dining room, when Iraq was under embargo and you told me that the price of a single cappuccino would have satisfied the needs of an Iraqi family for a whole day.

O God, we don't ask you for revenge or retaliation. We ask you for victory, a victory of justice over falsehood, life over death, innocence over treachery, blood over the sword. Your blood will not have been shed in vain, dear Ragheed, because with it you have blessed the soil of your country. And from heaven, your tender smile will continue to light the darkness of our nights and announce to us a better tomorrow.

Brother, your blood hasn't been shed in vain, and your church's altar wasn't a masquerade. You assumed your role with deep seriousness until the end, with a smile that would never be extinguished ever.

Your loving brother,
Adnane Mokrani

[Excerpted from a letter written posthumously to Father Ragheed Aziz Ganni by a Muslim friend of his who is a professor at the Pontifical Gregorian University. ]

My sincere thanks to Church in Need, please help their mission through prayers and sacrifices however your money can make a big difference. God bless you.

May Jesus Christ be praised evermore!

The God of Abrahamic Religions is Allah

I find this news from AsiaNews amusing but deeply upsetting. In Malaysia, the Islamic religious councils of seven Malaysian states and the Malaysian Chinese Muslim Association (MACMA) through its Minister-in-Charge Abdullah Mohd Zin had formalized the ban of using the word “Allah” from a Catholic Herald publication.

Their most intelligent reason why they banned non-Muslims from using the word is to get rid of Muslims from confusion. I think if there is anyone who is confused; it’s the council members themselves. They should be given a high dosage of etymological meaning of the word and another prescribed amount of historical facts and a few slaps to wake them up from this ridiculous declarations.

According to Wikipedia the world “Allah” is used by Arab Christians and Muslims alike without distinction. It says that the Arabic Allāh is a combination of al-, the + ’ilāh, god which forms the word.

I can understand that. Although I am not a Muslim but I can read Arabic script well. In their script, there is no distinction between a proper noun and a common noun just like in English grammar. For Arabs reading Arabic script, “god” (if you mean ‘God’) and “god” (if you mean ‘god’) is the same in meaning however it differs when it’s used in a sentence.

Take for example it’s Shahada (what is written in Saudi Arabian national flag), “Lā ilaha illa al-Lāh…” which means “There is no god but God…” would confused Muslims of the term itself isn’t the best reason to ban it from non-Muslim from using it in their publications. Considering historical basis for the word, no one should have the exclusive rights to use the word, not even Christians, Jews and pagans. The council should be lectured severely with their enormous ignorance that there are REAL Christian Arabs who uses the word long before the advent of Islam in the 6th Century better than themselves who aren’t Arabic speakers in that aspect. With due respect to their Prophet Muhammad (pbuh), I am sure he didn’t even invent the word by himself. Even before he was born, his own people have been using the word, even pagan Arabs living in Makkah during his time used the word ‘Allah’ or ‘allah’ in that respect.

In fact the father of their prophet was named “Abdullah” which if we conjugate it, it would mean ‘abd-allah” (slave of god or God) proving that the word itself has been used inclusive of any faith in the Arab world.

According to Wikipedia, “Allah (Arabic: ‎, الله Allāh, is the standard Arabic word for 'God.' While the term is best known in the West for its use by Muslims as a reference to God, it is used by Arabic-speakers of all Abrahamic faiths, including Christians and Jews, in reference to "God". The term was also used by pagan Meccans as a reference to the creator-god, possibly the supreme deity in pre-Islamic Arabia.

To spell the word “Allah” in Arabic, it’s composed of the script alif-lam-lam-alif (a-l-l-a) which all Arabs use regardless of their religious affiliation. Christian Bible uses the word and other catechetical and devotional publications. Christian Patriarchs and Coptic Christians with Muslims surrounding them have no problem with that. Not even an imam could challenge Arab Christians of its exclusive rights on the word. In other words, it’s immutable. They speak the same language and all Arabs knew that, that the word itself has no other translation but ‘god’ or ‘God’ in English.

Further, Wikipedia explains, “It is important to note that according to Muslim teaching, Allah is not only the God of the prophet Muhammad but also the God of Moses and Jesus - and is therefore identical to the divine being of Jewish and Christian sacred history.”

I am sure, even my Arab Muslim friends would agree just as my Arab Christian friends would that Allah as an Arabic term for God has to be free from any ownership not even by Malaysia’s Islamic Council.
-------------------------
Picture Credit: Wikipedia

Further Readings:
Evangelical Church goes to court against ban on using the word "Allah".
Islamic councils against Catholic magazine of Kuala Lumpur: forbidden to use the word "Allah"
Catholic weekly takes government to court over use of the word "Allah"
Islamic Minister countermands order: Catholic weekly cannot use “Allah”

Saint On the Making in Cuba

International Herald Tribune
The Associated Press
Published: November 29, 2008

Today, the Church has added to its long lists of virtuous men and women who offered their lives to Christ by selflessly giving what they have in the service of the poor.

In Camaguey, Cuba, the only tough standing communist country in South America, Friar Jose Olallo Valdes, a member of the Hospitaller Order of St. John of God was beatified, the first outside Vatican City. The rite was very unusual since Cuba is a communist country and in communism, they give little room for religious tolerance just like Vietnam, North Korea and the equally notorious Chinese government.

Read additional info at Zenit.com or have a view of the beatification at
YouTube

CHRIST THE KING! May He Reign Over Us!

Today is the Solemnity of Christ the King. This feast was declared Solemn by Pope Pius XI to commemorate the last Sunday in Ordinary Time in the Liturgical Calendar of the Church. This also signals the faithful that Christmas is almost at hand preceded by the Advent Season.

Christ, the Son of God is declared the King of the Universe in the Holy Scripture as we read in all Catholic Churches today in different rites and languages reflected in the First Reading taken from Ezekiel 34; the second reading taken from I Corinthians 15 and the Gospel taken from Matthew 25.

May all who confess belief in Christ find this day fitting to make good their faith in him and pledge faithfulness to his honor and splendor as our King and Savior. Amen!


Picture Credit: Thanks to EWTN.com

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

And Yes! I am 100% Christian!

The Wrong Path of Iglesia ni Cristo (Ang Maling Daan ng Iglesia ni Cristo)

Iglesia ni Cristo (as a Trade Mark) Ministers are very quick in their judgment for non-members of their cult founded in the Philippines on July 27, 1914. In their TV Net23 program "Ang Tamang Daan" their hatred against the Catholic Church in particular and to other non-believers who oppose their un-Christian cristology are evident.

Yesterday, I was up late till almost midnight. Switching from channel to another channel, I get hooked with Net23 Channel aired by the Iglesia ni Cristo (Trade Mark as per their registration at SEC). The topic? "Ang Karapatan ng Mga INC na tawaging 'Mga Anak ng Dios' Ayon (daw) sa Bibliya." (The right of the INC members to called 'children of God' according to Bible).

Hmm... I just don't trust their gullible tones and facial expression. Wolves in sheep's clothing (Mt. 7:15)! A lot of them in there.

I was late for that program, a quarter maybe so I got to start with John 1:12 as they qouted "But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name." According to their Minister, believers can have the right to become "sons of God" only when they become beleivers of Jesus. Which of the many false believers they are referring to? Definitely, they're far from the real believers of the real Christ. Poor memory, they forget that in Chapter 1 of John, it deals mainly with the Word (Logos), the true Jesus whom Christians should worship! The Word God who became flesh, God Jesus in the form of flesh.

Trying hardly to prove their assertions having the exclusivity of being "sons of God" they quoted Dueteronomy 32:5-6: and was badly interpreted. Those who disbelieve (as the verse was written) have lost that previledge. In their quotation, they reduce the Bible as merely servant to their evilness, not the Bible serving man's purpose. It has no direct subject on that matter, just to fit their lies so they qouted Deutoronomy.

Trying hard to make their very superficial and small-minded explanation understandable, they quoted John 3:16 as his basis that they are the believers who has the (sole) right to be worthy of being called"children of God." Desperatedly they qouted Romans 8:16: "The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God." Make no confusion with the pronoun "we". It didn't spell out their Trade Mark "Iglesia ni Cristo." The Letter of St. Paul to the Romans was addressed to Christians in ancient Rome and their churches are still standing to this day, bearing witness to Paul's zealous missionary activities! Compared to their newly built Catholic copied Gothic-styled temples.

Just like a boxer who is desperate in winning the fight, the Iglesia ni Cristo's Ministers will find every word that may sound siding with their point. Take for example Colossians 2:6-7 . "As ye have therefore received Christ Jesus the Lord, so walk ye in him. Rooted and built up in him, and stablished in the faith, as ye have been taught, abounding therein with thanksgiving."

They say, this verse clearly states that those who walk in him (Jesus) are rooted and was built up in him have the rights to be called "sons of God". Narrow it down they claim that its members are the real inheritors to this previledge. Playing amnesia, this letter of St. Paul to the Colossians was addressed its citizens in the Lycus Valley in Asia Minor, east of Ephesus when they " have been under pressure to adopt the false doctrines, they have not yet succumbed." (Introduction to St. Paul's Letter to the Collosians) This has nothing to do with their claims. What a poor interpretation...

Believe me. They even have the nerve to quote Matthew 16:18 but with twisted interpretation to suite their lies. Here's the whole story in Matthew 16:14b-19

When Jesus went into the region of Caesarea Philippi he asked his
disciples,"Who do people say that the Son of Man is?" They replied, "Some say
John the Baptist, 10 others Elijah, still others Jeremiah or one of the
prophets." He said to them, "But who do you say that I am?"

Simon Peter said in reply, "You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God." Jesus
said to him in reply, "Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah. For flesh and blood
has not revealed this to you, but my heavenly Father.

And so I say to you, you are Peter, and upon (you) this rock I will build my church, and the gates of the netherworld shall not prevail against it.

I will give you the keys to the kingdom of heaven. Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven."

The Ministers didn't keep focus on this Chapter rather they jumped to another book of the Bible proving that "the Rock" in Matthew 16:18 wasn't Peter but Jesus and quoted furtherActs 4:11 which says "He (Christ) is 'the stone rejected by you, the builders, which has become the cornerstone.'

In Matthew 16, Jesus must have said "You are Peter and upon my Rock I will build my Church." Jesus is not stupid to mean nothing when he meant it. He cannot be fooled, his words cannot be twisted. Our words may be of error but with due respect, Christ's words shouldn't be changed, altered, or corrupted with our evil interpretations. These Ministers will have to answer to God in the last days.

No doubt, the Rock in Acts 4:11 is Jesus Christbut let's not forget that in Matthew 16:18, Jesus was talking directly to Simon, whom he called Peter later on. According to Fr. Paul Kaiparambadan in his magazine "Know the Truth" he said: "Jesus spoke Aramaic and nicknames Simon "Kepha" (Cephas) which means "Rock."

Anti-Catholics are too quick to disprove the "Rock" wasn't Peter but Jesus himself. In this particular Biblical verse, Jesus wasn't speaking to himself. That could be rediculous if he would be calling Simon "Cephas" (rock) when he was referring to himself as the Rock. Really that's stupidity! He was speaking to Simon 'YOU are Peter (the Rock)' and that through this Peter he'd build his (Christ's) church. Notice, Jesus was conversing with Simon Peter, not to himself. According to Fr. Paul Kaiparambadan, "the next sentence clarifies this: 'I will give you the keys to the kingdom of heaven. Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.'" Isn't that something clearer to understand than to qoute Acts 4:11 to answer Matthew 16:18? What a shame for their Ministers!

"The "true" Church must have a name" as they insist. It's Romans 16:16! There we go again in circles!

Is it?

According to Romans 16:16, the name is a common noun "iglesia ni Cristo" not "Iglesia ni Cristo" as proper noun. He never said in that verse to name his Church as "Iglesia ni Cristo". Nor he commissioned someone from the Philippines to register his Church subject to human government under its existing trademark laws. That's more ridiculous to think, aren't they? Rather Jesus left us Four Marks of the Church (Further Reading here from EWTN) that we can use as a guide to differentiate false churches like the Iglesia ni Cristo founded by Felix Y. Manalo in the Philippines to the real Church he founded.

The INC Ministers may try and try to confuse nominal Catholics and other further confuse other Christians however their lies will never quench the TRUE CHURCH, the One, Holy, Catholic, Apostolic Church which Christ have built upon the rock of Simon Peter whom he promised that the "gates of hell will never prevail against it"; not even the lies of Felix Manalo's Iglesia ni Cristo!

An INC Minister in "Ang Tamang Daan" TV Program

Ms. Miriam Isla - a new convert from the Catholic Church

In between the program, they featured a new convert. Her name is Ms. Miriam Isla, a Medical Doctor, resident of De Castro Locale in Southern Metro Manila.

According to her, she's baptized Catholic (infant baptism in the Trinitarian way). Nothing to do with her being a member of Manalo's cult, she said "miyembro pa nga ako ng Legion of Mary' (I was even a membef or the Legion of Mary).

Uncertain of her faith (as a nominal Catholic), she was drifted afar until she found herself being with Protestants and was baptized there. Still doubtful of their beliefs, she had a dorm mate who happen to be a member of this cult and successfuly convinced her to become its new convert.

What convinced her to join Manalo's cult was their opposition against the teachings of most Christians that Jesus is God. She failed to understand "Cristology" for that reason. She must hav tried to read extensively as a Medical doctor with that kind of keenness in balancing knowledge.

Perhaps, these INC members qouted John 8:40 where He said: "But now you are trying to kill me, a man who has told you the truth that I heard from God". Yes, he said he's human but he never denied being God in this verse.

In fact, there are more Biblical passages that says he is God. Consider these chapters and verses:

(1)John 1:1-3 - "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God. He made not any thing made that was made... and the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us."
(2)Matthew 1:23 - "Behold, the virgin shall be with child and bear a son, and they shall name him Emmanuel," which means "God is with us."
(3)John 8:57-59 - "Then the Jews said to him, 'you are not yet fifty years old, and have you seen Abraham?' Jesus said to them: 'Amen, amen, I say to you, before Abraham came to be, I AM'". (see Exodus 3:14-17).
(4)John 8:24 - "That is why I told you that you will die in your sins. For if you do not believe that I AM".
(5)John 13:19 "You may believe that I AM".
(6) John 5:17-26 - Therefore the Jews sought all the more to kill him, because he not only broke the Sabbath, but also said that God is his father, making himself equal with God. (And Jesus never recanted that fact!)

(7)John 10:28-39 - "The Father and I are one".
(8) John 14:189 - "Whoever have seen me has seen the Father."
(8)Matthew 4:7 - "You shall not put the Lord your God to the test." (Because Satan was tempting him in the wilderness.)
(9)Philippians 2:6-11 "Though though he (Jesus) was in the form of God, did not regard equality with God something to be grasped. Rather, he emptied himself, taking the form of a slave, coming in human likeness; and found human in appearance,he humbled himself, becoming obedient to death, even death on a cross.Because of this, God greatly exalted him and bestowed on him the name that is above every name, that at the name of Jesus every knee should bend, of those in heaven and on earth and under the earth,and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, 9 to the glory of God the Father."
(10)Revelation 21:6 - "I (am) the Alpha and the Omega, the beginning and the end" says Jesus. (see Isaiah 44:6).

And the list goes on...

Due to her belief that Jesus is not God, she was found accusing those who teaches otherwise that God will punish anyone who adds or takes away from Scripture (Revelation 22:18-19) . Poor soul, she never realized it was the cult of Manalo who added and subtracted the Scripture to suit their lies!

She was baptized in the cult on October 6, 1990 in the Trinitarian way.... hmm... very ironic!

We shouldn't forget that they too accept the fact that the Catholic Church is the true Church Christ founded in Jerusalem"

PASUGO Mayo 1964, p. 15:
Tinatanggap halos ng lahat na sa Dios at kay Cristo ang INK na itinayo ni Cristo sa Jerusalem noong unang siglo. Datapuwat ang INK sa huling araw na ito na lumitaw sa Pilipinas noong 1914 ay hindi nila kinikilalang sa Dios at kay Cristo. Ito ay nagpapanggap lamang na INK ngunit ang totoo raw ay Iglesia ni Manalo. Walang katotohanan ang kanilang palagay na ito sapagkat walang Iglesiang kanya si Kapatid na Manalo."

PASUGO Mayo 1954, p. 9:
"Alin ang tunay na Iglesia? Ang Iglesiang itinayo ni Cristo sa Jerusalem."